Ign: Berdb
Ban: Assisting Win Trading, 30 days.
The rule in question:
"11.1. Win trading in conquest is not allowed. This includes, but is not limited to, starting a battle with no intention or not attempting to win and asking others to place on you and not attempting to defend. "
Ban reason extended version:
I messaged a guy coordinates of the Inhib to go place at, which prevented Best in the South from placing on us.
Argument:
The "Win-Trading" was blatantly inconsequential and had zero effect on the status quo of Balak. (And if your concern is that Best in the South lost their right to place on us, that will be explained below.) Furthermore, throughout history there's been a clear precedent set about utilizing Balak placements to avoid continental fights/"Win-Trading". And in relation to that, there's irrefutable evidence that we genuinely believed these actions did not constitute win-trading, and our intentions were clearly written. & Most importantly, Capital Bounties are utilized all the time to block continental fights, which block the opposing alliances from gaining potential strength. This will all be proved below.
- "The "Win-Trading" was blatantly inconsequential and had zero effect on the status quo of Balak."
The Balak fight which was initiated was inconsequential as the strength and tile/strength difference is so huge + more.
If you look at the current map:
(Blue = Lemonade Legion - Purple = Lunar Dominion)
Its apparent that no other alliance is competing Balak. The only competitors are: Lemonade Legion, and Lunar Dominion. And due to the vast difference in strength between Lemonade and Lunar (144 to 99 respectively) + the fact that the strength would change by only 6 depending on the outcome of the fight, the fight was quite literally irrelevant. Maybe yeah sure, if there was another alliance only a few strength behind us, it would be somewhat relevant. However no other alliance has a single tile on Balak, other than Lunar Dominion, which obviously doesn't care as they placed on us in this situation.
Additionally, due to Regalis not participating in Balak at any moment in time this month, it can be established that the only “competition” was Lunar Dominion. Lunar Dominion was the only alliance which had a slight shot at winning, however they willingly placed on us here.
And furthermore, both Lunar Dominion and Regalis warp an average of 0-20 players, so it would be quite literally impossible for them to win.
Also, even if Regalis places on us on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and wins all of those somehow, they physically cannot win the month.
(Currently Lemonade Legion is at 144 Balak Strength, and Regalis is at 100. Its physically impossible for Regalis to over take us in strength even if they magically win a fight today, Saturday, and Sunday)
Also, going off this fight: (https://eldritchbot.com/fight?id=dJAs4kxyN)
There is a clear discrepancy in outcomes (Bans vs No Bans) that cannot be explained; regardless of who ordered the fight to be placed. This leaves us to suspect that the primary reason for the ban being issued is not a matter of Balak Strength, but rather, a matter of potential Garama Strength. We have already addressed this matter further down in the section regarding Capital Bountifuls, so I’d encourage you to look at the bountiful (no pun intended!) amount of precedent in favor of placing a Capital Bountiful, where the primary intention of placing was to prevent a Continental fight.
- "Furthermore, throughout history there's been a clear precedent set about utilizing Balak placements to avoid continental fights / "Win- Trading"."
Throughout the past 2 and a half years, multiple major alliances have utilized this method in order to avoid continental fights, as long as the Balak is placed for that purpose, its been allowed.
Instances:
July 2021: Used to prevent Fruit Force from placing continental on Luxor Coalition.
August 2021: Used to prevent Imperial Alliance from placing continental on Wolf Force.
January 2022: Used to prevent Big Leds from placing continental on Wolf Force.
November 2022: Used to prevent The Bank Robbers from placing continental on Western Union.
December 2022: Regional Powers placed Balak on Fruit Force at 13:55 so that Regional Powers Itself would be unable to be attacked from 13:55-14:55, meaning they only had to spend 5 minutes from 14:55-15:00 defending their Inhib from Best in the South on Garama.
(Fruit Force Vuln closed at 15:00, this basically means this exact same situation as right now has happened before.) (Evidence: https://eldritchbot.com/fight?id=p$fuqiT@v , "BALAK - 13:55 - DEC 23 2022 - 16 PLAYERS")
And another time during the month, Regional Powers placed Balak on Fruit Force near when FF's vuln was ending, meaning Western Union was unable to place Ascalon on Fruit Force.
March 2023: Used to prevent Best in the South from placing continental on Regional Powers.
From all these instances, a precedent has been set; to present an argument against this method is to argue for win-trading bans for the leadership of all major alliances over the past 2 and a half years.
- "And in relation to that, there's irrefutable evidence that we genuinely believed these actions did not constitute win-trading, and our intentions were clearly written."
From this screenshot our intention is crystal clear: get placed on, on Balak in order to prevent Best in the South from placing continental on us. We did not believe these actions constituted win-trading as alliances have been using this method (and other similar ones) to avoid continental fights for years.
- "Most importantly, Capital Bounties are utilized all the time to block continental fights, which block the opposing alliances from gaining potential strength."
If your point of view is that we used Lunar Dominion placing Balak as a way to circumvent fighting Best in the South, denying Best in the South the potential strength, then lets take a look at Capital Bountifuls. Almost all alliances have used Capital Bountifuls as a way to avoid being placed on, allowing their vuln to close. All that's needed is for someone to place a Capital Bountiful 2 hours before the alliances Vuln ends, and then they are safe.
If you are to mention that Capital Bounties yield no change in strength, if you refer to the paragraphs above: its already been established that its physically impossible for Regalis to win even if they somehow win every fight. So overall, it can only be said that the Balak fight prevented Bits from obtaining potential strength, yet Capital Bounties serve the same purpose.
So, adding onto the topic of the loss of potential strength, If utilizing Capital Bounties for the exact same purpose is allowed, its a contradiction to say using Balak for this purpose is forbidden. The Balak fight was placed solely for the purpose of avoiding a fight on Garama, and Capital bounties are used the exact same way.
Ban: Assisting Win Trading, 30 days.
The rule in question:
"11.1. Win trading in conquest is not allowed. This includes, but is not limited to, starting a battle with no intention or not attempting to win and asking others to place on you and not attempting to defend. "
Ban reason extended version:
I messaged a guy coordinates of the Inhib to go place at, which prevented Best in the South from placing on us.
Argument:
The "Win-Trading" was blatantly inconsequential and had zero effect on the status quo of Balak. (And if your concern is that Best in the South lost their right to place on us, that will be explained below.) Furthermore, throughout history there's been a clear precedent set about utilizing Balak placements to avoid continental fights/"Win-Trading". And in relation to that, there's irrefutable evidence that we genuinely believed these actions did not constitute win-trading, and our intentions were clearly written. & Most importantly, Capital Bounties are utilized all the time to block continental fights, which block the opposing alliances from gaining potential strength. This will all be proved below.
- "The "Win-Trading" was blatantly inconsequential and had zero effect on the status quo of Balak."
The Balak fight which was initiated was inconsequential as the strength and tile/strength difference is so huge + more.
If you look at the current map:
Its apparent that no other alliance is competing Balak. The only competitors are: Lemonade Legion, and Lunar Dominion. And due to the vast difference in strength between Lemonade and Lunar (144 to 99 respectively) + the fact that the strength would change by only 6 depending on the outcome of the fight, the fight was quite literally irrelevant. Maybe yeah sure, if there was another alliance only a few strength behind us, it would be somewhat relevant. However no other alliance has a single tile on Balak, other than Lunar Dominion, which obviously doesn't care as they placed on us in this situation.
Additionally, due to Regalis not participating in Balak at any moment in time this month, it can be established that the only “competition” was Lunar Dominion. Lunar Dominion was the only alliance which had a slight shot at winning, however they willingly placed on us here.
And furthermore, both Lunar Dominion and Regalis warp an average of 0-20 players, so it would be quite literally impossible for them to win.
Also, even if Regalis places on us on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and wins all of those somehow, they physically cannot win the month.
(Currently Lemonade Legion is at 144 Balak Strength, and Regalis is at 100. Its physically impossible for Regalis to over take us in strength even if they magically win a fight today, Saturday, and Sunday)
Also, going off this fight: (https://eldritchbot.com/fight?id=dJAs4kxyN)
There is a clear discrepancy in outcomes (Bans vs No Bans) that cannot be explained; regardless of who ordered the fight to be placed. This leaves us to suspect that the primary reason for the ban being issued is not a matter of Balak Strength, but rather, a matter of potential Garama Strength. We have already addressed this matter further down in the section regarding Capital Bountifuls, so I’d encourage you to look at the bountiful (no pun intended!) amount of precedent in favor of placing a Capital Bountiful, where the primary intention of placing was to prevent a Continental fight.
- "Furthermore, throughout history there's been a clear precedent set about utilizing Balak placements to avoid continental fights / "Win- Trading"."
Throughout the past 2 and a half years, multiple major alliances have utilized this method in order to avoid continental fights, as long as the Balak is placed for that purpose, its been allowed.
Instances:
July 2021: Used to prevent Fruit Force from placing continental on Luxor Coalition.
August 2021: Used to prevent Imperial Alliance from placing continental on Wolf Force.
January 2022: Used to prevent Big Leds from placing continental on Wolf Force.
November 2022: Used to prevent The Bank Robbers from placing continental on Western Union.
December 2022: Regional Powers placed Balak on Fruit Force at 13:55 so that Regional Powers Itself would be unable to be attacked from 13:55-14:55, meaning they only had to spend 5 minutes from 14:55-15:00 defending their Inhib from Best in the South on Garama.
(Fruit Force Vuln closed at 15:00, this basically means this exact same situation as right now has happened before.) (Evidence: https://eldritchbot.com/fight?id=p$fuqiT@v , "BALAK - 13:55 - DEC 23 2022 - 16 PLAYERS")
And another time during the month, Regional Powers placed Balak on Fruit Force near when FF's vuln was ending, meaning Western Union was unable to place Ascalon on Fruit Force.
March 2023: Used to prevent Best in the South from placing continental on Regional Powers.
From all these instances, a precedent has been set; to present an argument against this method is to argue for win-trading bans for the leadership of all major alliances over the past 2 and a half years.
- "And in relation to that, there's irrefutable evidence that we genuinely believed these actions did not constitute win-trading, and our intentions were clearly written."
From this screenshot our intention is crystal clear: get placed on, on Balak in order to prevent Best in the South from placing continental on us. We did not believe these actions constituted win-trading as alliances have been using this method (and other similar ones) to avoid continental fights for years.
- "Most importantly, Capital Bounties are utilized all the time to block continental fights, which block the opposing alliances from gaining potential strength."
If your point of view is that we used Lunar Dominion placing Balak as a way to circumvent fighting Best in the South, denying Best in the South the potential strength, then lets take a look at Capital Bountifuls. Almost all alliances have used Capital Bountifuls as a way to avoid being placed on, allowing their vuln to close. All that's needed is for someone to place a Capital Bountiful 2 hours before the alliances Vuln ends, and then they are safe.
If you are to mention that Capital Bounties yield no change in strength, if you refer to the paragraphs above: its already been established that its physically impossible for Regalis to win even if they somehow win every fight. So overall, it can only be said that the Balak fight prevented Bits from obtaining potential strength, yet Capital Bounties serve the same purpose.
So, adding onto the topic of the loss of potential strength, If utilizing Capital Bounties for the exact same purpose is allowed, its a contradiction to say using Balak for this purpose is forbidden. The Balak fight was placed solely for the purpose of avoiding a fight on Garama, and Capital bounties are used the exact same way.
Last edited:
