Sellous

Member

Last active last week

  1. last week
    Fri Oct 6 10:31:00 2017
    Sellous posted in Motoko's Account .

    Interesting if true although since Motoko is working with support regarding this issue I will no longer comment in regards to this incident. Unless somebody is skeptical about his innocence since I would vouch on his behalf.

  2. Thu Oct 5 20:40:33 2017
    Sellous posted in Motoko's Account .

    Upon further review and full cooperation from Motoko Kai I can say with 110% confidence he is absolutely 500% clear and has been a victim of an unauthorized breach. He was subjected to odd circumstances surrounding his account that I personally cannot explain or seen before. There without a doubt has been intervention by a player with the assistance of the support staff or an account with access to gm abilities.

    Some of the behavior his account has been exhibiting includes original added names being tampered with on other players, which is why I began to suspect he was guilty. I personally had Motoko Kai the player name added for years and did not take it off my list; however, when he logged into the game today to become clear he appeared as Motoko Abyssus, which was removed from his main account.

    Further there is odd behavior concerning the in game name Gladiator Motoko. It does not exist and cannot be created for reasons unknown to me. I had originally concluded it may have had been a banned name since the Gm's back in the day used to disable names from creation without warning; however, upon cross examination with another player who still had him appearing as Gladiator Motoko in their list TODAY it is apparent that this indeed was his original account.

    Motoko fully engaged in showing all of his characters on the select screen with video to rule out possible tampering. He also provided titles and showed armor to disprove name changes. I can honestly say despite his inability to produce evidence sooner he was correct and I formally retract my statements regarding his integrity. I hereby also issue an apology as well and hope Motoko is compensated for the actions of the support staff and the hacker.

    Despite heated exchanges and long debates regarding Motoko's guilt I can see now that whoever fucked with his account knew what they were doing. And they do hold a vast majority of his core names. For this reason the following names are to be watched for unless otherwise stated by Motoko himself and only himself:

    Motoko Chroma
    Motok O
    Motobot Terrorize
    Motoko Complex
    Motoko Kai
    Motoko Zyzq

    Again, I retract all earlier statements in regards to this man's integrity. His account was subjected to more tampering than I personally have witnessed. And I thought I had seen it all. While my intentions were good on behalf of the person who was scammed I may have come across hostile as the days went by. I was seeking information to prove or disprove and when the evidence was stacked against him I drew my conclusion in what I thought to be a reasonable time frame; however, I will let this be a learning experience. Good luck Motoko, I hope you give GW a load of shit this was definitely a unique case. Later for now.

    Reference -image-
    I will vouch that his support logs are legit with what I saw in game and thru live stream via twitch.
    As well as the picture concerning his deleted characters.

  3. Thu Oct 5 16:11:32 2017
    Sellous posted in Looking for new ownership.

    If people don't know who you are that is a damn shame and the gw servers as well as the website should be shut down. At this point though I don't see why the website needs to be paid for any further. With all the different free boards and small demand for pvp in guild wars altogether it seems like a waste. There are only a handful of people who even log on here every so often. Just my 2c.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Wed Oct 4 11:23:32 2017
    Sellous posted in Motoko's Account .

    Unless you want to start posting up pictures of your support logs I think we have our answer..... Since you could have provided those even the day of the 19th.... or even the 24th....

  5. Wed Oct 4 11:13:54 2017
    Sellous posted in GW Is Sexist.

    Gender in guild wars is only sexist when being concerned about hit boxes for say body blocking. Most people aren't aware of the actual size/units ppl take up, so texmod used to be able to be used to outline your player box. Although you can no longer do that.

    But if you know most 4 to 3 person blocks can be pulled off by 2 people :)

  6. 3 months ago
    Tue Jul 18 12:41:00 2017
    Sellous posted in PvP: fix suggestions?.

    @Motoko The theory is true. Ladder matches should not give points. In fact, ladder at this point should be the new scrim. Still on obs mode to watch, but no benefit other than to practice.

    Keep in mind ATs and mATs would suffer consequences that would need additional modification - People will still sell champ points. Those syncers would then enter in the ATs to flood them with accounts to the point they could create that second AT set during the same AT just to flood it with teams to pair against. They would accept the loss against the real guilds and just farm each other. So you would have to create some sort of mechanism to control that.

    That could become the new issue; however, again restricting the number of minimum players can kind of handle that nicely. The number of accounts required to be utilized doubles when you jump from two to four players. And in order to even run more than +14 accounts on a computer consistently and have multiple (pvp) games go on at once you need a pretty decent computer. It would require a pretty hefty investment into your rig and you'd need to invest in accounts since even entering in 5 guilds if you increased the min to four would require 20 accounts.And most computers even if it's a nice rig cannot run 20 accounts at once.

    Also the champion points given out would be small even if you pushed a ton of guilds in at's since you need to win consecutive games to even gain a decent amount. 1 guild if it won 4 games in a row would gain 10 total points with my proposed formula. This would mean any other team that won games and then lost would have it's consecutive counter lost meaning their guilds might net 2-4 points. In order for them to even push for a second automated tournament they would need 37 accounts with 37 guilds + 3 other accounts per guild entering. And consecutive wins, and normal wins only grant champion points. If guilds forfeit teams would not be given champion points since only real wins would count. It would also require the syncers to pump in over 160 tournament tokens an at to even attempt it which isn't even feasible since to enter on more than 32 guilds at once and not forfeit they would need 37 x 4 accounts and that isn't realistic.

    I don't think if you increased the minimum required players you'd see more people jumping into at's especially given forfeits don't count toward points and consecutive wins are the only real way to cap or gain a decent amount of points. The amount of effort and strain on some high end rigs would have most people not even attempt it.

  7. Tue Jul 18 09:54:29 2017
    Sellous posted in PvP: fix suggestions?.

    @JornF All it needs is ladder reset every month since they lowered it to 1050 for champs , shouldnt be too hard to get back to that. Guilds lose rating even for no shows, this will discourage them from farming ladder or they will just give away free rating. I feel this would eventually free up the ladder a little bit, not that it matters tbh, there arent enough people to try and ladder with. Im prety sure if they do the no show during an AT or mAT they will lose the rating, never tested it or seen it happen. If this is the case then it wouldnt be hard at all for them to implement it for ladder matches. Just getting someone from ANET to do it would be the hardest part lol.

    Ladders resets + allowing rating loss for not showing would help although I think you should take away the primary incentive to even sync ladder to begin with. If you can only gain champion points in automated tournaments and increase the minimum amount of players needed to engage in automated tournaments syncing becomes far harder. Realistically a team without at least 4 players + 4 henchies or 4 heroes does not belong in an at since they have absolutely no shot at winning. It's a format that makes your team eligible for the monthly automated tournament like wise you should have a full team if even it's with henchies/heroes not 6/8 team.

  8. Tue Jul 18 09:42:50 2017
    Sellous posted in PvP: fix suggestions?.

    @tdrone t

    Ladder resets help in conjunction with a changes to the champion rank title track, lower K value gains. People who play the monthly automated tournaments and automated tournaments would be more likely to win ladders due to significantly higher K values if you reduced the ladder K from 19 as a maximum to a maximum of 5. So guilds near each other would net 2-3 rating where guilds below you would net 0. Instead of gaining 0-19 a game.

    Re-introducing heroes to ladder would probably give some guilds or people more incentive to try to participate for fun and to show off their heroes. I'm not saying it would make the format active but it'd definitely be much funner than facing sync guilds or 6/8 teams with outdated inferior henchmen builds that literally took no thought to add to the game. Just copy pasted most old meta bars. It'd also allow for fun scrims, challenges. So the proposed changes don't only apply to the dead ladder format it allows for people to engage in all kinds of fun prior to the 2009 change. We were promised to still be able to scrim/challenge with heroes back in 2009 but ofc nothing happened with that.

  9. Mon Jul 17 16:44:11 2017
    Sellous posted in PvP: fix suggestions?.

    @Motoko Yeah... I suggested this years ago. Automatic enter = no way to avoid getting counter synced. (Along with monthly ladder resets so the syncers are more likely to give up on building up sync-able guilds over and over and over.)

    @kasperov Solution is simple.
    Remove this fucking bug that allows syncers to leave before match starts without loosing rating.
    Without this every1 could just enter gvg with 6 henchies and have fun playing. Then If people see other guys playing with 6 henchies they will try to find more players to win with them and then finally you are going to see 8 people teams in guild battles again.

    Not to say that isn't a valid point but I don't think that would be very effective because then syncers could just push guilds into gvg to force you to pair against stallers. The way stallers would function is they could make it, so their guild wouldn't pair with the stallers because they would have had already had faced it before and could not face it again due to the way the game operates (you need to face X amount of guilds) before you can face another team.

    And since syncers have higher rating than any guild today due to ladder not being reset and everybody remaking guilds after the mat they could keep stallers at low rating and you would forcibly pair against the stall guilds synce realistically sync guilds would take some time for the ladder to even let you pair with them depending on their rating. Or even if they desired they could even create new guilds and you'd pair with them just due to the rating different. Further syncers could push their rating back up easy sync the K value of ladder is too high than it should be given it's a non existent pvp format.

    And since they also have the ability to play on multiple accounts they could play vs you on stall guilds whilst they sync champ points forcing you if you didn't have a full team to take far longer to beat them. So while it sounds good on paper it's actually a very weak method to handle ladder syncing.

    Also I'm not sure how you plan to enter with 6 henchies pretty sure cap is still 4?

  10. Sun Jul 16 11:34:18 2017
    Sellous posted in PvP: fix suggestions?.

    @K R S ;C H K R How to fix PvP

    1st) Ban RM traders. Yay, the syncers are gone!
    2nd) Ban the remaining botters and people frequently playing with them.
    3rd) Find 1.2 mio active PvP players for GW.

    3rd is optional.

    That requires too much moderation where as just revamping certain pvp aspects will make syncing much harder in the long run and requires far less moderation and support intervention. And pvp syncers have very little to do with RM traders it's completely different. The syncers who found a way to abuse the game after these said changes would stick out like sore thumbs and little investigative work would be needed. If you wanted to hit RM traders you'd restrict the amount of connections a certain i.p or hardware i.d could make to the server since most of these sites that sell currency utilize 20-60 accounts at a time. The harder you make it the better it is rather than the more you monitor since that requires resources and a level of thought the current support system does not have.

View more