Banner
Xtra Smileys
[Open]
We Unite Gaming
May 23, 2025, 09:10:34 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to We Unite Gaming!
Formerly Wii Unite/Wii Unite Gaming
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Youtube Channel Chatbox Staff List Login Register  

TKO: Scum?

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: TKO: Scum?  (Read 302 times)
FlyingSparx
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


View Profile
« on: February 19, 2009, 09:01:49 am »

I just thought I'd post this here to bring attention to it. I feel it doesn't deserve to go unnoticed.

I originally posted this on GB here: http://gamebattles.com/forums/t/1957488.html

And the message says:

To start, only from what I've seen can I comment on, so I might not have the full story.

From what I heard about Blazers war vs. The Takeover Clan last night was that Blazers won and TKO disputed. Sunkist was a member of BC since the beginning of CoD and then he left. He came back yesterday, so he was not eligible on the GB team. I understand if any clan wouldn't let him play. However, TKO said it was fine if he played. They could've easily said no, but they agreed that although he was ineligible, he could play. They said this publicly and eveyrone saw. If they didn't want him to play, they could've said so but they didn't. They allowed it, so there should've been no problem.

So Blazers win the war. TKO pulls this crap about the ineligilbe player. That's the lowest crap I've seen pulled by any clan. They basically went in thinking if we win, we win. If we lose, we'll be poor losers and cheat Blazers out of a win.

I also heard that the BC host put friendly fire on. Okay, in the GB rules it says friendly fire is on. So is their host breaking the rules by putting friendly fire off? Thus Blazers should win? BC normally plays with friendly fire off, but if they put it on and it's in the rules, don't complain.

I'm not sure what else happened, but from what I've seen TKO has stooped to the lowest level, scum. I like smartguy in TKO because he was in Bc and he was a cool guy. Others always give crap to BC. They are the toughest clan to work with, and now, they've stooped to the lowest level.

DON'T LET THEM CHEAT YOU! Just be careful because they're basically cheaters. Please correct my story if I'm wrong, but from what I've heard, this is all true, and that's just sad.


And another response from me:


I'm not worried about being flamed. I'm just trying to expose this problem that really taints TKO's rep.

If my story is wrong, then I'll take any flaming. However, I trust what I heard. Our leader is a very nice guy and he went about the situation a very different way than I would have. He changed the scores for TKO because BC's argument wouldn't stand against GB. TKO had the argument because BC did use an ineligible player. Although TKO agreed to let them use it, that doesn't stand for Gamebattles. I would've argued because you just don't do what TKO did. My point is that

Any clan that cares so much as to cheat a win out of a team doesn't deserve to go unnoticed. Blazers won fair and square. TKO just had to be immature.

BC has had problems with them in the past. They argue and are poor sports. We waited an hour once because they kept disputing everything. They argued over pointless issues.

So, TKO, quit being stupid and play the game. You lost. Don't be cheap. It's a shame that the cheaters are making all of TKO look bad.
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

JTRamboman
WU Elite
**

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Clan: NAMBLA
Posts: 285



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2009, 09:26:59 am »

I don't think its prudent to use such harsh language if you are only basing this on what you heard from others. 

That being said: 
-If TKO said it was ok for an ineligible player to play, then complained afterward, that is weak sauce.
-If TKO had a problem with FF being on, they should have left as soon as they realized the settings were not as they wished.  Playing out the match, then complaining afterwards is poor form.
-From the feeback on the match, it looked like TKO had a problem with BC using martyrdom, which led to teamkilling.  I think this is silly, as a martyrdom TK is unintentional and does not help your team.  In my opinion, the only legitimate complaint of FF, is killing teammates in second chance.

Perhaps TKO can provide their side of the story, as I'm sure they would disagree with the title of this topic, lol.
Report Spam   Logged

Nin_Jerk
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2009, 10:59:04 am »

Quote
From what I heard about Blazers war vs. The Takeover Clan last night was that Blazers won and TKO disputed. Sunkist was a member of BC since the beginning of CoD and then he left. He came back yesterday, so he was not eligible on the GB team. I understand if any clan wouldn't let him play. However, TKO said it was fine if he played. They could've easily said no, but they agreed that although he was ineligible, he could play. They said this publicly and eveyrone saw. If they didn't want him to play, they could've said so but they didn't. They allowed it, so there should've been no problem.

We never agreed to let him play. No one told us he was ineligible. Let me quote what one of your members said to us when you were abusing the rules: "GB doesn't accept verbal agreements." Please note, that even then, we never agreed to let him play.

Quote
So Blazers win the war. TKO pulls this crap about the ineligilbe player. That's the lowest crap I've seen pulled by any clan. They basically went in thinking if we win, we win. If we lose, we'll be poor losers and cheat Blazers out of a win.

"That's the lowest crap I've seen pulled by any clan" - LOL! Ok guys, lemme enlighten you all on the part Sparx so "accidentally" forgot to mention. First map was our host. I didn't play the first map because I was watching LOST online, but from what I know (not hear, KNOW) we accidentally hit score limit at 750. With 3 mins remaining we beat Blazers to 750 by 5 kills before them. In the midst of our celebration, they come in and say "GB says score limit has to be 1000, so you guys forfeited your host and map." We tried haggling our win and even offered to redo map totally. They said no way, too bad, and remember next time. THIS IS WHEN I POPPED INTO CHAT.

DG's parents were badgering him to go to sleep and he was pissed that a clan like BC would pull the "lowest crap I've seen pulled by any clan." I subbed in for him and Smartguy subbed in for Anarchy because he wasn't able to get new host fc and isn't on pc at all during wars.

Quote
I also heard that the BC host put friendly fire on. Okay, in the GB rules it says friendly fire is on. So is their host breaking the rules by putting friendly fire off? Thus Blazers should win? BC normally plays with friendly fire off, but if they put it on and it's in the rules, don't complain.

We accepted our mistake and tredged onto the second map where BC hosts 1-0. Without our consent and I repeat WITHOUT OUR CONSENT, they turned friendly fire on in a NORMAL TDM match. The strat they used in this map (Castle) was that at least 2 had martyrnoob on. They stuck as a group and when our superior shooters rushed them and killed one of them, the remaining went into ally's martyrnoob and took the tk instead of the TKO quadruple kill pwnage. It was HILARIOUS! Every 20 seconds had at least 2 tk's. The one thing we just found out last night which pissed us off: TK IN NORMAL TDM LEADS TO NO BANNINGS - we just realized like 3 mins into game and we thought it was too late. This is why they did this martynoob strat. We didn't agree to ff being on, but we just thought "**** IT, LET THEM TK AND THEY WILL GET BANNED. IF WE LEAVE THEY WILL PULL ANOTHER 'LYKE OMG U LEFT DA GAME U FOURFITS.'" They say we abused tk too, but I can guarantee we tk'd 3 times most in the whole 10 mins - we're allowed to miss shots aren't we? Default rules are ff off in normal tdm and on in hcore, you can do the opposite only if BOTH clans agree to it. This they say TKO Zero agreed to too. No he didn't. If he did, why wouldn't we have abused the martyrnoob start too? <___< Sadly, they won this map by ONLY ONE KILL. LOL! they abused the strat so badly that their individual scores added up to be less than half of their team's total. This picture was sent to GB officials too to reflect the enormous amount of ILLEGAL tking in a match.  Afro

Quote
I'm not sure what else happened, but from what I've seen TKO has stooped to the lowest level, scum. I like smartguy in TKO because he was in Bc and he was a cool guy. Others always give crap to BC. They are the toughest clan to work with, and now, they've stooped to the lowest level.

DON'T LET THEM CHEAT YOU! Just be careful because they're basically cheaters. Please correct my story if I'm wrong, but from what I've heard, this is all true, and that's just sad.

1) Using ineligble player without consent.
2) Making opposing team who won a map by pts forfeit because of a technicality that they were sorry for and willing to redo map for.
3) Changing rules without agreeing with opposing teams in order to abuse a noob strat that is illegal on GB to begin with.
4) Making a board like this in order to defend yourself with only your side of the story.
5) BC Blazers fail. They say we are hard to work with? We played 17 or 18 wars. Read the feedback. One bad feedback out of 17 or 18 reflects all of our matches? lrn2usestatsuoutlier. We played against 2 other BC divisions and the consensus was best clan we ever warred and everything went smoothly: ask the other two divisions if you don't believe me. You don't need to worry about us warring you again BC Blazers, because we would kill ourselves before that day comes by.
6) Some, like JTR, know I am from Unity (un). If I ever joined a clan that abused rules to avoid a loss and "cheat BC of a win," I woud leave so quickly that they wouldn't even have known I left. So why am i still in TKO?

"DON'T LET THEM CHEAT YOU! Just be careful because they're basically cheaters."
Report Spam   Logged
MrPillow
WiiUnite's Fluffifier
WU Pwn
****

Karma: 62
Offline Offline

Clan: Wii Failures
PSN: MrPillow92
Posts: 2944


STR8 SLAMMIN'


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2009, 11:24:43 am »

Sounds to me Jerk just owned this topic
Report Spam   Logged

TIGER STYLE: Wii'Nite clan ain't nuthin' to **** with  \\//\\// <== My dubayew
Zerokilledyou
WU Regular
**

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2009, 11:52:58 am »

Also jerk. We DID ask them to change the TK but they refused and played the map anyway. Add this to the inel player who was playing off being their leader so we wouldn't notice.
Jerk is 100% correct, they also stalled for 2 hours at which point agreed to a rematch when they KNEW I was the only player remaining.
TBH neither team won but BCs refusal to acknowledge the errors led to their forfeit to which I am sad but will never play a BC team until play-offs which I will be buying a dazzle just for them.

However there are only 2 BC blazer players who caused this and everyone else on blazers who was around and was in the war now knows who's fault it is they got a loss neither team really deserved.
A giant TY to IVP for being stupid and giving his team a loss for refusing to cancel when offered and reporting a win before the game was even over. NOT our fault:)
Thanks to the other players who were cool:)

OH and just throwing it out there we had agreed not to flame against BC for attempting to cheat us and not even play more then 1 game of a series. However YOU sir kinda screwed that idea and will not reflect well on BC:(
« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 12:07:30 pm by Zerokilledyou » Report Spam   Logged
undrclsshero
Cogito Ergo Sum
Founding Member
WU Pwn
******

Karma: 3
Offline Offline

Clan: vT
Posts: 1071



View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2009, 12:09:18 pm »

Sounds to me Jerk just owned this topic

Sounds to me like we are being overrun by 8 year old girls.  Its a luvin' video game.
Report Spam   Logged

F5in
I love controversy
WU Combatant
***

Karma: 2
Offline Offline

Clan: The Fatal Five
PSN: SinF5
Xbox Live: F5in
Posts: 538


HE WHO RAGES


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2009, 12:14:32 pm »

"Screw GB rules."


I say who won, won...
Report Spam   Logged





Quote from: weiwrote huntrers
wen your wherate hunters this hunters spire,  trace, sylyx,  samus. noxsus, kanden and weawel. my wherete is trava and sylyx
JTRamboman
WU Elite
**

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Clan: NAMBLA
Posts: 285



View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2009, 12:20:07 pm »

Just to clarify a few things...

GB default rules include:

-1000 point max:  I actually understand BC's frustration here, as my squad has made serious comebacks in games past the 750 threshold.  The fair thing to do would have been to replay the map
-FF is on:  This applies to every mode, normal TDM included.  Now I know that many wars are played with this off, but it is a GB default rule that is supposed to be unchangeable.  It may be weak, considering the first map was played with FF off...but BC has the right to play be the correct rules.

My conclusion would be this:  If BC chose to be a stickler about the first map, taking a win instead of replaying, then they shouldn't be butthurt about TKO's enforcing the ineligible player rule.

Try and communicate better before the match, and if you have so many problems that it takes two hours to setup, just cancel.
Report Spam   Logged

FlyingSparx
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2009, 01:27:50 pm »

First of all, I wouldn't have made you forfeit the first map. I would've asked for a replay. I apologize for BC's action on that. It should've been a replay.

Second of all, saying that you didn't know Sunkist was ineligible is bullcrap. Here's the exact convo on the BC chatbox:

[BC]Ivp: Sunkist is going to play.
FlyingSparx: Sunkist can't play. He's ineligible.
[BC]Ivp: Crap. You're right.
TKO (I believe it was DoubleGunz): It's fine, just play.

TKO agreed to the ineligible and everyone saw it. I was there, and I told BC that Sunkist was ineligible. TKO knew as well as BC. Jerk, you weren't even on the chat. It was DG and Zero and others. Not sure how you can comment on that when you weren't there.

Even still, who cares? My squad has allowed ineligible players to play. We've let people sub as well. It's just for fun. I understand your point, but you guys knew he was ineligible and you said okay.


BC also can play with FF on. It is a GB rule. They don't have to say anything to you about it. So don't say that they didn't agre on it. It's a rule. My squad plays with it off, but they put it on so you have to go with it. To quote you, "GB doesn't accept verbal agreements."

As for the teamkills, you're obviously exaggerating. It is physically impossible to have 2 TK every 20 sec. because TKO killed two players. Not possible in a war. Also, I was there when Blazers were stratigzing. There was never anything said about maytrdom or anything. FF wasn't mentioned either. I think you're just pointing out some stupid point. BC won the game by 10 points fair and square.

BC didn't forfeit either. Our leader said that it is just a game and it's pointless to argue with people like you guys. :/

My guess is you didn't want to say anything about "BC cheating" because people would realize that you guys are in the wrong.
Report Spam   Logged
FlyingSparx
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2009, 01:33:55 pm »

And here's the exact story from the leader of Blazers and someone who was there:


Well yeah. What happened is that they played wrong settings in the first map (750 points) therefore they must have of taken the loss for that match. At the time they seemed fine with our 1-0 win until then and they brought out 2 subbed players maybe thinking they would easily defeat us in the 2nd match so they ignored their forfeit at 1st map.

Then since we made them forfeit I wanted to play all the Gb rules indicates so we wouldn't have to forfeit under any circumstance.

After we beat them at the 2nd match they complain that they never agreed their 1st match loss but what they didnt seem to understand even though I linked them to the rules 100 times is that they don't need to agree their forfeit, they MUST take it however they saw it as a "deal" "we never agreed to our 1st map forfeit".

Then they complained about friendly fire on in the second match saying they didnt agree to that either -.-. I mean I linked them to the freaking rules 1000000 times and keep saying the friendly fire is optional.

Then they complained about our ineligible player and I said ok your right, even though you said it was fine gb supports no verbal agreement. So its 1-1 cause in 1st match it was your host so it was your responsibility to check our eligibility in that case. And at the 2nd match its our host so the ineligible player is our fault. 1-1 anyone would say but they didnt even take that.

They wanted a 2-0 win they never earned. At the end we had to be the guys that gave away our deserved win and they took a win they never earned :/.

THIS IS A WARNING TO ALL CLANS, DONT WAR THIS CLAN UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO TAKE A LOSS WHEN YOU WON.

~Ivp



Again, now that I've seen both sides, I think Blazers got cheated out of a win.
Report Spam   Logged
Thumper
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2009, 02:09:55 pm »

To be fair, nin_jerk, I never accused you guys of tking on purpose. And I know that people don't take people's "word" on video games anymore (which in itself is ridiculous because it's just a video game), but I promise you we didn't tk on purpose. Not one bit. Take that as you want because I know some people will never believe what is said just because of the side they're on. So, let's drop this one.

Also, if someone did say that our ineligible was ok or not... it seems like we'll never get to the bottom of it anyway because someone on some side is too affraid to man up here. I don't care who it was. Let's drop this too.


Also jerk. We DID ask them to change the TK but they refused and played the map anyway. Add this to the inel player who was playing off being their leader so we wouldn't notice.
Jerk is 100% correct, they also stalled for 2 hours at which point agreed to a rematch when they KNEW I was the only player remaining.

For ur first point. I don't remember you guys asking to change the TK but w/e... it might of happened. Also, if you are talking about our ineligble hosting, he wasn't going to but our first host couldn't do it halfway through.

2nd point: Let's not be nasty here... We never stalled. The 15 minutes between the 1st and 2nd map included disputing of the 1st map and subbing of two of your players. The two hours after the second map was disputing on both sides. Neither side can be blamed for stalling. Also I believe I saw 4 TKO guys on the chat the whole time while one of our guys left previously. At that time it was pretty obvious that we wouldn't continue this match.

It's a loss to both of us to not play a game for the game.
Report Spam   Logged
DoubleGunz
Founding Member
WU Smash Yo Face
******

Karma: 57
Offline Offline

PSN: DoubleGunz
Posts: 4906



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2009, 02:12:22 pm »

So many things I could say right now, but I won't.

I'll sum it up by saying this: I hate BC now.  Undecided

Report Spam   Logged


Z3R0
Founding Member
WU Recruit
******

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Clan: TaKeOver War Team *Leader*
PSN: G1_Z3R0Z
Xbox Live: KENYAN SQUIREL
Posts: 34


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2009, 02:12:55 pm »

Ok... I was not in this war, but I was informed about it. I feel that whats done is done and that you should just drop it. Its not like there is anything to do to fix it anyways... Flaming us does not make you guys look any better.
Report Spam   Logged

Nin_Jerk
WU Recruit
*

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2009, 02:19:54 pm »

Quote
As for the teamkills, you're obviously exaggerating. It is physically impossible to have 2 TK every 20 sec. because TKO killed two players. Not possible in a war. Also, I was there when Blazers were stratigzing. There was never anything said about maytrdom or anything. FF wasn't mentioned either. I think you're just pointing out some stupid point. BC won the game by 10 points fair and square

They used martyrdom and they used it to TK. TKO Zero said he even saw when he put an enemy into flashing health the enemey ran about 3 secs away from him into an ally's martyrnoob in order to avoid giving up points. They used martyrnoob and they abused it. They're not stupid, why would they confess such an important implication in a public forum like this? We saw what we saw, and that many tk's cannot be a coincidence.

Quote
Then they complained about our ineligible player and I said ok your right, even though you said it was fine gb supports no verbal agreement. So its 1-1 cause in 1st match it was your host so it was your responsibility to check our eligibility in that case. And at the 2nd match its our host so the ineligible player is our fault. 1-1 anyone would say but they didnt even take that.

LOL, speak out of your ass more? They said they will restart map 2 b/c they CONFESSED their illegal strat if we give them 1-0 for our accidental 750 limit from match one. We offered a 0-0 restart or a complete cancellation. They refused to do either and wanted a 2nd map restart with the 1st map being your win. You nitpicked the rules to screw us, so we did the same to you.

P.S. DG never said he would let Sunkist play. The only thing he agreed was that Thumper could play with a name different from his GB name. Ask him and he will reinforce this. kthnxbaidie.
Report Spam   Logged
OhioLawyer
Administrator
WU Master
*

Karma: 9003
Offline Offline

Clan: The Fatal Five
Posts: 8207


Romans 5:8


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2009, 03:35:44 pm »

If BC nitpicked the first map for a win on a technicality and TKO nitpicked back (as Jerk just stated) for a win on map 2, and no 3rd map was played, then it should be replayed or cancelled.

While both clans made mistakes here, the MOST shameful thing is that TKO accepted a win on GB under these circumstances.  Heck, they have all agreed that both teams should've each lost a map and yet TKO still accepted the win.  That is purely shameful.

Regardless of who's account of the situation you believe, both stories point to mutual forfeits.

How TKO can go from mutual forfeits to accepting a win is beyond me.
Report Spam   Logged

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
© 2008-2014 We Unite Gaming, Wii Unite Gaming, Wii Unite
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy