Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
renegadestatuz

Dev Blog - Anti abuse system update

303 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,475
[HINON]
Supertester
7,656 posts
8,088 battles

ST. Anti-abuse system update.

Players who display "unsportsmanlike" behavior in battle (being AFK, damaging teammates, leaving the battle too early) will now be warned and punished by battle type limitation (co-op only), until they improve their behavior. 

Localization is underway.

  • Cool 12
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[2347]
Members
299 posts
6,505 battles

I hate to be the one to bring this up, but does WG really want to define it's co-op game mode as a punishment? That's kinda...negative. Get someone from the PR staff to put a positive spin on it with a little creative rewording, me thinks.

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,492
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
6,676 posts
8,217 battles

Long overdue. (though they need to build in protection for those that are kicked because of internet DCs, and not punish those that disconnect, and then reconnect a few minutes later.)

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,048
[INTEL]
Members
9,822 posts
27,863 battles

Interesting. Have to wait til it is implemented in practice, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,011
[UDEAD]
Beta Testers
1,298 posts
12,407 battles

If you actually do something in game and are alive at the end of battle, you will get some xp, so re-connects are not punished beside the time they lost in battle.

Being restricted to co-op mode might work against botters trying to grind a ship up on the margins, and doing penance for team killers in co-op will restrict mischief makers from disrupting competitive games.  It's in supertest though, how often does it happen in that environment to actually test it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295
Members
1,125 posts
7,798 battles
18 minutes ago, _Starbuck said:

I hate to be the one to bring this up, but does WG really want to define it's co-op game mode as a punishment? That's kinda...negative. Get someone from the PR staff to put a positive spin on it with a little creative rewording, me thinks.

It's not punishment it's preventing misbehaving players from natively affecting other players. They should rename it to time out mode.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,600
[5BS]
Members
6,761 posts
4 minutes ago, killsbane67 said:

They will drive players away from the game IMO. 

Are they players you want to keep around? I mean accident TK's are one thing (they need a forgive button like Battlefield 2 had), but do you really give a crapabout keep deliberate TKers or people who sit AFK?

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[4HIM]
Members
2,225 posts
6,552 battles
2 minutes ago, killsbane67 said:

They will drive players away from the game IMO. 

Yep.  Times I've had to AFK were due to things IRL interrupting.  Things FAR more important than a game.  And I have a family member who's going through a bad spot and any time the phone rings I have to drop everything and respond.  Doesn't happen often, but it's nothing I can schedule.  Plenty of other things IRL interrupts and need immediate attention.  

And yeah, using PvE as 'punishment' is bad optics at best.  

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[4HIM]
Members
2,225 posts
6,552 battles
29 minutes ago, renegadestatuz said:

Players who display "unsportsmanlike" behavior in battle (being AFK, damaging teammates, leaving the battle too early)

How about those that die early or sit at the back of the map and spend the rest of the match flaming their team mates in chat?  IMO, that's "unsportsmanlike".  

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,011
[UDEAD]
Beta Testers
1,298 posts
12,407 battles
2 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

Are they players you want to keep around? I mean accident TK's are one thing (they need a forgive button like Battlefield 2 had), but do you really give a crapabout keep deliberate TKers or people who sit AFK?

He may be referring to the co-op only players having to play with them, it's the only reason to oppose this on it's face.

@ZARDOZ_II I doubt people that afk a single game are the droids they are looking for, but people that do it repeatedly throughout the day while trying to play at work or school.  Did you ever receive a warning about afk'ing during your family problems?  If not I wouldn't worry about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
929 posts
18,228 battles

Sounds like it will do nothing to team damagers... players that take 80% of your health but don't KILL you. I've had plenty of those experiences. I now kill team damagers that take repeated damaging shots at friendlies. When I'm pink, it's because I've done WG's job for them:

 

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[4HIM]
Members
2,225 posts
6,552 battles
3 minutes ago, BiggieD61 said:

He may be referring to the co-op only players having to play with them, it's the only reason to oppose this on it's face.

@ZARDOZ_II I doubt people that afk a single game are the droids they are looking for, but people that do it repeatedly throughout the day while trying to play at work or school.  Did you ever receive a warning about afk'ing during your family problems?  If not I wouldn't worry about it.

Given this hasn't yet been implemented, no.  But what I'm saying is that there are many things IRL that are beyond our control which can result in an AFK.  

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[SALT]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
3,660 posts
2,989 battles
6 minutes ago, ZARDOZ_II said:

Yep.  Times I've had to AFK were due to things IRL interrupting.  Things FAR more important than a game.  And I have a family member who's going through a bad spot and any time the phone rings I have to drop everything and respond.  Doesn't happen often, but it's nothing I can schedule.  Plenty of other things IRL interrupts and need immediate attention.  

And yeah, using PvE as 'punishment' is bad optics at best.  

I hate to be that person, but if you know that you have someone that could call and makes you have to drop everything then you shouldn't be playing a competitive matchmaking game during that period. You should only jump on the game when you can allocate dedicated time to it without major issues. Most matches only last 15 minutes so setting time for say, an hour a day of uninterrupted play is quite manageable.

If you know you might be interrupted and be forced to drop what you're doing than you should be playing a single player game that you can pause on the fly. When ever I know I'm on call and could have to drop something immediately I go play something solo or a game with others that's not dependent on me. Overall you're just harming the team if you know for a fact you could have to take a step away mid match. I have across 2 servers and including Alpha test near 5000 matches played and have had to step away mid-match 3 times. It's not hard to plan ahead on such things but you're right that sometimes RL interrupts you. In my case, it was 2x incidents of an upset stomach that had no forewarning and the 3rd one was a dog that ran out the door and was about to get onto the street so I had to sprint to run after it.

 

  • Cool 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,229
[WORX]
Members
3,422 posts
14,785 battles
10 minutes ago, ZARDOZ_II said:

How about those that die early or sit at the back of the map and spend the rest of the match flaming their team mates in chat?

That is more the issue of the Damage oriented reward system that WG has for its game mode. Flamu did a video on the topic. One thing is "unsportmenlike" and its the other to do what the game rewards you. This is more a "time out" for creating a hostile gaming experience, the self inflicted gun shoot wound that dont help the team. What you have stated well has a 50/50 chance of working but its more poor decision issue. The flaming over in chat well, that is uncivil and I agree. but lets not confuse the two issues 

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,453
[HINON]
Members
10,708 posts

It will be interesting to see how strict the thresholds are. Seems a bit bad for coop players if they have to put up with all the peeps on probation. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,600
[5BS]
Members
6,761 posts
11 minutes ago, BiggieD61 said:

He may be referring to the co-op only players having to play with them, it's the only reason to oppose this on it's face.

Easy enough, although WGing will not do it, to address: Pink can only be grouped with Pink/Bots only.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
584
[PVE]
Members
2,903 posts
21,541 battles

Instead of the automated system they should review TK reports & punish all intentional TKs...period...& make the punishment double for any false reports so they can actually not have the queues filled w/trolls reporting just because they're but sore they lost.

& 100000000% agree w/removing friendly rams from keeping people pink longer...in fact remove damage from friendly rams altogether so a DD can smoke for his teammates w/out having to worry about getting/causing pink from 1 or other being microscopically low on life...sometimes you need to ram into a ship you are smoking for to help slow them down so they don't just run through the smoke...be nice if you could use this strategy w/out DD becoming pink because the person that could really need a quick disappearing can't be rammed into w/out killing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,640 posts
3,603 battles

I'm not against this, I've had several matches where there were more divisions on the other team and suddenly players on the opposite side AFK. I doubt it will be instant punishment, probably based on a certain amount of AFKs over a time period or games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
220 posts

Soo... a system clearly made to be abused. People will just get themselves intentionally TKed by torps to grief.
 

What is next? auto bans to the training room for "hate-speech"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,011
[UDEAD]
Beta Testers
1,298 posts
12,407 battles
15 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

Easy enough, although WGing will not do it, to address: Pink can only be grouped with Pink/Bots only.

That actually would be an awesome punishment - throw them all in a mosh pit and watch the team damage penalties fly around ... "The bots win AGAIN! "

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,657
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,460 posts
12,810 battles

It doesn't bother me.  If I find myself restricted to co-op, I'll have earned it.  No problems there.  I think what would be a more interesting fix is to put all the griefers into a queue that only matches them with other griefers on their team.  If they then want to grief each other, by all means do so, and let the other team mop up their easy win.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,657
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,460 posts
12,810 battles
1 minute ago, kruppw said:

Soo... a system clearly made to be abused. People will just get themselves intentionally TKed by torps to grief.
 

What is next? auto bans to the training room for "hate-speech"

Don't throw torps that your teammates MAY wander into.  Easy problem to solve, that.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×