KAG bans policy

There is no exception for hacking. Altering the game to your own benefit is a complete no go. In my opinion, keep him banned.

 

I don't see a point to a permanent ban for a first offense. Sure, it had a negative impact on a small group of players for a limited duration - but life isn't all rainbows and sunshine. You give them a temp ban - 2 to 3 days should be enough to get a point across. If it happens again - then slap on a month long. If they decide again - then drop the permaban. But to ban someone for a first offense - permanently from your entire game is just too harsh.

Sure, it's common sense - if it is considered a hack, don't use it. However, a lot of people lack common sense. I don't fire my employees for breaking conduct, especially if I see a learning potential. In no way was the player stealing from you, damaging your property, or altering your servers. It was client-side, cost you no money, and I doubt any real damage was inflicted other than some "rage." And I say this because most offenses in a workplace that result in immediate termination would involve theft, harassment, or vandalism. So rather than removing your paying customers and scaring away your potential customers you should attempt a lighter penalty system. Currently you basically play god and enjoy the trip. If he had hacked your servers, perma ban. Duped those on the server he was on out of cash, perma ban. Made your servers crash, perma ban. But all he did was have a little fun that harmed nobody - and you perma banned.

Current in-game issues mixed with the review of this thread makes me never want to give your company a dime - especially if you believe in jumping right to permanent bans for light offenses. As it stands, you instantly sentence his account to death and now the money he spent is gone. That's disrespectful on all levels. That means you think so little of the money he gave that you can't see a way to correct his behavior other than to get rid of him indefinitely. I wouldn't ban a customer from my store just for being rowdy and causing a small scene with another shopper. I'd address the situation and hope to retain the customer - as they SPEND MONEY in my store and I'd rather not lose them. But obviously your company is so rich that you can toss paid accounts into the garbage.

But what would I know - my skills come from non-internet related areas. You clearly have a better understand of customer-supplier relations than I do. Guarantee this game goes belly-up in less than a year with this current attitude.

 

I never even said someone who bought it - this guy has. But I'm a potential customer and just seeing a thread like this keeps me from going for my debit card to charge up this game. A lighter ban policy that has tiers instead of a straight out "You are a permanently banned" might go a lot further for this game's future. As it stands - that player is gone. 100% gone. If you have micro transactions in mind, they won't buy them. If they have friends, they won't tell them to play this. And then players like me who see this going on, we wont' buy it.

You basically take authority and ram it up our backsides and expect us to thank you for it. It should be the other way around - we give you money, you should be thankful for it. Doing what you are now just spits in the face of your customers. No, I don't believe that hacking/cheating should go unchecked. But players don't always use common sense and they'll "test" things. If this is the case - a few days to cool off will do wonders for their behavior and keep them talking about the game. And just like with my son, replicated behavior will result in harsher penalties. It's logic. With the current trend of banning you will basically choke your inflow of new players and kill any interest in this game.

At 10 bucks this game will attract a wide-range of players, and by that: I mean age -_- It's obvious that your main group will be early teens who can get mom or dad to fork over the cash. They'll, in-turn, want their friends to play. And they tell their friends...you get the point. Now, age doesn't always factor - but the younger the player - the more likely they are to do stupid crap. Life lessons and all that jazz. So instead of chopping the rope that could pull in more customers - you could take the time to treat them like the irresponsible player they are and give them a timeout and hope the behavior stops. If not, then move to harsher penalties.

 

this is very true and you sirdirtybutt have chosen to use programs that ruin the experience for other people who have also paid. it would be unfair to them if you were aloud to keep playing along side them. you being banned is out of sheer respect for the money you are using as a defense. speedhacks are enough of a problem without trying to sort out who was using them "fairly" or in a way that "doesn't hurt anyone". it becomes exponentially more time consuming, difficult and impractical when you start making exceptions. this is all beside the fact that it is clearly stated in the rules that you agreed to.

at my very successful place of business, we do ban the very infrequent customers who ruin other customers shopping experience. again this is not because we don't appreciate that individual's contributions, but because we respect the other customers as much if not more.

as previously stated in this thread, perma-ban for cheating in multiplayer games is standard policy across all platforms. every successful online game you've ever played has had the exact same stance. your prediction is unfounded, senseless and impulsive.

 

Permanently banning isn't standard - just look at the high-grossing MMO's. This game pales in the shadow of the larger games out there. And the players on those games don't get permanent banned - even in the FPS games they usually just end up with a server ban or a blacklist ban. This game can use all the new players and current players it can get - so why does it take the liberty to be overly harsh with its bans?

And this isn't an "infrequent customer" as you put it - he bought the game. That makes him someone you know will be back. You find a little leeway for someone that you know is gonna be an inflow of cash. But not immunity.

 

It doesn't matter. Hacking is hacking, altering the game is a no no. It makes the game worse for others, and only benefits you.

Even if he did pay for the game, that should probably make him cherish his premium even more, and not make any rash decisions.

 

And you don't think a denial of service for a smaller duration wouldn't get the same point across? Some people don't understand what they have till it's gone. To go from step A to step C without first seeing what B might do is just blind ignorance and a complete lack of respect for your community and contributors. And it isn't like a continued disregard for the rules wouldn't get the permanent banned. If anything, it would make the action more justified. I could understand the ruling if this was the second or third time he had done this - but on the first offense? Just seems like they are doing it because they can - then moving this thread and opening it like this just proves it. They are showing their "power" over the players in hopes to bully them out of future offenses. What they forget, are the players like me who have recently become interested in the game. I see this thread and I think "Power hungry admins" and "They don't care about my money."

 

So what you are saying is "Don't buy our game and get away with offenses like this because you can just make another account."

That made me chuckle - so you really are putting it to your paying customer. The same offense for a F2P gets that account banned, and they lose nothing - because they invested nothing. Yet the player that gave you money is not only unable to access that account - but out the cash as well. At that point I'd just make tons of F2P accounts and give your admins more than 10 dollars worth of work to do.

 

yes it is.

this isn't an MMO. there is no inflow of cash. he never has to pay again. this is only part of why your inaccurate comparison to MMO's ban policy is senseless.

 

Notice I included FPS games there, chief.

As for "ruin other customer's shopping experience" - people CAN AND WILL BE ASSHOLES FROM TIME-TO-TIME. You learn to understand this. Ask them to leave. You see them a few days later and they are embarrassed and a bit apologetic. But guess what? You still have a customer and if you addressed the situation like a responsible adult - you made sure the other customer, who had their "shopping experience ruined," was happy as well after. Generally, the removal of the unruly person will fix that - even better if they hear they won't be allowed back in the store for a few days. You obviously don't understand running a business. If you remove all your customers who make a stink or fire all your employees who break a policy - you'll have zero customers and zero employees. Nobody wants to shop where they feel like their money isn't wanted, they'll find it somewhere else. Employees won't work for an employer if they know you have a high turn-over rate. And you know how they all know this? Either personal experience or word-of-mouth. For each player you ban - you create the exact same scenario. But I guess that I should stop using analogies with someone that has "derpina or a derp in a pretty, derpy derp" in their profile. Might get a little hard for you to follow what it relates to.

 

Hella, why ban some griefers and not others? The ToS states it's a ban. Therefore it should be a ban. At least, that's how you approach your incidents of "hacking." And lets be honest - you will usually catch a hacker pretty quickly if they go all out with it, so how many people are actually being effected by the player? No more than what a single griefer could do to an entire team/structure in less than 5 minutes. But you allow leeway there if they claim "ignorance." But isn't it their responsibility to read the ToS and the rules prior to playing? So why allow any give? You treat hackers like that - you give them no benefit of the doubt.

Basically, you set a double standard. You give griefers a "second chance" but go straight for the throat on "hackers." And I use the term hackers loosely because they are probably just copy+pasting a script or using a simple program in the background. Both offenders have "negative" impact on the players. Both require time and investment from the mods. So why is one instantly a permanent ban while the other is case-to-case?

 

So why does the game run with a script console up in the background? That is just begging for it to be hacked. Make it harder to hack and you'll in-turn have less hackers. I still don't agree with a one offense permanent ban. The crime doesn't seem that destructive to warrant the removal of a player, paying or not. I would assume that the same is true with hackers, that usually a 3-5 day ban will change their ways. And a harsher penalty would occur if they attempted it again.

"As Geti said, when it comes to hackers, the game is far too small to be able to be lenient to them." - But wouldn't it also be true that it is too small to lose players in this fashion? That it would be in the best interest to try and long-term ban with an end point rather than to outright ban an account permanently?

If that player is dead set on ruining the gaming experience for other players they will find a way - be it through a constant investment of purchases to keep their gold status or just spamming F2P accounts. They will find a way.

But I believe that, just like the griefers, a hacker with a long-term ban with an end-date will reflect and ultimately learn and not repeat their actions. In terms of what they do to the game, it's partial responsibility of the developers to make it more secure. Again, make it harder to hack and you will have less hackers.

In no way do I condone or promote hacking - I'm a purist and avoid cheating/hacking. But I think that you can benefit by toning down the penalty for a first-time hacking offense.