Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Wadres

New Surge in Team Kills, Plus TeamKiller Defense Proposal

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

26
[D-D-D]
Members
30 posts
13,009 battles

Has anyone else noticed a recent surge in the amount of deliberate team killing in matches?  I realize that there are a few ships in the game following the Christmas events (among other things) that have left players with a bad taste in their mouths (Puerto Rico, Smolensk, and Colbert to be precise) and that's caused issues recently as well.  In the last week I've encountered more instances of deliberate team killing/griefing than I have in the last 4 years of gameplay combined.  Two instances where I was the target (one in my Smolensk, and one in my Colbert) and just tonight another instance where a Des Moines player on my team, who started the match off marked pink, purposefully griefed our friendly Gearing to death.  I am quickly learning to be especially wary of players who are pink in recent weeks because I have no reason to believe that it may just be an accidental hit penalty.  I have no frame of reference as to whether or not I'm looking at an actual team killer until I actually observe their conduct in match.  Now, I understand the distaste of the player base towards the Research Bureau Ships as well as the PR and the Smolensk.  I'm not saying I approve of it, but just that I understand it.  For a player to be harassing a Gearing for an entire match?  Unacceptable!  For that matter it is unacceptable for any player to harass another on their own team for any reason, end of discussion, regardless of the ship they've chosen from their port.  

I'm concerned that the issues brought about over the Christmas/smolensk/research bureau ships may have inadvertently set a dangerous precedent for players opting to grief any player who takes in ANY ship they don't like, and not just controversial premiums.  I'd hoped that the WoWS player base as a whole was better behaved than this.  It seems that I was sorely mistaken.

To clarify a bit on my own matches mentioned:

-The Smolensk match I was targeted by a "friendly" Jutland who was not pink to begin with.  He targeted me and his sole contribution to the match as a whole was to charge into the center of the map while shooting at and damaging only me, turning pink, and getting killed early on by a mixture of drawn enemy fire and reflected damage.  Ultimately the damage he did to me was Negligible

- The Colbert match was just yesterday, and I was singled out by a "friendly" Massachusetts (already pink) who chose to target me and a couple of other teammates, no enemies, for the duration of the match.  Unlike the smolensk case, this mAss knocked out my guns, Steering, and engines while I was visible and being targeted by enemy ships, effectively ruining the entire match for me.

- The third instance was, as mentioned, a "friendly" Des Moines (already pink) following, shooting and harassing the friendly Gearing until he'd killed the Gearing.   In this instance, I tried (too late) to help the Gearing by killing the DM.  Got the DM about 10 seconds too late, but did notice his guns beginning to turn on me in my PR (which I would have imagined to be the more controversial and therefore enticing target for a TKer to begin with).  The unfair end of this being that, in killing this player who was pink to start with and had already tallied a negative kill as his sole contribution to the match, I got slammed with a 5 match penalty for killing a confirmed team killer.  It would have been one thing if this player had gone through the match and not done a single point of damage to a teammate, but he'd already killed a friendly in front of me, and yet I got penalized for trying to defend his target and potentially myself.

These have all been within the past 2 weeks, this does not include instances I may have observed without being directly involved in them.

I'd also like to take the time at this point to propose something to Wargaming staff for consideration.  That penalties should not be incurred by non penalized players should they choose to act defensively towards any player who has invoked a TK (unsupporting conduct) penalty.  However, to prevent players taking this as a carte blanche reason to strike pink players from the start, I also propose that certain criteria be met before such measures come without penalty.  Mainly that the players with penalties must first have incurred at least 5k in damage upon their target or in reflected damage from main battery hits, and two torpedo hits on friendlies would also be a requirement so that a single "accidental" torp hit for a match would not instantly draw team fire.  All damage within the criteria must be met each match, not in the match for which the player was initially penalized. These limitations would prevent simple instances of accidental ramming, or single stray main battery shell (barring accidental citadel hits) from invoking the loss of penalty.  Naturally any confirmed friendly kill by a pink player, regardless of damage done, would fully eliminate the penalty for anyone opting to try and take measures to defend themselves from the team killer.  I propose these limitations to protect players who are upstanding members of the warships community from receiving penalties should they opt to act in their own defense or the defense of others, but also to protect the players who may have been marked TK for truly accidental circumstances so they don't get singled out at the beginning of battles over honest mistakes.  At the very least, I propose that the act of killing a team killer, should Wargaming maintain a TK penalty for such action, at least be reduced to a single battle penalty regardless of damage done.

To be honest, I doubt my words will reach anyone,  but I felt the need was there to speak up.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
840
[-K-]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
2,346 posts
12,409 battles

Have not noticed any of this and think current system is fine. They do it enough they get a coop timeout.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[D-D-D]
Members
30 posts
13,009 battles
2 minutes ago, Fodder4U said:

Have not noticed any of this and think current system is fine. They do it enough they get a coop timeout.

Maybe that's why I'm noticing it, and you aren't, because I'm a co-op main and they're getting dumped on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
33 minutes ago, Wadres said:

Maybe that's why I'm noticing it, and you aren't, because I'm a co-op main and they're getting dumped on me.

Yeah most likely, because I have not been seeing those sort of players in Randoms for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,022
[4HIM]
Members
3,027 posts
12,664 battles
1 hour ago, Wadres said:

- The third instance was, as mentioned, a "friendly" Des Moines (already pink) following, shooting and harassing the friendly Gearing until he'd killed the Gearing.  

Can this even happen?  I thought once you were a pinkie that all team damage was reflected.  Or am I mistaken here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[DPS]
Members
55 posts
2,841 battles

I once accidentally turned into someone on my teams torps,  took four to the broadside.  I had about quarter health, so quickly in chat I posted “DENIED!”  as I would have been smoked by the enemy team anyways.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
840
[-K-]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
2,346 posts
12,409 battles
13 hours ago, Wadres said:

Maybe that's why I'm noticing it, and you aren't, because I'm a co-op main and they're getting dumped on me.

Yeah that must be it as you don't see that stuff happening in randoms. IMO the only thing I would change is when a player goes orange they get a 24 hour game ban then they come back pink and have to do the required amount of coops. But that is just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
772
[REVY]
Members
2,287 posts
12,296 battles
2 hours ago, Wadres said:

Has anyone else noticed a recent surge in the amount of deliberate team killing in matches? ........

No

And I have been working some of the Directives as well as the Naval Battles in Co-Op during the week and weekend.

1 hour ago, ZARDOZ_II said:

Can this even happen?  I thought once you were a pinkie that all team damage was reflected.  Or am I mistaken here?

It is, but it was a Des Moines going after a Gearing. Different size health pool, means he can ping away at the Gearing and likely kill it, while losing just about half his health.

OP also does not mention if the enemy team did anything to the Gearing as well, which would also take from its HP pool.

 

2 hours ago, Wadres said:

- The third instance was, as mentioned, a "friendly" Des Moines (already pink) following, shooting and harassing the friendly Gearing until he'd killed the Gearing.   In this instance, I tried (too late) to help the Gearing by killing the DM.  Got the DM about 10 seconds too late, but did notice his guns beginning to turn on me in my PR (which I would have imagined to be the more controversial and therefore enticing target for a TKer to begin with).  The unfair end of this being that, in killing this player who was pink to start with and had already tallied a negative kill as his sole contribution to the match, I got slammed with a 5 match penalty for killing a confirmed team killer.  It would have been one thing if this player had gone through the match and not done a single point of damage to a teammate, but he'd already killed a friendly in front of me, and yet I got penalized for trying to defend his target and potentially myself.

 

TK system is working as your post shows.

Unlike in WoT, you cannot shoot a TKer in WoWS without a penalty.

While I myself commend you for trying to assist a teammate, you went about it all wrong and basically become the thing that you are complaining about.

With the damage to the Gearing, and the kill of it, he was in a position that, had he fired on you, he would have lost more health and eventually sunk, with minimal health lost to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,574
[1984]
Members
4,132 posts
19,960 battles

The worst thing about the tk rules is that a fixed amount if damage is absorbed by the agrieved party without any of it being reflected on the offending party. This is often exploited and costs the victim of tk damage to die faster while the tk offender remains full health before going pink.

this should be changed such that the tk is reflected 100% and immediately against the offender without any damage being taken by the victim.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
251
[USCG]
Members
576 posts
19,975 battles

Had a random battle a few days ago in my Ranger. One of our DDs (who was already pink) said he got pink because he torped a friendly CV for not supporting him. When he asked for support (which wasn’t needed because there were no planes/ships near him) I ignored him. After several more requests I replied no in chat so he turned and torped me. 
 

Every now and then you just come across an immature clown...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
545
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,712 posts
4,168 battles
3 hours ago, Wadres said:

Has anyone else noticed a recent surge in the amount of deliberate team killing in matches?

That's likely the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon, where you notice something, and then suddenly you see it everywhere.  That or confirmation bias.

There might be some grumpiness left over from the CV rework, or the PR pr fiasco.  But I have not noticed an uptick in either witnessing team kills, or seeing pink people on my team.  I've seen calls for people to kill PR players on sight, but those get yelled down.

I usually assume a pink player has accidentally torped someone, most times when I've asked, it was an accident or "someone turned into my torpedoes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,373 posts

 

Greiving especially in games that are controversial is on the upswing. From a Devs standpoint this game has a problem toughening up standards as team damage as opposed to TK happens frequently to Destroyers.   

I like the current system.  The controversial decisions are what is causing any increases in bad behavior. 

Edited by Toxic_Potato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
6 hours ago, Wadres said:

distaste of the player base towards the Research Bureau Ships

is it even a thing? never noticed... I mean of course Ohio and Colbert are relatively strong ships, but they surely not even close to be as salty as Smolensk

 

6 hours ago, Wadres said:

it is unacceptable for any player to harass another on their own team for any reason, end of discussion

Yes, but policing it with changing color in team line up is pointless (unless offender have special distaste for pink color). I would suggest rather harsh fines in credits, couple of orders higher than what we have now. Credits - that's what should drive bad/toxic players down the drain from hi-tiers to mid- and lo-. WG opened up hi-tiers to become easily accessible by selling multitude of T9-10 ships for different currencies. Which caused complete chaos and influx of people who don't learn, don't want to learn and don't care for game. This is main cause for toxicity and teamkills. Lack of punishment for bad play causing indifference. Not taking it serious causing loss of quality player-base. Without quality player-base this game will be better off with more arcade style stuff, which, I predict, will show up more and more. Arms Race, Post-Apocalyptic scenarios etc. If you just look at how those events getting more and more traction - simplicity, lowering learning curve and arcadeness going to dominate this project more and more. 

 

Cash desired, intelligence not required

Welcome to modern world

Edited by SlartiBartFastE2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts

At the very least, there needs to be a minimum distance from red ships inside of which green-on-green fire doesn't count.  Too many idiots are trying to ram these days and charging in on ships that are already under fire from their teammates...  I saw an idiot trying to ram get hit by three different teammates over the weekend, and instead of the system recognizing that it was his fault, it spat out warnings to all three of the other players. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,484
[GOB]
Members
2,066 posts
18 minutes ago, Kebobstuzov said:

For deliberate stuff like that you can send a ticket with the replay and help net them a temp ban.

I have heard this a few times from long time residents like yourself.  All I got last time from a post with replay and full reports was a MOD sending me a message saying that there is no way to determine the MOTIVE for running straight for me and deliberately  ramming me out of my smoke so I could be insta deleted.  Get that?  His MOTIVE???

As long as staffers have mushy hippie attitudes like that how can we count on anything every being done to the offenders.  IF they were actually being dealt with maybe they wouldn't do it?

Just asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,484
[GOB]
Members
2,066 posts
29 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

At the very least, there needs to be a minimum distance from red ships inside of which green-on-green fire doesn't count.  Too many idiots are trying to ram these days and charging in on ships that are already under fire from their teammates...  I saw an idiot trying to ram get hit by three different teammates over the weekend, and instead of the system recognizing that it was his fault, it spat out warnings to all three of the other players. 

 

I agree with you 100% Happens  in my BBs and CAs but this is exactly what people are talking about when they ( we) launch torps from point blank range and the same rammer or other does the same thing.  No one will scream you shoot them you own them though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,030 posts
16,897 battles
57 minutes ago, Col_Nasty said:

I have heard this a few times from long time residents like yourself.  All I got last time from a post with replay and full reports was a MOD sending me a message saying that there is no way to determine the MOTIVE for running straight for me and deliberately  ramming me out of my smoke so I could be insta deleted.  Get that?  His MOTIVE???

As long as staffers have mushy hippie attitudes like that how can we count on anything every being done to the offenders.  IF they were actually being dealt with maybe they wouldn't do it?

Just asking.

Was that a forum post? Because when I've sent tickets I typically get a copy paste response but have been able to verify a couple people getting week-long temp bans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,757
[SALVO]
Members
2,020 posts
6,200 battles
1 hour ago, Col_Nasty said:

I have heard this a few times from long time residents like yourself.  All I got last time from a post with replay and full reports was a MOD sending me a message saying that there is no way to determine the MOTIVE for running straight for me and deliberately  ramming me out of my smoke so I could be insta deleted.  Get that?  His MOTIVE???

As long as staffers have mushy hippie attitudes like that how can we count on anything every being done to the offenders.  IF they were actually being dealt with maybe they wouldn't do it?

Just asking.

Difference between actually killing someone. And he truly could have simply not seen you to push you out of your smoke , so that the enemy kills you.    Pretty clear that is what they mean with motive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,390
[WOLFG]
Members
9,633 posts
8,624 battles

I haven't seen any uptick in TK in coop, other than what comes with a torp hit mission (and those are at least intended for the reds).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[DPS]
Members
55 posts
2,841 battles
8 hours ago, Col_Nasty said:

I have heard this a few times from long time residents like yourself.  All I got last time from a post with replay and full reports was a MOD sending me a message saying that there is no way to determine the MOTIVE for running straight for me and deliberately  ramming me out of my smoke so I could be insta deleted.  Get that?  His MOTIVE???

As long as staffers have mushy hippie attitudes like that how can we count on anything every being done to the offenders.  IF they were actually being dealt with maybe they wouldn't do it?

Just asking.

Proving intent is notoriously difficult.  It’s easy to have an opinion from the outside.

 

A good example is all the misplaced hate against gun owners... You like guns to compensate, you’re just paranoid, you have rambo fetishes... etc.  Reality is I grew up with them and they remind me of wonderful times spent with family target shooting together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,888
[WPORT]
Members
5,522 posts
10,532 battles
9 minutes ago, NavyCuda said:

Proving intent is notoriously difficult.  It’s easy to have an opinion from the outside.

 

A good example is all the misplaced hate against gun owners... You like guns to compensate, you’re just paranoid, you have rambo fetishes... etc.  Reality is I grew up with them and they remind me of wonderful times spent with family target shooting together.

:cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
571
[LEGIT]
Members
2,336 posts
31,819 battles
16 hours ago, Wadres said:

another instance where a Des Moines player on my team, who started the match off marked pink, purposefully griefed our friendly Gearing to death.

Last week I was in my Cossack at start of game.  Some Ossified cranium  in a CA started shooting at me.  I made it easy for him and told him I'd stop so he could hit me.  He did; repeatedly, causing me little damage until he exploded.  Chuckles all around with that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×