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

A useful unsportsmanlike penalty

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles

Instead of punishing afk which is abosuletly uselss, why not punish actual bad behavior, such as ca who refuse to shoot at dds. The system can simply track spotting range and anytime a ca is within 10km of a spotted dd and does not fire at it (note i'm not saying hit it) that ca should be punished. this would actually reinforce useful behavoir, unlike the punishment of disconnects/game crashes.

Edited by monpetitloup
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
27 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

Instead of punishing afk which is abosuletly uselss, why not punish actual bad behavior, such as ca who refuse to shoot at dds. The system can simply track spotting range and anytime a ca is within 10km of a spotted dd and does not fire at it (not i'm not saying hit it) that ca should be punished. this would actually reinforce useful behavoir, unlike the punishment of disconnects/game crashes.

You cannot dictate how a player should play the game, now its not that I disagree with you about the CA who doesn't shoot the DD, but they might not want to shoot the DD, its not up to you to play their ship, you can only f3 the red DD hoping the ca will shoot him.

 

 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,357 battles
31 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

Instead of punishing afk which is abosuletly uselss, why not punish actual bad behavior, such as ca who refuse to shoot at dds. The system can simply track spotting range and anytime a ca is within 10km of a spotted dd and does not fire at it (not i'm not saying hit it) that ca should be punished. this would actually reinforce useful behavoir, unlike the punishment of disconnects/game crashes.

This is just as stupid as the new AFK, TK penalty system. WG already dictate how a person should play this game, by dumming it down , so brain dead
monkey's, can also participate, after getting off the special bus. Come to think of it, you're suggestion, just might make it into the game at some 
point. 

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
2 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

This is just as stupid as the new AFK, TK penalty system. WG already dictate how a person should play this game, by dumming it down , so brain dead
monkey's, can also participate, after getting off the special bus. Come to think of it, you're suggestion, just might make it into the game at some 
point. 

Dude your so hostile, towards the OP, yes not the smartest idea, but allow people to have their own say without tearing them down to your level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,357 battles
1 minute ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

Dude your so hostile, towards the OP, yes not the smartest idea, but allow people to have their own say without tearing them down to your level

No just too you :Smile_ohmy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
4 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

No just too you :Smile_ohmy:

So you add nothing to what the OP has suggested, have you had a bad night of playing, and feel the need to attack people, your not very bright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,357 battles
Just now, CriMiNaL__ said:

So you add nothing to what the OP has suggested, have you had a bad night of playing, and feel the need to attack people, your not very bright

Iam hostile towards the OP. Oh please, how childish can you actually be. Get a glue :Smile_sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
8 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

No just too you :Smile_ohmy:

 

1 minute ago, Crusin_Custard said:

Iam hostile towards the OP. Oh please, how childish can you actually be. Get a glue :Smile_sceptic:

 You seem to be acting like a child, sorry I don't sniff glue, it would explain you tho

There is no need to be hostile tho

and the top quote you were referring myself, don't know why, maybe I'm not a clown like yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,357 battles
2 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

 

 You seem to be acting like a child, sorry I don't sniff glue, it would explain you tho

There is no need to be hostile tho

and the top quote you were referring myself, don't know why, maybe I'm not a clown like yourself

No, you just an ignorant fool. No big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
1 minute ago, Crusin_Custard said:

ignorant fool

I feel sorry for you being this way

 

1 minute ago, Crusin_Custard said:

No big deal

Your right, your not

 

2 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

No

yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles
33 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

You cannot dictate how a player should play the game, now its not that I disagree with you about the CA who doesn't shoot the DD, but they might not want to shoot the DD, its not up to you to play their ship, you can only f3 the red DD hoping the ca will shoot him.

 

 

 

and yet they seem to be dictating that players should move a certain distance during a match and not cause more than a certain amount of damage to teammates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles
26 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

This is just as stupid as the new AFK, TK penalty system. WG already dictate how a person should play this game, by dumming it down , so brain dead
monkey's, can also participate, after getting off the special bus. Come to think of it, you're suggestion, just might make it into the game at some 
point. 

while i agree that imposing play styles is not good. i propose that since it is being done it might as well be done in a useful way rather than as is the case with punishing computer crashes and program bugs

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles

We have had this update nearly 24 hrs now, give it time, the sky isn't falling, let WG collect the data and adjust accordingly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,458 posts
8,357 battles
2 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

while i agree that imposing play styles is not good. i propose that since it is being done it might as well be done in a useful way rather than as is the case with punishing computer crashes and program bugs

I can agree to that :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles
14 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

We have had this update nearly 24 hrs now, give it time, the sky isn't falling, let WG collect the data and adjust accordingly

as i mentioned in another post, if they are going forward with this, then the report for afk function needs to be removed. i dont see afk as an issue in the game. i do however see plenty of cruisers, particularly high tier completely ignore dds. it think it would be more useful to the game to promote beneficial play rather than punish game crashes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,221
[KP]
Beta Testers
2,681 posts
12,344 battles
24 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

game crashes

This will most likely be at the fore front of adjustments made, i actually thought they were making allowances for this with the penalty system but obviously not at this stage, its a wait and see type of thing as to what they will do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,522
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
6,049 posts

I think they should punish anyone who brings a Kamikaze R into Co-Op.

Or maybe anyone who brings a Colorado into Random.

It hurts the team as bad as an AFK operator.

....

Maybe they should punish all the players who 'Lemming Train' off to a remote corner in a Standard cap battle.

....

Oh wait...  there is a penalty..  it's called DEFEAT.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles
1 minute ago, AVR_Project said:

I think they should punish anyone who brings a Kamikaze R into Co-Op.

Or maybe anyone who brings a Colorado into Random.

It hurts the team as bad as an AFK operator.

....

Maybe they should punish all the players who 'Lemming Train' off to a remote corner in a Standard cap battle.

....

Oh wait...  there is a penalty..  it's called DEFEAT.

cute that you think that, but the reason you see cruisers ignoring dds is because they are damage farming. you can easily earn as much xp as the top 3-4 winners while being on the losing team if you farm enough damage. this is the reason you see people ignoring dds, they think it's not worth the time for the hp farmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,269
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,019 posts
9,409 battles
2 hours ago, monpetitloup said:

Instead of punishing afk which is abosuletly uselss, why not punish actual bad behavior, such as ca who refuse to shoot at dds. The system can simply track spotting range and anytime a ca is within 10km of a spotted dd and does not fire at it (not i'm not saying hit it) that ca should be punished. this would actually reinforce useful behavoir, unlike the punishment of disconnects/game crashes.

And what if the DD is on the other side of the island? What if they are shooting at the radar cruiser? Burning the BB that was at half health but 4 kills? What if they don't see the DD on the other side of their ship? What if they can't get a worthwhile shot on it? What if the only 2 guns they might get on it before it blinks out are disabled/destroyed? What if a CV is spotted and they are trying to sink it or set it ablaze to take it out of play? How about any scenario's I have not yet thought up?

This is the same blanket punishment thinking that gave us Wargaming's idiotic new penalty system. Also under "why the bots shouldn't be in charge".Make the system a report system and then have to type WHY it was bad play or behavior. Pay a person/people to sift through and ignore the "They used a bad word" and "they didn't play the way I wanted them to" types and focus on LEGIT bad behavior like obvious intentional TK's, these people over using obscenities while telling people to kill themselves, and the ones who actually give up on a battle or spend half of it hiding and making the team carry them.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,522
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
6,049 posts
3 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

cute that you think that, but the reason you see cruisers ignoring dds is because they are damage farming. you can easily earn as much xp as the top 3-4 winners while being on the losing team if you farm enough damage. this is the reason you see people ignoring dds, they think it's not worth the time for the hp farmed.

Then change the REWARD system, not the PUNISHMENT system.

edit:  Geez..  The next thing, folks will be demanding PINK for losing 5 games in a row.

Edited by AVR_Project

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[TAFFY]
Members
76 posts
5,020 battles
6 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

Then change the REWARD system, not the PUNISHMENT system.

I agree with you. The good idea is they should change the system aspect to make AFK/inactive players to lose more credits/XP rather than punishing them. Also they should make the punishment system for people who use bad/foul languages and insult each other, rather than punishing game crashes and sudden disconnections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
675
[VW]
Members
2,489 posts
14,445 battles
42 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

And what if the DD is on the other side of the island? What if they are shooting at the radar cruiser? Burning the BB that was at half health but 4 kills? What if they don't see the DD on the other side of their ship? What if they can't get a worthwhile shot on it? What if the only 2 guns they might get on it before it blinks out are disabled/destroyed? What if a CV is spotted and they are trying to sink it or set it ablaze to take it out of play? How about any scenario's I have not yet thought up?

This is the same blanket punishment thinking that gave us Wargaming's idiotic new penalty system. Also under "why the bots shouldn't be in charge".Make the system a report system and then have to type WHY it was bad play or behavior. Pay a person/people to sift through and ignore the "They used a bad word" and "they didn't play the way I wanted them to" types and focus on LEGIT bad behavior like obvious intentional TK's, these people over using obscenities while telling people to kill themselves, and the ones who actually give up on a battle or spend half of it hiding and making the team carry them.

they werent. they were simply ignoring dds while shooting full health bbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
847
[WOLFB]
Members
2,620 posts
10,631 battles

If I follow your logic, I would be punished because :

- I found another treat more important than a DD within 10 km and decided to focus on that treat instead of the DD

-My guns are facing the other side so I focused on another target

 

No thanks 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,269
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,019 posts
9,409 battles
7 minutes ago, monpetitloup said:

they werent. they were simply ignoring dds while shooting full health bbs.

And you completely missed the point of my post. The broad system your proposing would punish EVERYONE. Not just the players your complaining about. Also doesn't discount maybe they didn't see the damned thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×