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

Forget Flamu how about the constant Toxic CV chat and false reporting

148 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

496
[XXII]
Banned
862 posts
967 battles
1 minute ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency.

Yeah. Whiners argument, 'They weren't being toxic towards players! They were just being toxic to WG!'

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,919 posts
3 minutes ago, Lose_dudes said:

Yeah. Whiners argument, 'They weren't being toxic towards players! They were just being toxic to WG!'

the handling of all toxicity in wows is weak.. even other weegee titles do a much better job.

 

he could remove the letters CV from the op and it would still be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,330
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,691 posts
10,102 battles
17 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

I agree. People should be able to put a checkmark next to 'Add me to Queue of battles where there are CVs' .. that way the CVs can play with those that love them and not have these horrible CV haters hurt their feelings. 

Seems like a win-win. This way CVs can play with people that don’t mind having them in their matches, and thus not have to deal with all the toxicity. I was told on the forums that people who dislike reworked CVs constitute a tiny minority of the WoWS player base, so it shouldn’t affect the CV queue time too much. Right?

  • Cool 24
  • Funny 2
  • Thanks 7
  • Haha 2
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
732
[TIMT]
Members
1,377 posts
4,922 battles
24 minutes ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency. 

yay, fun police is now thought police, much success comrade!

Seriously though, why do people still bring this up. The CV people here tell me that only a small minority is upset with CVs and that the rest is indifferent or fine with them. So this small isolated incidents shouldn't matter, shouldn't they? Because, if a large number of people were to use the karma system to vent their frustration with a specific type of ship and the type of play and player they attract, then shouldn't we look at the cause of that frustration instead of just muffling the noise?

 

  • Cool 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,121
[PVE]
Members
5,095 posts
22,557 battles
31 minutes ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency.

Honestly, carriers are "forced on us" and many of us "just don't want to play with Carriers"....  To the point, I left PVP.  Now, if, as said above, we could "opt out" of Carrier play, I'd be back.

I would never be toxic in any game.  But, I won't help Carriers in anyway;  IF,  I am forced to play with them on my team.  AND, if the Carrier driver isn't playing at a level of skill I feel is adequate, that carrier driver is going be reported......  Now, that sound fair and within the game rules, yes???  The same if I wasn't playing with adequate skill in my DD.........

If you don't like what you are seeing, don't use chat?   That would work too !

Edited by Asym_KS
  • Cool 6
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
[TSG4]
[TSG4]
Volunteer Moderator
3,369 posts
17,012 battles
31 minutes ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.

 

You make a CS ticket with replay and ss. WG dont discussed about the penalty but they will act on it.

More evidences mounted, the better, even with the -ve karma pt.

 

regards,

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
192
[GONE]
Members
268 posts
7,333 battles
13 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

Honestly, carriers are "forced on us" and many of us "just don't want to play with Carriers"....  To the point, I left PVP.  Now, if, as said above, we could "opt out" of Carrier play, I'd be back.

I would never be toxic in any game.  But, I won't help Carriers in anyway;  IF,  I am forced to play with them on my team.  AND, if the Carrier driver isn't playing at a level of skill I feel is adequate, that carrier driver is going be reported......  Now, that sound fair and within the game rules, yes???  The same if I wasn't playing with adequate skill in my DD.........

If you don't like what you are seeing, don't use chat?   That would work too !

I'm one of those people. I especially hate it when I'm playing a Clan Naval Battle where losses reduce our BXP by half, & the match maker gives us a bot CV for "balance"!  If MM thinks that there aren't enough live players, then why not just let us play with what we have? Or wait the extra minute to fill in the blanks?  It's bad enough having to play for [edited]-XP as it is.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,129 battles
20 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

I would never be toxic in any game.  But, I won't help Carriers in anyway;  IF,  I am forced to play with them on my team.

This sounds pretty toxic to me, Asym.

21 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

AND, if the Carrier driver isn't playing at a level of skill I feel is adequate, that carrier driver is going be reported......  Now, that sound fair and within the game rules, yes???  The same if I wasn't playing with adequate skill in my DD.........

I agree that that sounds fair enough, as long as you're not trash talking the under-performing player.  Just report him for "poor play" and move on.

 

22 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

carriers are "forced on us" and many of us "just don't want to play with Carriers"....  To the point, I left PVP.  Now, if, as said above, we could "opt out" of Carrier play, I'd be back.

Honestly, I would never, ever support opt-in or opt-out of any sort of battles, be it carrier battles (or those with BBs, CRs, or DDs) or different battle (Standard, Dominion, or Epicenter) modes.  There should never be any opt-out or in options on these items.  You do have to option to choose whether or not to participate in Ranked or Clan Battles, or Operations, etc.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,129 battles
4 minutes ago, AdmNimitz41 said:

I'm one of those people. I especially hate it when I'm playing a Clan Naval Battle where losses reduce our BXP by half, & the match maker gives us a bot CV for "balance"!  If MM thinks that there aren't enough live players, then why not just let us play with what we have? Or wait the extra minute to fill in the blanks?  It's bad enough having to play for [edited]-XP as it is.

Not sure what you mean by "clan naval battle".  Do you mean "Naval Battles" and you're doing them in coop?

Honestly, I have no problem with the occasional bot CV in coop.  They can be useful for grinding out plane kills missions.  And they're rarely any threat to any halfway competent player in coop, since the bot CV AI is so bad.

I would agree with you about wishing that coop MM would wait longer to form teams rather than just dump players straight into battle after only 30 seconds.  I don't want to wait for "another minute", but I think that increasing the wait time from 30 seconds to 1 minute would be acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,121
[PVE]
Members
5,095 posts
22,557 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

This sounds pretty toxic to me, Asym.

Verbally insulting or condescending kind of toxic.... 

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,240
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
29,858 posts
25,782 battles
1 hour ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency.

I wouldn't worry about it.  If they hate your CV that much, then give them more of what you got.  Feed them more air attacks.

 

"Let them hate.  As long as they fear."

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
321
[VOP]
Members
956 posts
1 hour ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency.

What is false reporting? What may be "false reporting" to some is "justified reporting" for others.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,129 battles
6 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

Verbally insulting or condescending kind of toxic.... 

Pretty convenient to choose what forms of toxicity you find acceptable and which ones you do not in a discussion on toxicity.  

Then again, in the past (i.e. 2+ years ago), I've been known to do both things.  That said, first, I never refused to help someone based on what type of ship they were in.  And second, I never trash talked someone for what type of ship they were in.  Any toxicity I may have displayed was purely based on what I perceived as very poor play.  All that said, I have almost entirely given up on either form of toxicity, as I can't be bothered any longer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
450
[VORTX]
Members
585 posts
7,683 battles
1 hour ago, HooplaJones said:

Behavior towards players, that is what Flamu was called out on, and it should of been dealt with A-loooooooong time ago.  That is on him,  What about the incessant CV Toxic chat when someone plays a CV, personal attacks, down voting  (actually the negative Karma makes me laugh).   The Flamu decision was a VISABLE action, we as a community need to SEE WG actions against the (_*_) hats that spread Toxic Vibes throw those personal attacks etc.   If you cant show what is being done then WG is doing nothing.   Tired of the  lack of transparency.

Toxic ships invite toxic attitudes. Even more so when WG just introduces more of them without doing anything to address what makes these boats toxic in the first place. 🤣🤷‍♂️

I’m not just talking about a whole class of ships, but also individual ships and certain captain skills as well (diversity LOL). 

  • Cool 3
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,129 battles
10 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

I wouldn't worry about it.  If they hate your CV that much, then give them more of what you got.  Feed them more air attacks.

That kind of points to what's like true most of the time, i.e. the most toxic anti-CV enemy players are probably those on the receiving end of a CV's attacks.

One thing that I'd probably suggest though is that the effort required to sink a full health Yammy or Musashi may not be worth a CV's time, which might be better spent picking out better targets of opportunity, such as badly wounded ships that the CV definitely has to ability to finish off without so much effort.  Trying to farm and kill a top tier enemy BB may literally cause that BB to distract the  CV so greatly that it removes the CV from being an effective contributor to his team because that BB is tanking so much  damage.  It may not seem like much fun to the BB, but it can actually help your team win if the enemy CV is ignoring the rest of your team.  I've been in that position as the BB (a Montana) who was the target of nearly endless attack from the enemy CV.  In the end, my Montana was sunk, but not before I'd shot down over 80 planes and so distracted the enemy CV that my team defeated the enemy team in a close battle.

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,454
[SALVO]
Members
26,129 posts
29,129 battles
2 minutes ago, Pirate_Named_Sue said:

Toxic ships invite toxic attitudes. Even more so when WG just introduces more of them without doing anything to address what makes these boats toxic in the first place. 🤣🤷‍♂️

I’m not just talking about a whole class of ships, but also individual ships and certain captain skills as well (diversity LOL). 

There are no toxic ships.  Only toxic players.

  • Cool 6
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
3,919 posts

ships can mebbe be cursed... toxic... i guess if you are licking the paint off it before it's dry

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,089
[WOLFC]
Members
2,341 posts
7 minutes ago, Airjellyfish said:

What is false reporting? What may be "false reporting" to some is "justified reporting" for others.

You already know this but before I put you on ignore, gonna say this

 

As much as some people on here are unwilling to admit it, WG does not think the mere playing of a CV = being toxic and worthy of reporting.

 

 

 

  • Boring 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[4HIM]
Beta Testers
2,255 posts
16,116 battles

I hate CVs in the game with a passion, and after last night, where my poor QE was being singled out, because she was T6 in a T8 game, really was making me want to send the CV player every report I could... I refrained, it is not his fault, I told myself, it is WG's fault...but the temptation was close to overwhelming, and quite frankly I don't blame some players for just losing it.  In my case I was having a very nice game for being in a slow, undertiered BB... and the nice game suddenly turned into a battle of just trying to get in a few more hits before I got whittled away.  Nothing you can do really...I did the only defense tactic, turned away and ran, just to make the CV player have to fly a little bit longer...small favor...as for my fully upgraded AA suite...close to worthless.  Oh and of course I got zero help from my CV ... but again can't blame him much either since why would he waste his time flying some fighters to a poor old low tier BB.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
321
[VOP]
Members
956 posts
38 minutes ago, Anonymous50 said:

You already know this but before I put you on ignore, gonna say this

 

As much as some people on here are unwilling to admit it, WG does not think the mere playing of a CV = being toxic and worthy of reporting.

 

 

 

Really? I just posed a question with no mention of CVs in it. People get reported for any number of reasons that seem ludicrous, not just CVs. So, go ahead and put me on ignore if you are that sensitive and no different than the CV haters, lol.

 

 

Edited by Airjellyfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,305
[CLUMP]
Members
1,515 posts
2,180 battles

HbXKOxp.gif

 

Yes the hating on CVs is enough wargaming do something :Smile_izmena:  It's not CV fault they are fabulous and other ship types are jelly of CV magnificence :fish_cute_2:  

Edited by LastRemnant
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×