Afk Gaming

[SoulEchelon]

Honestly I've seen the private ban between players work out ok (xbox live had a simliar system that allowed this and it saved me some headaches). It's not like the afker is banned from all games, just the ones the player is in. I don't see anything wrong with the feature. If the person only AFK's once in awhile or due to some technical issue, then they would only be private banned between a handful of random players. Usually the way this works is if two players join the same game, one gets bumped and sent to another game with a similar set up. Neither party can contact the other unless the ban or bans are lifted by the players. This would save a lot of online grief imo.

 

For PvP the ban would only work if both players are on the same team. If they are on opposite teams, the personal ban won't do anything.

 

I'm kind of curious to hear what the bad points of having such a feature are? Why would this be a bad thing?

 

The absolute only thing I can think of that people might point out is that the playerbase for that particular person will shrink. Indefinitely. While I believe this is perfectly fine (I mean, if you're afking THAT MUCH to where you can't find a team anymore, then you totally deserve it), DE might actually be wary about such an event taking place.

 

There's also the thought that it could be "abused" in other ways. I can't really think of any other than pvp activities. Perhaps only have the player in question be banned only from joining YOUR team. Luckily the hacker/cheater population is practically nil, so seeing such players on the other team probably won't happen either way.

 

Perhaps the ban lists can be cleaned once a month? That's more than enough time for afkers/trolls/etc to be punished, and keeps the playerbase open. If the afkers/trolls/etc continue to ruin games, they'll just continue to be banlisted.

[Austerity]

How so?  You couldn't blacklist everyone, and if you don't like playing with someone then you shouldn't have to play with them anyway.  On top of that, the game should not be balanced around PvP anyway.

 

What if the option only became available after the player was afk for several minutes?

 

DE have mentioned in their live streams that end game content for the foreseeable future is PVP/Dark Sectors. As such it is important to recognize that any changes that occur which would effect their current content focus should be well thought out. Next one should understand that It is pretty standard fair for this community that anything that can be abused, will be abused. Knowing this, if you give players a tool that could alter the outcome of a Dark Sector encounter, you can, with near 99.9% certainty, know that it will get used and abused.

 

Now to the "How so?"

 

Hypothetically speaking, lets say we have 2 Alliances. Alliance A is has 20 near unbeatable players. The other Alliance B has some exceptional players. Because of their strength Alliance A controls the Dark Sector. Alliance B has been unable to beat Alliance A  due to the 20 top PVPers they possess. Now include the ability to ban players from your game. Alliance B sends out an alliance wide message telling all members of the alliance to add the 20 unbeatable players to their ban list. What will happen? Alliance B is now able to circumvent the match-up system that would force them to  play against the best Defenders. Now imagine the other side. If Defenders of a Solar Rail did this to "lock out" players they can't otherwise beat.

 

Yes I understand there are plenty of other factors that are added to this when determining the outcome of a battle, but the potential for serious abuse of this type of feature is there. And it gives players enough of an advantage you can be almost guaranteed they will abuse it.

 

EDIT: 'Off-Topic'

 

Dear SoulEchelon,

 

I'd like to give you this opportunity to offer me a PUBLIC apology for your assassination attempt against my character. Retract all your lies either with strike through (like this) or by deleting them altogether. Oh course you do not have to do this, but I should warn you that when you fire shots at someone, there is a good chance they will fire back.  And I already know I'm a better shot than you. Why? Because I don't have to lie to shoot you down, all I have to do is tell the truth.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2014 by Austerity

[Kage2015]

AFK player ned to ban,or,pls add report button and show everyone how many report point he got,so we knw what he doing before.

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

DE have mentioned in their live streams that end game content for the foreseeable future is PVP/Dark Sectors. As such it is important to recognize that any changes that occur which would effect their current content focus should be well thought out. Next one should understand that It is pretty standard fair for this community that anything that can be abused, will be abused. Knowing this, if you give players a tool that could alter the outcome of a Dark Sector encounter, you can, with near 99.9% certainty, know that it will get used and abused.

 

Now to the "How so?"

 

Hypothetically speaking, lets say we have 2 Alliances. Alliance A is has 20 near unbeatable players. The other Alliance B has some exceptional players. Because of their strength Alliance A controls the Dark Sector. Alliance B has been unable to beat Alliance A  due to the 20 top PVPers they possess. Now include the ability to ban players from your game. Alliance B sends out an alliance wide message telling all members of the alliance to add the 20 unbeatable players to their ban list. What will happen? Alliance B is now able to circumvent the match-up system that would force them to  play against the best Defenders. Now imagine the other side. If Defenders of a Solar Rail did this to "lock out" players they can't otherwise beat.

 

Yes I understand there are plenty of other factors that are added to this when determining the outcome of a battle, but the potential for serious abuse of this type of feature is there. And it gives players enough of an advantage you can be almost guaranteed they will abuse it.

So you make the ban list only apply to teammates.  Meaning, you will never have to play with them in co-op, and you will never be on the same team as them in PvP.  Problem solved.

[Austerity]

So you make the ban list only apply to teammates.  Meaning, you will never have to play with them in co-op, and you will never be on the same team as them in PvP.  Problem solved.

 

This doesn't solve the problem of people exploiting ban lists for PVP conflicts. Example: Alliance B controls rails. Alliance A attacks. Alliance B has its members join attacking side to keep Alliance A's players on their "ban" lists from joining games. 

 

I'm not against a solution to your problem, but I am in favor of finding a solution that doesn't have echoing consequences in other aspects of the game that will have DE rushing for a quick fix solution. I'd rather see the community come together as a think tank and come up with a truly viable solution that would take all aspects of the game into consideration. Otherwise it's just senseless complaining, especially when they've given options for dealing with AFKers (even if it is after the fact).

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

This doesn't solve the problem of people exploiting ban lists for PVP conflicts. Example: Alliance B controls rails. Alliance A attacks. Alliance B has its members join attacking side to keep Alliance A's players on their "ban" lists from joining games.

Didn't they make it impossible to play against your own clan/alliance? Besides, that wouldn't keep the people wanting attack from attacking, it would just put them on separate teams.

[Austerity]

Didn't they make it impossible to play against your own clan/alliance? Besides, that wouldn't keep the people wanting attack from attacking, it would just put them on separate teams.

 

Things might be a little different on PS4, but here in PC land there are many people with an alternate account. Likewise if individuals wanted to set up a second account all they'd need is a different email address. I am not addressing this as right or wrong merely that it is a possibility. Now if a person were to get on a team using an alternate account they could play against their own alliance. And if that person chose to have an identical ban list as their alliance memebers, then theoretically it would be possible to lock players out of games. Lessening competition, and possibly effecting the outcome of the Rail conflict.

 

Now while this kind of activity might take a little work, If you head on over to the PVP feedback forums and read through the kind of behavior that the PVPers exhibit, than you will understand the lengths that they are willing to go to in order to claim victory. 

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

Things might be a little different on PS4, but here in PC land there are many people with an alternate account. Likewise if individuals wanted to set up a second account all they'd need is a different email address. I am not addressing this as right or wrong merely that it is a possibility. Now if a person were to get on a team using an alternate account they could play against their own alliance. And if that person chose to have an identical ban list as their alliance memebers, then theoretically it would be possible to lock players out of games. Lessening competition, and possibly effecting the outcome of the Rail conflict.

 

Now while this kind of activity might take a little work, If you head on over to the PVP feedback forums and read through the kind of behavior that the PVPers exhibit, than you will understand the lengths that they are willing to go to in order to claim victory. 

If you try attacking and someone has already started a game and has you blacklisted then you would not be unable to play, it would simply put you into your own game with other people.  If they blacklisted a lot of skilled players then you are just more likely to be matched with skilled players, making your game more enjoyable and your own side more likely to win.

[ArchPhaeton]

This has been an issue as old as the first tenno.

 

DE don't seem to care that much about it, this is demonstrated by the fact that NO FUNCTIONALITY has been implemented to stop leechers and this goes way back, many updates have passed since this became an extended practice...

 

REPORTS HAVE NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER support just pastes a generic message saying your report is taken seriously etc etc.

 

And I don't mind the "putting to shame" in forums, if the proof is solid like in OP they should be brought to public light IMO. This kind of people is what spoil communities.

 

For the record, I support the idea of a personal banlist.

[YourMoms]

I like how my topic found a feedback among many people in community, although some participants mock on my "leech" "hard work" phrases, but it's okay, I guess leech is what they do instead of actual gameplay to get cookies and have their hands clean. I think if someone have no time to farm and earn smth ingame it does not mean they necessarily have to become parasites declaring disrespect to the people who actually waste their time. I do not mind them doing it in company of likes of them, but I would prefer not to play with the leech anymore.

 

If I go AFK - I warn the team about it. If the estimated time is more than 5 minutes I leave the game for the benefit of the other players of course along with proper agreement or try to make the game to some point.

 

One more argument is "if you do not like random AFK-ers just play with friends". Really? Why should I? Why not those leechers play with the friends of theirs instead?)

 

Anyhow still hope for the DE to expedite this matter and make at least some sort of a personal-blacklist feature with further improvement.

Edited August 6, 2014 by YourMoms

[BlackVortex]

This guy gets it.

 

If you are STUPID enough to open a game to ANYONE, then for the love don't complain that people joining do whatever they like. It's no different then advertising a party on FaceBook, and then complaining gatecrashers thrashed your house. Really? You had NO idea it would happen? Sucks to be you.

 

It's not YOUR mission, it's just a RANDOM mission. You can quit, you can start another, you can do solo or friends only, hell, you can connect a SECOND account that you own already and powerlevel it (EXAMPLE ONLY; this is against the rules and will get you an account closure).

 

Frankly, you enter my game with a tag of "YourMoms", if I had a kick option, I'd kick you instantly. I've already had someone with the word "CVNT" as part of it - obviously the "V" replacing a "U" so he wont get banned, and frankly, if you are the type to use nicknames that instantly sound like abuse, In My Humble Opinion, you have other problems going.

 

Back on topic - game working as intended. We already have control options, LEARN HOW TO USE THEM.

and they say PvP brings in a toxic community xD

[YourMoms]

Played a little Sechura today's morning before going to work. Encoutered another guy AFK-playing, but the funny thing when I sent kind message in squad chat, he immediately started to participate w/o any furhter AFK. He must have been reading this topic while AFK ^^

[SquirmyBurrito]

Played a little Sechura today's morning before going to work. Encoutered another guy AFK-playing, but the funny thing when I sent kind message in squad chat, he immediately started to participate w/o any furhter AFK. He must have been reading this topic while AFK ^^

 

You're a nicer person than me. I'd have just recorded and insta-reported the dude.

[fatpig84]

Switch teleport.

Bounce pads.

Ripline.

 

Plenty of ways to have your fun.