Host Migration - Penalty system required

[Mosuowai]

On 2019-07-17 at 12:21 AM, Mosuowai said:

I was actually amazed by the number of host migration issues reported by the other players, which severely affects the gameplay and rewards for many other players. Sometimes, host migrations can be due to poor connection/crashes, but can also be intentional (for example, some players joins SO / ESO expecting to leech exp to rank up their gear; but there are no carries in the party, so they leave the squad).

I believe that a penalty system should be in place where, just as an example, if a player causes a host migration more than, say 3-5 times in a given day, they are not allowed to act as host anymore and/or are banned from joining specific game modes they keep host migrating from ie, the leechers in SO / ESO

 

This post is to expand further on my previous post, which went largely ignored.

I honestly believe that a penalty system would solve many of the Host Migration issues and would not be a difficult thing to implement. Should a host causes host migration for X amount of times in any given day for a mission type, they are banned from joining that mission type and will have to wait 1-3 days to play that mission type again. And if a host is banned from many different mission types within a set period, then I think an outright ban would be the answer.

There are far too many instances of host migrations, and I am sure that I am not the only player to encounter host migrations in as many as 8 out of 10 missions. It is perhaps worth noting, that I have found host migrations to rarely occur at lower level missions where the other squad team mates are of lower rank. I will assume now, that it is because they welcome the extra help to carry them through the level. Whereas, host migrations happen extremely often for higher to end game content, such as Sorties, Sanctuary Onslaught, PoE, Orb Vallis, Boss fights etc.

I do not believe that the higher game levels/maps are the actual cause of the host migrations, unless there are known/undiscovered bugs causing the problem. Therefore, it can be assumed that a large part of the host migrations are caused by other players intentionally, be it for their own entertainment or to stunt progression of other players

Here are a few situations I have encountered previously, and I would confidentially say that I have not come across all the possible scenarios for such malevolent behaviour

1. Eidolon hunts - The host leaves squad right after the Teralyst is killed, leading to a host migration, which causes the drops to disappear, and on some occasions, we are pulled back to Cetus with a "Mission Failed" screen
2. Exploiter Orb - After killing the Orb Mother, host leaves squad, followed by host migration and I am returned to Fortuna with "Mission Failed"
3. Mobile Defense - host takes datamass, runs off somewhere and causes host migration. Subsequently, datamass cannot be found with no indicator as to the location of where the datamass was dropped
4. Sortie Spy Missions - Host goes to one of the spy locations, activates alarms and causes host migration
5. Sortie Lua Rescue - Host rushes to gate, hacks console and causes host migration
6. ESO/SO - Players constantly host migrating as no nukers join their squad.
7. ESO/SO - When playing into a few zones and host migration occurs, game is locked out and I cannot continue, resulting in me having to force close the game, losing all affinity gained.

I really hope something can be done about these host migrations, as currently, the system penalises other players instead of the host.

[krc473]

Just now, Mosuowai said:

I honestly believe that a penalty system would solve many of the Host Migration issues and would not be a difficult thing to implement

Well, it’s good that you think that is the case. But I highly doubt you are correct. You are completely forgetting what can actually cause a host migration. There are countless incidents where it is not the hosts fault. Explain how it is fair to ban a host because their PC crashed, or because your internet is too slow. What about when you start the wrong mission and the host leaves first? 

 

Yes, there are cases where it is griefing, but you cannot apply blanket bans. It will not be easy to do that as DE will have no choice but to add exceptions to it.

• If you feel like it was ‘malevolent behaviour’ report it to Support.

[(XBOX)Salty Ginger]

Reporting is the best solution, honestly. I don't have the best connection so on bad days i get kicked from the squad. I wouldnt want to be punished for that. 

[Mosuowai]

33 minutes ago, krc473 said:

Well, it’s good that you think that is the case. But I highly doubt you are correct. You are completely forgetting what can actually cause a host migration. There are countless incidents where it is not the hosts fault. Explain how it is fair to ban a host because their PC crashed, or because your internet is too slow. What about when you start the wrong mission and the host leaves first? 

 

Yes, there are cases where it is griefing, but you cannot apply blanket bans. It will not be easy to do that as DE will have no choice but to add exceptions to it.

• If you feel like it was ‘malevolent behaviour’ report it to Support.

If a hosts leaves because he/she started the wrong mission after other players join, how is that fair to those players?

If a pre-made party started the wrong mission type, they can abort mission the mission, there is no host migration, so this penalty has no effect.

If a hosts PC crashes, he wont be banned straight away, unless we are talking crashing many times he/she hosts - how is that fair to the other players he/she is hosting?

I do understand your point, however, did you actually read the following? I suggest you read what I said carefully in my original post, as it's flexible (DE can make it as flexible as they see fit) and not as extreme as you are making it out to be.

 

38 minutes ago, Mosuowai said:

Should a host causes host migration for X amount of times in any given day for a mission type, they are banned from joining that mission type and will have to wait 1-3 days to play that mission type again.

 

27 minutes ago, (XB1)Salty Ginger said:

Reporting is the best solution, honestly. I don't have the best connection so on bad days i get kicked from the squad. I wouldnt want to be punished for that. 

This is not a carpet ban, this is why I specifically mentioned a ban from that certain mission type. And where it says X amount, it can be 5, 10 or however many times DE sees as suitable. 

And to be honest, if you have an extremely poor connection and/or your game crashes 50+ times a day, have you thought about the other players that you directly affect? Therefore,  there should also be a system to detect system and connection stability as well, before allowing players to become hosts in the first place (I have made a separate post previously that addresses this).

 

 

Edited July 24, 2019 by Mosuowai

[krc473]

1 hour ago, Mosuowai said:

If a pre-made party started the wrong mission type, they can abort mission the mission, there is no host migration, so this penalty has no effect.

Well, this is totally false. I have got host migrations many times in this situation. So the penalty will apply.

1 hour ago, Mosuowai said:

however, did you actually read the following? I suggest you read what I said carefully in my original post, as it's flexible (DE can make it as flexible as they see fit) and not as extreme as you are making it out to be.

I did, but I was also assuming sensible limits. There is no point having a system where you have to migrate people 100 times to get a penalty. The level that the system would actually be useful at is also likely going to be one where you can feasibly trigger it by mistake.

1 hour ago, Mosuowai said:

And to be honest, if you have an extremely poor connection and/or your game crashes 50+ times a day, have you thought about the other players that you directly affect?

DE’s hosting system is terrible, and their ping limited does nothing at all. U found many 1000+ ping games last night. All of these caused host migrations. All the while the limit was set to 300 ping. If DE would actually give us a way to host public missions I think many issues would resolve themselves. I think DE should really focus on Matchmaking first, it is quite flawed. If issues still persist you can introduce a system where when someone gets X number of reports about their behaviour as a host they get banned from hosting. Banning people from a mission type altogether is not a good choice.

[Mosuowai]

12 minutes ago, krc473 said:

Well, this is totally false. I have got host migrations many times in this situation. So the penalty will apply.

I'm not saying it cannot happen, but so far I have not encountered this problem. When our pre-made squad leader aborts mission, we are all taken back to our orbiters, still in party together, no host migrations.

Anyway, I believe you also have made valid points which need to be considered. I don't think the points I made are ridiculous and should also be considered.

Regarding the Match Making system, I already discussed about this in another post that I made regarding a rework of DE's Match Making system. As at the end of the day, one of the biggest thorn in the sides of all us Tennos are... host migrations.

[krc473]

8 minutes ago, Mosuowai said:

As at the end of the day, one of the biggest thorn in the sides of all us Tennos are... host migrations.

You shouldn’t lump everyone together like that. I have not had a single issue with them (excluding bugs). I get a host migration, it migrates successfully and the mission carries on with everyone keeping their stuff. The number one difference between me and others I know with issues is PC/internet quality. I have a high end PC, and fast internet. When you do not have these, host migrations seem to cause more problems. Perhaps I am biased as I don’t have a lot of problems with it.

8 minutes ago, Mosuowai said:

I don't think the points I made are ridiculous and should also be considered

I don’t think anyone said to ignore your points. I do think some of your points are a little strange/unfounded, but discussing that won’t add anything. I do think a system that punishes people that use host migrations as a tool for griefing is a good idea. But the only way to be sure this is the case is detailed player reports. Yes, you could also use excessive logging software to figure this out, but I doubt people would approve of being monitored by loggers that check what you click/do. We don’t want a system that punishes the innocent making them afraid to run public games.

Edited July 25, 2019 by krc473