It's the player who cheats not the account. So if this guy had one account in SAS and one in TAW then both had a cheater on board. If as you claim SAS run a cheater's school why did TAW accept the hamster account? Surely not to take advantage of the knowledge of cheating?!Originally Posted by Keapa
"The Tokyo Rose of the Trailer Park"
Didn't know it was mickey blues mini. Only that one minute it was an active players account the next moment it had disappeared. It was a sas player who said it had been cheating for some time.It's the player who cheats not the account. So if this guy had one account in SAS and one in TAW then both had a cheater on board. If as you claim SAS run a cheater's school why did TAW accept the hamster account? Surely not to take advantage of the knowledge of cheating?!
the next thread - its funny. Now it concerns the Top teams and thats good enough to discuss in several Threads for weeks long. A lot of this "players" are in game gree are not willing to stop it.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all the time. Anyone can honestly say they were unaware that someone they met on the internet was not playing the game legit once or twice, but recycle that reason/excuse every single time something "fishy" is brought to attention and there will be people who suspect foul play.
Just sayin'. Back to drama please.
Those players were not in taw long enough for us to observe anything unusual about them. Yet they had been in sas long enough for sas to know why they were removed. Why is it some players who had been in sas get booted. But players from taw don't?
I say any/ all sas players who have knowingly been active in hacking any other players account should have their accounts banned.
TAW boots people, they just use different words.
Any syndicate who removes a player from their roster has a reason, whether it's a good reason or not. However, lies and deception go a long way in a crime game, so it's also a risk when deciding whether or not to take someone's word with regards to a 'removed' player.
Agree so rather than accept what sas was saying we went to Gree. After all, gree has far greater resources to check out a players past history that players.
This is the same no matter what syndicate it is when it comes to taking in new players.
Precisely.
But if it's SAS having suspicions (like you say it's not always immediately obvious someone is cheating, I'd say much less so now than it was in pre-syndicate days) and booting/reporting players once they have good reason to believe they're cheating, surely that gives the lie to the claim that they actively harbour hackers.
If then one or two of those booted players go to TAW before Gree catch up with them, that doesn't make TAW any more guilty of harbouring them than it does SAS. The argument that Gree gave the all clear to this last one is a red herring. We all know Gree don't discuss players' account with third parties.
And please stop digging up the festering corpse of that Baddad thing. The only people who truly know what happened there are Gree (any activity will be on the server record). I wouldn't even trust the alleged memories of those supposedly involved because of syndicate rivalries.
"The Tokyo Rose of the Trailer Park"
Didn't know it was mickey blues mini. Only that one minute it was an active players account the next moment it had disappeared. It was a sas player who said it had been cheating for some time.It's the player who cheats not the account. So if this guy had one account in SAS and one in TAW then both had a cheater on board. If as you claim SAS run a cheater's school why did TAW accept the hamster account? Surely not to take advantage of the knowledge of cheating?!
The same can be said for anything claimed by any syndicate/guild/faction in any issue brought up on the forums. Due to syndicate rivalries, any information exchanged from one syndicate to another may or may not hold truth. And what better way is there to gain support for an unknown 'truth' than to promote the unknown as truth on a public stage?
Why would sas have suspicions about a player who has only just left them.
And the baddad episode should not be forgotten as it's a wonderful example of what sas does to players who leave sas and go to a syndicate they don't like.
What proof is there that sas reported that player to gree.
But putting that to one side. If players do report someone to Gree for suspect game play then Gree fails to inform others that they are currently investigating that player. Indeed if gree says that account is clean Then it's Gree's fault not the syndicate who then accepts that player.
That really is the question that affects every syndicate
What can a syndicate do when Gree fails to stand by their own assurances about a player being clean and Gree has the greatest resources to use when checking out a players history. gree cannot punish a syndicate for their mistakes.
Posting Permissions
