Jump to content

Ignore Function And/or "do Not Play" List


14 replies to this topic

Poll: Ignore function and/or "Do not play" list (53 member(s) have cast votes)

Ignore function and/or "Do not play" list

  1. Yes (38 votes [71.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 71.70%

  2. No (12 votes [22.64%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 22.64%

  3. Other (see post) (3 votes [5.66%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.66%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Jun Watarase

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,504 posts

Posted 01 May 2014 - 02:56 PM

Basically im suggesting two things :

1.Allow us to ignore text messages from players. This is pretty self-explanatory, just two people flooding chat with off topic nonsense is enough to prevent anyone else from using the chat and is technically not against the COC. All you have to do is claim that you and your friend were having a conversation.

2.Allow us to put players on a "do not play" list so we will never have to play with them again. These are the type of people who are complete killjoys and ruin the game for everyone else but stop just short of blatant violations of the COC that would get them banned.

Benefits :

1. You can ignore people who are annoying you in chat or cluttering up chat with off topic stuff.

2. You dont have to play with people you dont want to. This is a pretty big deal, imagine the guy you hate at work but have to deal with everyday. Now imagine being forced to play with him everytime you try to relax.

3. People will be more inclined to use these features instead of reporting people to GMs, which means less work for GMs. And if no action can be taken against a player because hes technically not breaking the COC, people can choose not to play with him instead of sending more and more reports to the GMs that just get marked as "technically not illegal".

Drawbacks :

None, except for coding time.

Explanation :

With any large playerbase (not that the playerbase is particularly large now, but hopefully at sometime in the future), you are going to run into a lot of people you simply do not want to associate with.

These are people who trash talk, spam the chat with gibberish, or simply play the game in a way that kills fun for everyone else, which may or may not involve violation of the code of conduct.

Reporting players is time consuming, especially for GMs who have to investigate every report, and what might be multiple reports against the same person.

Theres also the problem where people rules lawyer to stay within the code of conduct, technically, but play the game in a way that ruins it for everyone else.

An example of this might be dropping in a fast mech with only a few MGs and then running straight into the enemy team solo, while saying "well its not MY fault the MGs are short ranged! And i'm scouting, its not my fault if i die!". Which is just a disguised way of suiciding. Or deciding that, well, he doesnt want to help his team win, so hes going to let enemies kill his teammates, maybe while firing off a few shots at out of range enemies to make it look good. Or hiding in a corner of the map till his team is dead then running out to die (hey, theres no rule saying i have to stick with the group!).

I dont know what tools GMs have access to for checking reports, but im guessing its pretty hard to tell whether someone is just really bad, or trying to make his team lose on purpose. It would be pretty easy to come up with plausible excuses for any suspicious behaviour.

Since the matchmaker doesnt let you choose who to play with (unless you play the rewardless private matches 100% of the time), you are stuck with these guys everytime the MM decides to put you together. Which can happen very very frequently. I ran into the same 8 man sync drop nearly a dozen times in one night, according to my screenshots anyway.

Everytime one of their 4 man groups ended up on my team, they would go out of their way to try and make us lose. Nothing as obvious as blatant tking or yelling out teammate locations in chat, but generally they refused to engage enemies and would hide in a corner of the map till everyone else was dead, THEN start fighting. Im pretty sure they were revealing teammate locations to their friends on the other team over voice chat whenever they got split up as well. Everytime they did this, the game was effectively ruined for everyone else and the worst thing is, we cannot opt out of playing with people like these. The matchmaker will continue to put us in the same match as them. And we really need a way to avoid people like that, that doesnt involve bringing in the GMs and hoping they get banned, which is a long and complex process with no guarantees. Not exactly hard to make a new account either.

Edited by Jun Watarase, 01 May 2014 - 03:15 PM.


#2 Geeks On Hugs

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 121 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

Posted 01 May 2014 - 03:12 PM

Yes but the "do not play" list should be set up for the match maker to try it's best but not delay matches - at least until the match maker gets better at quickly putting together matches. Along the same vein I'd like to see a "requested map" that is not absolutely honored but allows the match maker to try it's best to put you on. Or even a "non-requested map list" perhaps.

#3 Jun Watarase

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,504 posts

Posted 02 May 2014 - 02:22 AM

If PGI has competent coders, it shouldnt be hard for them to ensure that the matchmaking process isnt disrupted badly by this.

#4 MrMasakari

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 387 posts
  • LocationThe Kerensky Cluster

Posted 02 May 2014 - 03:00 AM

Ingame ignore/mute yes

Do not play with no

View PostJun Watarase, on 02 May 2014 - 02:22 AM, said:

If PGI has competent coders, it shouldnt be hard for them to ensure that the matchmaking process isnt disrupted badly by this.


As I have recently said in another post, even with the best coders the system will always be limited by many factors and variables. Part of the reason you keep playing with the same people/ groups is because conditions set by these factors and variables cannot be met so it has to make do with what its got, otherwise you don't play, meeting all of them is not going to happen and adding another is going to make it harder. However I do completely agree with muting/ignoring coupled with in-match reporting needing to be added at some point.

If that is added I can't really see a reason why you won't be able just permanently mute/report said individual and just play your game rather than have an unnecessary feature that further complicates matchmaking.

Edited by Artaire, 02 May 2014 - 03:02 AM.


#5 Jun Watarase

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,504 posts

Posted 02 May 2014 - 08:06 AM

I already explained why reporting isnt a great solution. It could take weeks for GMs to act on a report, meanwhile you keep getting put into the same match where they ruin it for you. Worse of all, they could do rules lawyering to stay within the COC while still ruining the match for everyone else.

The program logic doesnt need to be complex. All you need to do is get the matchmaker to check everyone's do not play list firsts and then slot in compatible people into open slots.

#6 Xarian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • 997 posts

Posted 06 May 2014 - 06:50 PM

Reporting is useless.

A "do not play" list would be extremely simple from a matchmaking standpoint.
If team is empty, add player to the team. Otherwise, check prospective player's "do not play" list; if no player that is already added to the team is on the list, add player to the team and force the player to search for a new game. If player searches for too long due to the list, give a message that says "Could not find any games. Perhaps your 'do not play' list is too large?"

It increases the game search time for the person who uses the list. That's the tradeoff.

#7 RAM

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Resolute
  • The Resolute
  • 2,018 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 08 May 2014 - 12:21 AM

What happens when everyone 'Do Not Plays' Jun? Would that be a junjacking?


RAM
ELH

#8 Bashfulsalamander

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts
  • Locationnot looking at forums

Posted 08 May 2014 - 12:37 AM

This feature exists in some games and I know its on XBOX Live, but it would be hard to implement into this game. First it should use the not recommended instead of do not play with other wise what would happen if said 1 annoying guy was in a match with 3-4 preferred players? In other words it should be like a weight system instead of absolute. Secondly in game ignore seems like it would be very hard to program maybe if they made it for spectate mode only using a different in game channel or something...... either way just sounds complicated. Lastly most of this could be avoided with VOIP and Mute options.

#9 Mitsuragi

    Legendary Founder

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 311 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationOUT OF BOUNDS

Posted 24 July 2014 - 08:03 AM

The matchmaker has a hard enough time matching people up right now as my wait times are upwards of 5 - 10 minutes for solo queue. This would add a lot of overhead to the system to cross check 23 player's ignore lists to validate if a player can be added to the roster.

#10 Hoffenstein

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 368 posts
  • LocationThe Great White North

Posted 28 September 2014 - 12:54 PM

To the original poster, what would you do if everyone blocked you and you were no longer able to play? I notice you're an elite Founder, that means you payed to play the game. If you're part of a group you may be holding up an entire 12 man team because one person on the opposite team has decided they did not like you dictating the way they played the game. Personally, I think we just need to accept that some players will enjoy the game in a different way than us, so long as it doesn't abuse or break the CoC.

#11 Kalimaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,811 posts
  • LocationInside the Mech that just fired LRM's at you

Posted 07 October 2014 - 02:46 PM

I have to agree with Hoffenstein.
While I can understand your position, and would be inclined to agree with you, however I also see to much potential for abuse by it. By using this proposed system, an unpopular player may just find themselves unable to play. There are players that I don't like for one reason or another. Yet I have no right to deny them a fair chance to play, or to deny them enjoyment of this game. There is already a feature to turn off text when you game.

In the end, I will have to say No to this suggestion. Sorry, but I cannot hold with this type of practice. I've seen what a small number of people can do in chat rooms and in other games, and I'd rather not see a system that lends itself to various types of behaviors. MWO is a good game, and this would take away more than it offers.

#12 Liushing

    Rookie

  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 8 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 09 October 2014 - 05:30 PM

I would love to see something like this. However, I'd recommend a few changes: I'd limit the size of the ignore list to 5 or 10 names. In addition, I'd ensure that those pilots are never on MY team. On the other hand, I have no problem having them on the opposing team. I've begun to play with general chat off, so I wouldn't have to listen to their bile. But I would LOVE to face them in combat.

#13 s0hno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron
  • The Patron
  • 128 posts

Posted 05 December 2014 - 02:47 AM

It's true that sometimes teammates can be annoying. But since a round does not last that long, it's ok to just ignore them for some minutes. A banlist has too many downsides, mentioned in posts before.

For serious cases like teamkills etc., an ingame report option would be nice to shorten times for both moderators and player.
Systems established in Starcraft or Dota seem to work well:
- every player has a maximum of 5 available reports
- if a player is reported by a certain number of players, he will be punished (has to pay c-bills, cant play for 1 hour, longer queue or similar)
- if a player you reported is punished, you receive 2 additional report options. Otherwise, you will gain one possible report per week.

This way, players learn to respect certain rules if they want to play; on the other hand, the restricted number prevents excessive reporting for insignificant reasons.

#14 VinJade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,211 posts

Posted 19 March 2016 - 08:28 PM

It isn't that hard to ignore chats anyways, it's the voip that is annoy, you have to stop the mech open up the correct menu then mute the player and all the while trying to not get shot...

a little text chat should be the lest of your complaints. voip spamming is what could be the real problem.

#15 Strength Damage Cliff Racer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 124 posts

Posted 20 March 2016 - 03:36 AM

Judging by how I see loads of familiar faces on two servers and how we get to play with tier 5 guys, playerbase is too damn small.
Also, it's just damn straight incentive for good old e-mail "merry-go-round" with chained and circled blacklists instead of e-mail redirects.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users