Cheating

Here you can talk about wanted and upcoming game features

Moderators: Moderator, Programmer

Locked

How to counter cheating?

Ebay-style transfer market
26
37%
More powers to administrators
11
16%
Implement both ideas
12
17%
Do nothing, cheating should remain an option
21
30%
 
Total votes: 70

zandyy
Team Manager
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:30 pm

Cheating

Post by zandyy » Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:40 am

Yes, yet another idea to counter cheating, but this time I hope more people can help bring a change, because the problem is getting worse.

At the moment, only having more than one team or making transfers in unrealistic prices count as cheating in SP. How about posting false player’s info in the transfer forum? How about agreeing on a direct transfer at a certain time and price and then backing off? I am sure all managers who have been here long enough have come across such behaviour, typically by younger, newer managers. (These two examples I gave are actually the work of the same manager by the name of ***...).

I disagree with managers that think these are inherent risks to the game. Things like this will not have gone unpunished in real life. It is also not that difficult to administrate them – we would probably need to double the number of sheriffs and add a line to the rules. Negotiations are an important part of SP, and all managers in higher leagues negotiate before they buy, not just bid for players and wait for it to time out. I think it is the most pressing problem in the game at the moment.

The idea is to add a rule against lying in the forum, in SP messages and in press releases, to SP rules. Administrators will be the sole arbitrators, and will have the power to impose fines and penalties according to their discretion. The type a remedies can be debated here.

If you don’t like this idea, I have another idea that would not solve the problem but at least minimise it. I am borrowing heavily here from another idea manager Frrfrr had a while back. This idea is to ‘Ebay-ise” the SP transfers market. This will include the following features:
a. A seller will have the option to list two asking prices – a minimum bid (which will be similar to current starting bids) and a ‘buy now’ bid, for a direct and immediate transfer. The seller won’t have to list a direct transfer price – it’s just an option. Direct transfer will take place immediately, after the initial 2-days cool-off period.
b. A buyer will be able to place a bid (as it is now), and a maximum bid. Example: manager A bids 2m for a player, with a maximum bid of 3m. Manager B bids 2.2m for the same player. The system will automatically post a new bid on behalf of manager A at 2.31m (+5%).
c. Each manager will have a ‘reliability scale’. After each transaction, both buyers and sellers will have the option to grade each other in a scale of 1 to 5. This way, managers will have a tool to warn them not to trust certain managers.

I do not see why negotiating with 2 managers, making similar promises to both, lying to both and using this to boost the price is not considered cheating and having two teams is. The only reasoning for this is that it easier to administrate the latter. Thing is, I don’t think it’s that complicated to arbitrate in disputes when one side has clearly lied.

Thanks for taking part in a debate.

Zandyy

User avatar
PipkiN
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 2445
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:33 pm
Location: Slaný, CZ
Contact:

Post by PipkiN » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:59 pm

I think that cheaters are being caught effectively nowadays, so there is no need to add something like this..

Fast transfers are only made by deal of two managers. Why because some % of managers are ******* add something like reliability scale ? It would show nothing, you could every time vote for the worst mark andthen what? This could ruin manager's reputation even if he makes the transfer OK.

And by placing 2 amounts of money, I disagree, too. 2 days to bid are enough and everybody can place a bid.
Automatic bidding ? Yes, then you can add automatic training with no need to click, then automatic youth centre and so on and the whole game will be automatic.
I think these "ideas" are coming every time that someone is tricked by some other guy. Am I wrong ?

You made a deal with a bitch, you're not the first and not the last. However you cannot force devepolers to add something like this only because you have been tricked by some lies.
playing in C2
Image
Turnaj Slaná baterka

zandyy
Team Manager
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:30 pm

Post by zandyy » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:21 pm

Pipkin,

I noticed that whenever someone makes a suggestion to counter the growing serge of cheating in this game, you are always the first to protest strongly. Why is that? You may have objections to the solutions offered, but how can you justify objecting to the clear fact that there is a problem? Of course these suggestions appear straight after someone faced a problem – most ideas here are expressed to solve a problem a manager experienced. I cannot force developers, but I am trying to suggest solutions to a clear problem. You say cheaters are caught effectively now – how so? The examples I gave don’t even qualify as cheating according to current rules, and therefore nothing is being done about them.

By the way, automated training already exists. Maximum bid has nothing automated about it – it is not simplifying things, it gives another aspect to transfer strategy.

User avatar
PipkiN
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 2445
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:33 pm
Location: Slaný, CZ
Contact:

Post by PipkiN » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:04 pm

These offers how to fight cheating were presented many times. How many of them have been implemented ? None.

Why? Because your ideas will take weeks of developing and finally would solve nothing. You won't catch a farmer by your system, and it is farming which is today's worst problem.
Next, I want to control my money, so I disagree with any of these automatic +5% offers. If you want the player, you will add it manually, why you must still search for some automatization ?
Lying. Yes, that is a problem. But it's only seller's morale to blame and probably your fault to trust him. But you find very little number of people lying in this way.
The worst problem is farming and it can be solved only by hunting via cheatreports. No system like yours would help I think..
playing in C2
Image
Turnaj Slaná baterka

User avatar
lee400
Team President
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:15 pm
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Post by lee400 » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:14 pm

I agree with you there Zandyy.

PipKiN, your thoughts also does make sense, and yes, none of these ideas have been implemented, but to be honest, I wouldn't want to be cheated on, like before - manay managers just try to find another, better deal, and so many promises were broken when I decided to buy my 35 new youths.

It's just frustrating how these liars get away with these kind of nonsense. PipKiN, none of the stop cheating ideas have been implemented, and hence, we are trying to think of a better one which will be.
Username: Sir Lee (former lee400)
Team: AFC Bournemouth (Former Yunderland FC)

NEED ANY HELP, TIPS OR ADVICE?
JOIN www.sptips.co.nr NOW AND ASK FOR 1:1 HELP! RECEIVE A REPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS!

User avatar
PipkiN
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 2445
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:33 pm
Location: Slaný, CZ
Contact:

Post by PipkiN » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:20 pm

SO try to find better one, tnot talk always about the same things !
That is why I am against, this idea has been here discussed before, try to find something new and maybe then I'll be for.
playing in C2
Image
Turnaj Slaná baterka

zandyy
Team Manager
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:30 pm

Post by zandyy » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:22 pm

Pipkin,

You can control your money by not entering a maximum bid – it’s only an option. Have you ever shopped at Ebay? Can I suggest that you try it? The result of such a system is that you do not lose out on players you would have been prepared to pay more for, just because you are not next to the computer 24/7. As for your comment on managers maliciously giving bad marks to others on the reliability scale – in time, that should have a negligible effect on average, if I go by your logic that there are only a handful of rotten apples.

I’m not sure I know what “farmers” mean – it is not the word used in English to describe whatever it is you mean. Can you explain? My suggestions might be absolutely useless, but at the moment the cheating you and I are discussing here are not even classified as cheating, and that has to change. How can they “hunt” cheaters who aren’t even cheaters according to current rules? I report these incidents to administrators and they do absolutely nothing about them, because they don't have the tools. Can you also please refer to my idea to give administrators the power to penalise managers?

User avatar
el stino
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 8152
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:24 pm
Location: Brussel

Post by el stino » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:40 pm

nice proposal but I think that this ebay-system isn't ideal as well :wink:

if I understand it well you can only give stars to the manager if you get the player?
suppose that you and me want to have the same player from manager X. we both ask the price for direct transfer and he tells you you can get the player for 5M direct and I can get him for 5,5M.
I read this message before you do and gave him 5,5M for his player. manager X promised you the player so you are disapointed of not getting this player. I'm happy that I have the player and give him a 5-star.

or suppose that you did the bid of 5M. manager X don't accept the offer and 1 day later I do my bid of 5,5M and manager X accept this bid. you had an agreement but didn't get the player so you can't give stars.

you see the problem?

hope you understand my english and what I'm trying to telling you :P
Royal FC (el stino) - Manager since season 8

User avatar
C.A. Peñarol
Team President
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:08 am
Location: Originally from Uruguay.

Post by C.A. Peñarol » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:56 pm

That's why you have to have a 'buy it now' button like ebay lol or a 'Direct transfer' button in this case. If the other manager doesn't transfer the player after 24 hours of the bid, he should get he's rating kicked back. :wink:

But I'm not sure about all this system, I'm sitting on the fence on this one.
Manager: Gabriel_

Season 23 G.240 16th
Season 24 H.720 5th
Season 25 H.720 1st
Season 26 G.240 1st
Season 27 F.80 1st
Season 28 E.27 1st
Season 29 D.9 1st
Season 30 C.3 3rd
Season 31 C.3 1st
Season 32 B.1 2nd
Season 33 A.1 ???

User avatar
dawron
Team President
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 4:31 pm
Location: Praha, Czech republic
Contact:

Post by dawron » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:02 pm

I wanted to make a complex reply to zandyy's first message of this topic, but my answer was lost due to some forum system mistake. I have not enought strenght to rewrite it, but I can handle simple reply at least.

1. There are two main law systems at the present World: anglo-saxon (also called british-american) and the continental system. SoccerProject is a Belgian game and it means it's continental game, therefore it belongs to continental law system.

2. Everything is allowed unles it is not forbidden by the exact text of a law. (This is fundamental premise of continental law system.)

3. There is nothing wrotten about liaing in SP rules, so to be a liar is allowed by the rules. And therefore it could not be considered as a cheating.

4. It is unpossible for sherrifs to control 36K+ managers if somebody of them is a liar or not and therefore rules must stay as are now. Liaing is unfair, unethical and bad, but it belongs to life (an mainly to bussiness!) as eg. breathing.

5. I don't want to americanize SP in a way of eBay-style trading. It is stupid and very problematic (some of it's disadvantages was mentioned by others before).

6. If You want to get some refferences on manager who you never trade with before, then simply check his history, find trades he made before and ask his former bussiness partners. In other words: You can do it yourself without anything like a 'reliability scale'.

7. Automatic bidding to a managers maximum is very problematic. It was developed as an internet practise to rise auction prices. I think it would rise player's prices too. Are we lazy fat Americans who can not handle bids ourselves? I hope we aren't!


So I woted for "Do nothing" option, I am sorry, zandyy.
Tatran Střešovice
Image
My máme slabý kádr jak hovado!

zandyy
Team Manager
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:30 pm

Post by zandyy » Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:53 pm

Dawron,

Thanks for Commenting.

I think your point of view is interesting and you have definitely a point there. The distinction you make between two law systems is of course correct, but I’m not sure it is relevant to the issue here. Everything is allowed unless there’s a law against it, but shouldn’t there be a law against it? According to the Continental Law system in real life, can’t you sue someone for false advertising? The issue you raise that there’s no law against it is exactly the problem. I disagree that this sort of cheating is a part of real life. It is certainly not a part of the business world, as such offences would have been punished by law, or in the case of football – the team would have been penalised by the FA or equivalent.

If you say that the sort of cheating I am talking about is not wide-spread and hence not that big a problem, you cannot then claim that the problem is too big for sheriffs to administrate – that contradicts. If the problem is just a few bad apples, then the sheriffs can handle it just like they were kind enough to get back to me straight away in the two times I approached them, to tell me they can do nothing. If the problem is wide-spread, a solution must be sought, and those I offered here (with Frrfrr’s help) are just a suggestion; any solution to this problem will be welcome.

It’s also a question of SP values. Sorry for using such high words but I couldn’t think or another way of saying this, but it’s my main point. At the moment, SP will intervene when a manager has more than one team; on unrealistic transfer prices; and if a manager expressed political opinions or puts on pornographic content. However, if a manager is racially abused (read Sly’s interview on the Newsletter from yesterday) then it’s not in SP’s interest to intervene? The transfer forum manager is so strict that he changes posts when the words are not in the exact order he likes them; but when a manager posts false advertising there’s nothing he or the administrators can do? That’s the issue I’m raising – I believe these things are far worse that pornographic content.

I hope future comments would focus on SP values and the moral issue we have here, admitting we have a problem, rather than dismissing the suggested solution.

On your point of maximum bid – I completely agree, this system was devised in order to get prices higher. It also makes the bidding strategy more complex, the prices more reflective of real demand, and less chances of missing a player you wanted. But this is really besides my main point.

You were talking about values, Dawron, and I hope I answered your claim about the sort of values I’m looking for.

User avatar
sljivovica
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 4424
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:39 pm
Location: Enschede, Nederland
Contact:

Post by sljivovica » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:33 pm

First the negative: The system of having more sheriffs for dealing with transfers is bad in my opinion. It means giving more people power, and since you need to have only really good non-cheating and honest sheriffs, I like to have a small team of them, not a big one.
They should be about cheaters, not about punishing people who don't obey a law that's not even a law.

So I would like to see a solution in the system, not in the execution of unwritten social laws.

Now a bit more positive: I agree the current system is very flawed, and I think an ebay-sort of system might work. It's interesting at least, since it will make the cheap transfers harder and it will give bidding teams cool options to overbid automatically. But the system would have to be updated real-time, and not just during the simulations :?
Which I guess is very hard and maybe not possible.

I'm for change, but not the way it is suggested here :?
FC Wageningen
S2: started in E.34
S13 - S19..: B.2
S20..: A!! (12th)
S21 - S22: B.2
S23..: A!! (15e)
S24-26: B.2 (12e)
S27 & onwards: C-division and lower.
Currently (S41): E.45

Frrfrr
Team Board Member
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm

Post by Frrfrr » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:38 pm

dawron>
rules:
there is nothing about cursing other players, but you may get ban for it
there is nothing about farming, but you may get ban for it
there is written if you cheat you may get ban, but there is no definition what is cheating. in my opinion many players are cheating, but they get no ban. if you want to find out what is cheat, you have to have experience how the other case was treated to know. even in this case the approach of admin could change and what for other meant nothing, for you it may mean ban :)
however, if you ask what is cheating you dont get any direct answer ...

so whatever law it is now, in my opinion the only law valid is chaos :)

only exception valid till now is, if you are just playing solo account and no strange transactions with friends or so, there is high chance you dont get ban ... - my prove of this is - i am not cheating and i am not banned :)

all> i believe admin strongly searches the solution how to fight cheaters, but it was not implemented yet, while there was found out no solution which would only add positives without not adding some negatives.
additionally, i believe the creators want to be this game completly unique and want to keep some unique features. till now proposed solutions would change the game dramatically and i think they afraid loosing many players due to this change.

i think they dont see, that maybe they are loosing many more players not implementing it.

whatever will happen i think there will be always more and more people, who will post their opinions about cheating and finally will force admin to make something about it ... but till then we will have to survive and accept those cheaters :)

User avatar
sljivovica
Member of the Soccer Project Association
Posts: 4424
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:39 pm
Location: Enschede, Nederland
Contact:

Post by sljivovica » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:50 pm

Most good teams from higher divisons are great thanks to direct transfers, the exact same system that makes cheating easy.

So changing this (which is necessary in my opinion) will make a lot of the best managers very angry :?
I don't know if this is part of the reason nothing gets changed.
Of course, a lot of the cheaters get caught thannks to the option of snitching to the sheriffs, they do a good job of course.

Two reasons FOR the direct-accept transfers:
1. Money! Sell more expensive, buy cheaper. The market cannot decide someone's value this way, which is -in a way- unfair.
2. Timing! Some teams like to sell Friday at 10:00, so they have more than 2 full days to recover their Teamspirit.
I have no problem with this.

A small solution could be to forbid direct acceptance of transfers, but let the managers decide the deadline for themselves (with, as now, a minimum of x days and a maximum of y days on the market).
Then get rid of direct accepting of transfers, and the transfermarket will become more transparent. Of course a lot of good managers will hate this proposal :wink:
FC Wageningen
S2: started in E.34
S13 - S19..: B.2
S20..: A!! (12th)
S21 - S22: B.2
S23..: A!! (15e)
S24-26: B.2 (12e)
S27 & onwards: C-division and lower.
Currently (S41): E.45

zandyy
Team Manager
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:30 pm

Post by zandyy » Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:09 pm

Sljivovica,

The idea of this posted topic is to fight cheating, given that negotiations are an essential part of SP. Read my initial posting, second paragraph. Forbidding direct transfers would kill this game.

Locked

Return to “Requested / Upcoming features”