Revisiting the need for a kicks and filters.

[321agemo]

The main issue is by giving kick option, its open to abuse such as kicking people just before mission complete triggers.

or punishing other people because the host didn't change the invite option.

You're basically arming trolls with another tool.

29 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

Feel better after looking at this gif!

[polarity]

If you want an example of a vote kick working fine in a similar type of game, look no further than Vermintide.

There are however a couple differences that make it work:

• A way to opt in/out of being host. You either join a game that someone else has decided they will host, or you host one yourself (no more unavoidable laggy games, because the person the game picks to be host, cheaped out on their PC and internet).
• Pre-game lobby.  As host you get a chance to see what class someone is playing, and what level they are, before you have to play with them.  This is where the majority of kicks happen, mostly for being way too low level for the content, especially when there is already a low level player/not enough high leveled ones to carry them.

There's even a developer sanctioned 3rd party addon for the game that allows the host to bypass the vote system, and kick players directly.  The developers don't consider this unfair, because it is a player's PC and internet that they payed for that others are playing on, not the developer's servers.  When you are providing a service to others, especially when it is for free, shouldn't you have some say in who benefits from it?

Despite what the chicken-little crowd would have you believe, kick abuse in Vermintide happens very rarely, even without a system like that present in WoW, where those who use the kick function excessively are penalised for its overuse, with a wait on being able to start a vote kick, or vote in one.  That's an effective solution to deter abuse, that is simple to implement.

There are plenty of supportive systems that can be implemented in addition to the base kick function, to handle the huge majority of abuse cases, so claiming 'it wouldn't work' without putting any thought into any further possibilities besides that base, is like counting the chickens not only before they've hatched, but before you've seen how many eggs there are.

 

Just because you've played a game with a kick function, and it was abused, doesn't mean a kick function can't ever work, when it could be implemented in a different way, with the proper supportive systems in place.

Edited April 12, 2017 by polarity

[[DE]Momaw]

Don't add kick.  Fix the anti-team mechanics that make people beg for a kick feature. (shrug)

"I never want to play with a Limbo ever again"  --> Limbo is overpowered and anti-team  --> Fix Limbo.

Begging for a kick feature for stuff like this is kind of like selling your car because the radio is too loud.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Momaw

[Ryunokage]

58 minutes ago, (PS4)Nek_Food said:

The only thing I can think would work with your desires and perhaps could make you happy is when you put someone in your ignore list, he could never join to your squad again. Don't think is happening now and still you would have to be patient for that one game you get to play with the first time.

Splitting players into newcomers and high MR for preventing them into playing together, I don't think is necessary that much beneficial. Too much work to be done for so little positive result to actually earn. High MR players are not usually playing those very low (even middle) level planets or mission if in fact they are not helping someone (at least I am speaking for myself as a MR23 player). Usually after hitting the top in MR they are trying to find some challenge for themselves and middle/low level rank planets/missions are not offering any of that.

On the other hand, perhaps is mostly your problem not that others are constantly trolling you. You simply don't like other people not playing with your way. I myself usually don't care of how others play or if I do find something rather not useful in a mission, I usually write/suggest in the squad tab what I think they should do. For example if slow nova is ingame and her molecular is not helping yet unnecessary slowing down the progress of the mission I kindly ask the player not to use it "until really needed". After that I turn the "patience mode on" and move on with completing the mission.

1. Please do not presume to assign motive to me, were we in a truly public forum, this is the sort of behaviour that could be interpreted as falling into the definition of libel.

2. You maintain that higher level players do not run lower level content unless "helping" their friends, this is wholly wrong. There are reasons for higher level players to engage in lower level content: Namely lower tier relics and their associated fissure missions.

3. Again, do not presume to assign motive to me, especially without justification.

4. The entire reason why a kick or matchmaking filter is required is because there are a significant percentage of people who will not listen to reason. What you suggest, being "patient" is not reasonable, given that my sole intention of playing this game is for sake of enjoyment. The behaviour that these people engage in prevents any enjoyment as i define it.

37 minutes ago, 321agemo said:

The main issue is by giving kick option, its open to abuse such as kicking people just before mission complete triggers.

or punishing other people because the host didn't change the invite option.

You're basically arming trolls with another tool.

1. The potential for abuse needs to be balanced against the current experience of abuse that players currently need suffer through. I regard the potentials for abuse that a kick function might entail as being the lesser of the evils.

2. Incorrect, we would be punishing people for playing in a manner that exploits the game's mechanics and spoils the experience for everyone else. A limbo player for example, isn't going to be a problem if they refrain from spamming cataclysm. The player retains the choice of how he or she plays, even after joining the game. A kick function ensures that they make those decisions knowing that there are real consequences for abusive behaviour.

3. See 1.

 

@polarity

Well laid out argument. I can see such a system working in warframe's context without requiring to extensive a change to current matchmaking mechanics.

 

27 minutes ago, Momaw said:

Don't add kick.  Fix the anti-team mechanics that make people beg for a kick feature. (shrug)

"I never want to play with a Limbo ever again"  --> Limbo is overpowered and anti-team  --> Fix Limbo.

Begging for a kick feature for stuff like this is kind of like selling your car because the radio is too loud.

Addressed this in the opening thread, its not reasonable to suggest that DE fix problematic frames in an acceptable time frame when given the size of their staff.

You need only look at how long it took for DE to rebalance the telos boltace, tonkor and simulor. None of these weapons were rebalanced promptly, its unlikely the limbo would be fixed quickly either, see how there's been no comment that I've see from DE regarding the complaints about him.

Kicking and matchmaker filters are intended as a stop gap to give us something to work with while DE works on balancing.

[Sirfol]

It's a controversial topic, but for me there is a solution but it's not a kick or filter feature.

A point leeching system. If you stay afk for more than 1 and half minute ur elegible for a leeching point. Player will Simply click that option in they're escape UI, you can't give a leeching point to a player not in the map, or a player that didn't make the First movement, players that don't make the First movement don't gain exp,loot,faction reputation, or effects benefits, they Simply stay invulnerable.

At 30 or 50 points you will be banned or sanctioned or whatever punishment they see fit.

To cancel the points you Simply Need to play, 3 mission played 1 leeching point cancel. You can regain reputation and lose It like this.

Every player can give u a point so i can get a max of 3 points in a mission.

The points will be given at extraction, the players can take back the points given, so if you can explain ur motive you can be graced.

The points given are anonymous.

I think warframe need something like this. If you explain u needed bathroom because u had a RAM coming out of ur .... the squad can understand that. If ur unlucky u can always regain reputation playing normally. 

Not a perfect solution but at least it will put pepper in ur butt to move.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Sirfol

[polarity]

Another alternative is a report function.

Not one where every report is acted upon, but one where every report is logged, both the person being reported, and the person doing the reporting, along with a reason from a set list.

At regular intervals the top 5 reported and reporters are flagged to have their gameplay and chat recorded (like spectator mode) the next few times that a report happens for/from them, so that it may be looked over, and appropriate action taken based on whether the reports were warranted (the reported gets a suspension), or clearly fraudulent and vexatious (the reporter gets the suspension).

It doesn't take an entire department of full-time moderators, just one person could do it for a couple of hours, and make a huge improvement to the game for any of those who would otherwise end up grouped with one of these individuals.

It's basic behaviour modification.  You don't need to deal with every case, only the most extreme, and by demonstrating that you are dealing with problem individuals, you are dissuading the huge majority of others from behaving in the same manner.

Moderation does require a human element, but at the same time a lot of the work can be handled through computer data collection and analysis.

[[DE]Momaw]

9 minutes ago, polarity said:

Another alternative is a report function.

Not one where every report is acted upon, but one where every report is logged, both the person being reported, and the person doing the reporting, along with a reason from a set list.

At regular intervals the top 5 reported and reporters are flagged to have their gameplay and chat recorded (like spectator mode) the next few times that a report happens for/from them, so that it may be looked over, and appropriate action taken based on whether the reports were warranted (the reported gets a suspension), or clearly fraudulent and vexatious (the reporter gets the suspension).

It doesn't take an entire department of full-time moderators, just one person could do it for a couple of hours, and make a huge improvement to the game for any of those who would otherwise end up grouped with one of these individuals.

It's basic behaviour modification.  You don't need to deal with every case, only the most extreme, and by demonstrating that you are dealing with problem individuals, you are dissuading the huge majority of others from behaving in the same manner.

Moderation does require a human element, but at the same time a lot of the work can be handled through computer data collection and analysis.

Interesting solution. Though this does rely on there being a suitable recording technology built into the game clients to capture activity, which I am not sure is the case. Capturing video would cost players bandwidth and cycles, much less defensible than a "demo record feature".

Though this does leave open the problem of, "What is acceptable gameplay".   Clearly we shouldn't be kicking or banning people for using Limbo as a nuke frame, if that's what DE added to the game, no matter how much we hate players doing it. It's a design problem, not a behavioral problem.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Momaw

[SeaUrchins]

13 minutes ago, polarity said:

Another alternative is a report function.

Oh, come on, that'd mean I'd have to report "this dude sucks"? lol

Reporting is a serious thing, if I'd want to kick someone from the mission, it would be just it, I wouldn't want support investigating them or something.

It'd be just something like git gud —> votekick/get votekicked in retaliation.

That'd be a hilarious way to co-op.

Edited April 12, 2017 by SeaUrchins

[polarity]

1 minute ago, Momaw said:

Interesting solution. Though this does rely on there being a suitable recording technology built into the game clients to capture activity, which I am not sure is the case. Capturing video would cost players bandwidth and cycles, much less defensible than a "demo record feature".

The network datastream contains everything required, and a copy could easily be sent to a recording server.

Sure, the most determined individuals could hack their game client to send a fake stream whenever it's told to send it, but in the unlikely event that ever became an issue, then data from both the host and clients could be requested/sent, and then compared by computer.

[polarity]

15 minutes ago, SeaUrchins said:

Oh, come on, that'd mean I'd have to report "this dude sucks"? lol

Reporting is a serious thing, if I'd want to kick someone from the mission, it would be just it, I wouldn't want support investigating them or something.

It'd be just something like git gud —> votekick/get votekicked retaliation.

That'd be a hilarious way to co-op.

You quite clearly failed to read any more than the first line.

'This dude sucks' would not be one of the options available, because playing badly does not warrant the attention of anyone reviewing the reports.

As for what you want done with the player, it is utterly unimportant and most likely unjustified, unless supported by the opinion of many others, and the decision of the moderator.

There would be no retaliation, both because there would be no way for any individual on their own to have any meaningful effect on another by reporting them, and because those who did report fraudulently would be just as subject to consequences as those who really do justify a report.

I'm sorry if a system that 'complex' is beyond your understanding.

Edited April 12, 2017 by polarity

[SeaUrchins]

40 minutes ago, polarity said:

'This dude sucks' would not be one of the options available

Wot? That's the only reason I'd support the votekick: to boot people who suck. Your system is a failure, but you tried.

[Ultimate_Vault_Hunter]

3 hours ago, MagPrime said:

Oh yeah.  I'm sure I'd be getting the boot constantly. 

Me too, I still agree with you on the last thread where you recommended multiple Recruit Chat channels.

[Ultimate_Vault_Hunter]

23 minutes ago, SeaUrchins said:

Wot? That's the only reason I'd support the votekick: to boot people who suck. Your system is a failure, but you tried.

I would like a 'bragging' option if it ever came down to it.. it's not a competitive game at the end of the day. I just want better ways to form a squad.

[KIREEK]

"other players are more efficient and give me ample time to collect loot, so i need to kick them"

Might aswell kick anything that you don't like, like any playstyle, any weapon and any warframe, i mean you are already including soundquake banshees and sinoid simulor mirages.

If you haven't noticed, one of the key secrets to gathering lots of credits, resources, affinity, mods and endo is by being efficient at the game, killing as many enemies as possible even if the mission is trivial, if a player kills tons and tons of enemies, then embrace it, because you won't find that often, kicking them is a slap on the face.

[Syndrella]

Still the most useful solution for these problems is forming a squad with trusted peoples. If you play with friends and clan mates there are much better chances to avoid peoples whom playstyle are differ from your and using different loadout what you don't like. Personally I am playing solo, pubs and playing with friends aswell and still not annoyed by any other players. We see differently this thing and I am okay with adding more feature which ensure players can enjoy their time in game but the kick, report, limiting options are not viable.

Each can be good in a type of game and in a type of execution but in warframe the only (still) usable way is the forming trusted groups and teams. This is almost the same like LoL or Dota2 where you can play pub but then you accept you could be insulted and annoyed by random peoples or you can find friends and form a team which make you more enjoyment and you can trust each peoples in the group.

 

Here in warframe the most problems often the kills, or using abilities and many peoples are arguing one better than him/her. The abilities created for reasons and the gun fight/melee created for reason. If you see speedhack or aimbot then that is sure not a normal way to play so there the report and photo making (video recording) may be a solution to make a good feedback but reasons some person bad or too good is not a reason.

Rarely I am arguing too but only in survival missions when low mr peoples activating the life support and after 2-3 I am ask them gently to not use it because they are wasting the life support. I am using the explanation and avoiding such a primitive says like "stop you imbecile" "don't activate it garbage" etc. That is not me and I am happy I rarely meet with real trolls or peoples whom avoiding the suggestion or critism.

There are many reason behind these behaviors and some of us using writing only, others using voice chat and third party programs. Others really not understand how the game works again others are silly another peoples just trolling like in every game. 

 

[Currilicious]

No to kick option. Stupidly open to abuse.

I've always said a public game filter and the option to host is needed.

Let folks decide who they want to play with and we can all have less monosodium glutamate from our forum visits.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Currilicious

[(XBOX)R3d P01nt]

On 4/12/2017 at 4:40 AM, Ryunokage said:

1. Please do not presume to assign motive to me, were we in a truly public forum, this is the sort of behaviour that could be interpreted as falling into the definition of libel.

No, it couldn't.

[(PSN)robotwars7]

a kick System will never happen because no matter how well it is implemented, it can still be abused.

/thread over.

[Ryunokage]

8 minutes ago, (PS4)robotwars7 said:

a kick System will never happen because no matter how well it is implemented, it can still be abused.

/thread over.

By that logic, the medication should all be banned owing to the dangers of abuse.

Again, the idea that anything that could be abused should be disallowed is lunacy. Everything has the potential for abuse, cars can be abused as weapons as we've seen in the vehicular attack in sweden for example, or in france when a muslim terrorist rammed a truck into a crowd. 

But we still have medication because the potential for good outweights the risks of abuse. The same applies to a kick feature.

[(XBOX)R3d P01nt]

5 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

By that logic, the medication should all be banned owing to the dangers of abuse.

Again, the idea that anything that could be abused should be disallowed is lunacy. Everything has the potential for abuse, cars can be abused as weapons as we've seen in the vehicular attack in sweden for example, or in france when a muslim terrorist rammed a truck into a crowd. 

But we still have medication because the potential for good outweights the risks of abuse. The same applies to a kick feature.

Does it?  And do your analogies make sense in this regard?  Comparing a kick feature to medicine or vehicular homicide seems a bit...off to me.  Maybe the PC community would be better, but I know that it would be abused to hell and back on Xbox One.

[MagPrime]

6 hours ago, Ryunokage said:

By that logic, the medication should all be banned owing to the dangers of abuse.

Again, the idea that anything that could be abused should be disallowed is lunacy. Everything has the potential for abuse, cars can be abused as weapons as we've seen in the vehicular attack in sweden for example, or in france when a muslim terrorist rammed a truck into a crowd. 

But we still have medication because the potential for good outweights the risks of abuse. The same applies to a kick feature.

Using medication isn't the best analogy due to how it's regulated and distributed.

And that it's not really comparable.  Medication helps people stay alive and prevent the spread of disease, among other things, it's something every person and animal will encounter in their lives, in one form or another.

Kicking features?  Not so much.

[-NR-Dabears]

Kicks only result in a more toxic community. You might expect less trolls, but I'm calling exactly the other point. There are going to be more, and they will decide to kick you for totally random reasons (or just for no reason). Give people might, and they will abuse it. Unfortunately that's the case way too often.

Instead settings for public matchmaking could be an option, as you would be able to do your own "settings" with which kind of teammate you would like to have in your squad. Nonetheless people could still abuse this so they can go into a mission with a team that would just straight up carry them through. This system would require a playerbase which is much more active, and especially one which tends to play public matches instead of private ones.


For now you should just search for a proper clan or alliance, or get some friends to play with. Otherwise it's time to step up the solo-skills - almost everything in this game can be done alone (which is a sad fact).

TL;DR: I'm saying no to the kick option.


----

Edit:

I don't mean to insult you, but wanting to kick people for playing Limbo in a mission so they can do the mission in a way they want to (or maybe also a more efficient way) rather makes you one of those troll-ish people who'd kick people for the most random reasons. Now just imagine some people would want to kick you just because of your choice of weapons or Warframes, although you could easily do the mission with your equipment. That's not really nice and just brings up more toxicity.

Edited April 13, 2017 by -NR-Dabears1337
Edit regarding the part of Limbo's rework.

[(PSN)BMWWOW]

What about rating each WF as:

-- Tank (gets the agro; example Rhino)

-- DPS-Near (superfast DPS; example Ember)

-- DPS-Far (long range DPS; examples Banshee, Mesa)

-- Support (healers, etc; example Trinity)

Then the in-game matchmaking could make sure that each match had at least one of each.  Home-made teams could build whatever team they want, but random gatherings would automatically make better groups.

[Ryunokage]

14 hours ago, MagPrime said:

Using medication isn't the best analogy due to how it's regulated and distributed.

And that it's not really comparable.  Medication helps people stay alive and prevent the spread of disease, among other things, it's something every person and animal will encounter in their lives, in one form or another.

Kicking features?  Not so much.

Its a very good analogy.

For all the risks that medication might bring, death, illness, permanent loss of function, it can also prevent keep people alive and prevent the spread of disease. The benefits are proportional to the risks. The same can be applied to a kick feature, we might risk the abuse of such a feature which would lead to people becoming unhappy about being kicked, vs the benefits of people having access to such a tool: Removing exploitative players or individuals who abuse things like slide attack macros. 

In both cases the benefits and the risks are proportional to each other. While you might think that a kick feature might lead to abuse and a toxic community, i might regard the use of a kick feature that allows me to maintain control of my time and the game i'm currently in to outweigh the risks of the abuses that you so described.

14 hours ago, -NR-Dabears1337 said:

Kicks only result in a more toxic community. You might expect less trolls, but I'm calling exactly the other point. There are going to be more, and they will decide to kick you for totally random reasons (or just for no reason). Give people might, and they will abuse it. Unfortunately that's the case way too often.

Instead settings for public matchmaking could be an option, as you would be able to do your own "settings" with which kind of teammate you would like to have in your squad. Nonetheless people could still abuse this so they can go into a mission with a team that would just straight up carry them through. This system would require a playerbase which is much more active, and especially one which tends to play public matches instead of private ones.

For now you should just search for a proper clan or alliance, or get some friends to play with. Otherwise it's time to step up the solo-skills - almost everything in this game can be done alone (which is a sad fact).

Edit:
I don't mean to insult you, but wanting to kick people for playing Limbo in a mission so they can do the mission in a way they want to (or maybe also a more efficient way) rather makes you one of those troll-ish people who'd kick people for the most random reasons. Now just imagine some people would want to kick you just because of your choice of weapons or Warframes, although you could easily do the mission with your equipment. That's not really nice and just brings up more toxicity.

As before, i acknowledge that there is a risk for abuse. I simply maintain that providing a kick function to me better enables me to manage my own time in a manner that outweighs the risks of "random abuse".

Moreover clan and alliances require that people might maintain common schedules and routines, i'm a doctor. I play whenever i'm not on shift, and not being called back to the hospital because a colleagues fallen sick or is unable to attend, or something catastrophic's happened that requires all hands on deck. I do not have the luxury of a predictable and regular routine.

Finally, it is entirely reasonable to kick a limbo player, or anyone using any exploitative mechanic the domineers the gaming session and leaves me no other recourse to engage in game play. I play a game to relax, unwind and enjoy myself. None of those criteria are met when I find myself saddled with some incompetent, inept halfwit who is so dependant on exploitative mechanics to make him or herself feel something other then entirely useless, who refuses to remove himself from my a game session, hosted on my computer, using my bandwidth and eating up my time.

If i am not getting a return on the investment that i am putting into any activity, i will find a way to recover it, this is what a kick feature represents to me.

[(XBOX)R3d P01nt]

1 hour ago, Ryunokage said:

Moreover clan and alliances require that people might maintain common schedules and routines, i'm a doctor. I play whenever i'm not on shift, and not being called back to the hospital because a colleagues fallen sick or is unable to attend, or something catastrophic's happened that requires all hands on deck. I do not have the luxury of a predictable and regular routine.

And, if you get kicked at the end of a mission because trolls gonna troll, and you lose all progress, how does that help you?  You seem to believe that you'll be on the kicking end all the time and you'll be the responsible person who only kicks people who should be kicked, based on your judgment.  Yet, you won't be the sole person with that power and it can just as easily be used against you, and the person doing it may be trolling or may feel they are entirely reasonable in kicking you just as you would feel entirely reasonable whenever you perform a kick of someone else.  I'm pretty sure you wouldn't see it that way if you were the one being kicked, however.