2nd opinion please

[KaoriYuuki]

Replay Link: first ban request: https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=81626
Game Name:
Your Warcraft III Username:
Violator's Warcraft III Username:
Violated Rule(s):
Time of Violation (in-game or replay):
Any further thoughts:
I think undeadkingpr needs a harder punishment that just a warning considering his history and his 1000 wood king up totally destroyed a 100% win game on 15

[AmnoN]

@kaoriyuuki Please do me a favour and read the rules surrounding "refusal to cooperate".

Refusing to cooperate when asked to do so several times by sending alone and not save-send with teammates to win.

You only asked him when he had roughly 200-300 wood left - the damage was already done. Also, spamming "stop" without any explanation such as "save 15" really does not help - it was also a unilateral decision made by you at the time. Granted, he should have communicated what he was doing, but as I mentioned, that is not bannable.

I am fully aware of his history as I have enforced the most recent 2 bans on him.

[KaoriYuuki]

It's not refusing to cooperate but teamkill instead, do you play 1200+?

[AmnoN]

@kaoriyuuki read my edited post above. I would hardly call that team killing - that alone does not constitute a team killing ban - it is not like he did so despite being asked not to several times or selling his towers or juggling the king to death, etc.

[KaoriYuuki]

That alone does not constitute a team killing ban? He wasted 1000 wood on king making blue call lvl 14 send which was a complete suicide. If he kept his wood we can end and win game on level, enemy team had no holder it was a clear level 15 race with 3 heals

[Jabba41]

@KoariYuuki Solo sending barely count as team killing. It would be teamkill if he like... sends aa demn on 16 in purpose to grant the enemy time to DD or such stuff. Or very heavy cases of solo send and when he even claims he wants to TK with it.

In LTD TK is like, selling towers, refusing to build. Or other violations like king juggle in order to kill or when you antistuck units so they dont fight against the king when youre about to die.

Do you still want a second mod too review this?

[supersexyy]

Pretty clear case of trolling...

[KaoriYuuki]

@Jabba41 if you think that way then obviously you win, but I just want to mention this is 100% tk, ask any skilled 1200+ player.

[Jabba41]

@KoariYuuki As i told you this i keep our definition of TK in mind. You can say every little thing that works against the team is TK. According to our guidelines a solo up like this isnt TK.
(i just talk about it in general, havent reviwed it so far)

So... you still want it t be reviewed by a second mod. Yes or No?

[matdas]

i'd rather have someone with more knowledge on the player such as @radiantcrystal to do the second review

[Merex]

@Jabba41 The severity of not cooperating with your team which is the initial definition of ''solo sending'' can play both minorly prior to majorly especially in a second tier of LTD like 1200+. TK is defined many ways, just as much as this one.

It's teamkill when you say you're gonna do something, then do something else.

@matdas I've happily reviewed this case, and others. Also being the fact I do not play 3.41 or it's second tier 1200+. You don't need a green nor an experienced LTD mod to take over cases like these, all ENT moderators are equally capable of handling any type of situation. If they have trouble, that's why the ENT chat is there.

@AmnoN Refer to my response to Jabba.

My own review on this case has only shown that 2 players cannot successfully keep up to their word, and instead act as solo-riders in a very team intensive game like LTD prior to it being 1200+. This is teamkill and I'm honestly surprised 2 other mods could not see this clearly.

If you look over the chatlog, you can see a mix of calls for sending but also agreed upon, then suddenly these blatant actions of spending lumber. 1200+ requires all team efforts. Sure, you can say teamkill is defined more towards actual game breaking misdoings, but also taking into account they were already losing and practically made the loss guaranteed, is equally as unjust.

Case closed. My ruling has been stated on the primary BRQ.
https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=81626