21 replies to this topic

[Bruigaar]

I posted this in another thread but though it might need its own to bring it out to light more. It is just copy pasted so you might have to read it all to understand its context

This would not stop griefing but would create a perpetual hell for griefers and other problem players. Just have an end of match report system that flags players for many different things. Each report on the list would be flagged in different ways. Lets say we correspond colored flags to types of reports. I.E. Red flag= Abusive player, Green flag = Unskilled player , Yellow flag = ...... and down the line. Now those flags each have a designated decay ratio attached to them. If a an account receives past a threshold of a particular flag they get matched into games with like flagged accounts. This would also work with premade groups because you could calculate the mien of the entire groups flags ( I already see an argument herebut honestly if you are premade with someone you probably know they are a griefer anyways). And due to the decay of the flags it would not stick people who have just had a bad day in perpetual hell but let them know that they are having a bad day and maybe they should get off the game and just chill for a bit. Now to combat people using this to their own benefit every time a person reports someone they also have a separate flagging system attached to their account. These flags would have a different threshold and a different decay rate. This would help make people report only when there is real need to report others. because if you just start reporting everyone (or flag griefing ) you can place yourself into the same hell you are trying to place others in.

Sorry if this was jumbled I was tired when I typed it

Edited by Bruigaar, 27 February 2012 - 12:52 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

What point is there in flagging someone for being "unskilled"?

[Leonardo Monteiro]

I think this is a good suggestion - i agree that perhaps "unskilled" isn't good, but then again...

Its something that we could brainstorm.
Anyway, this would boil down to a comunity rep system - it would be cool to work not only to a higher kill count, but to have 100 players tagging you as "competent"

[Kenyon Burguess]

you cant punish someone for being unskilled. otherwise day 1, everyone would get flagged. lol

i do think a system could be set in place where a player could self mark themselves that they are new to the game and are requesting some extra help during missions. this would be a notice that only a map commander would see.

[Adridos]

As mentioned above, the idea itself is good (with the exception of "unskilled player"), but it stands and falls on the community itself. People could flag other just because they are angry at them, or just for the pleasure of hurting them. Because of that, you can't make it automatic and you need people deciding over who is, or isn't guilty. But then arises the problem that developers simply can't hire enough men to keep track of it and if you let community handle it, they will abuse it, too.

With that said, the system has simply too many flaws to be used.

[TimberJon]

I agree on a few points.

• Griefing must be prevented.
  
• No part of the initial gameplay must be involved in preventing or deterring griefers.
  
• Reporting misconduct must be fair and just to even the individual being accused.
  
• No single instance of reporting another should ban or server-kick anyone.

Lets be very neutral about the reporting, if at all. It isn't a bad idea and goes hand in hand with a system that makes griefing or multiple account creation extremely difficult. Do you report anonymously? because that can be abused. Do you report with your account/profile tagged to the report? Who looks into the matter? Does a moderator or admin need to follow up with you? Interview you? Interrogate the accused? Does someone need to check logs or investigate exactly what happened? In a subscription-based game, the support arm is funded to take care of things like this. In a F2P there will be support.. but to what degree? How deep will anyone want to go. Who is liable?

I think post game, the ability to click a button near a players name or profile to allow you to "Report this player" with some simple checkboxes will suffice. The system can then be built to require a support administrators attention only when a "flag" is raised, such as X number of this box checked for this individual, or X number of that box checked, etc... The items might be progressively severe and therefore raise flags for attention by support staff sooner.

There is also the factors of some people having grudges and hating another player indefinately, who might ALWAYS report someone. A history like that would also need to be monitored, IE, if an individual always flags only the same person but never anyone else. Those who take the time to report misconduct tend to spread the love on many offenders, not just a select few.

Edited by TimberJon, 27 February 2012 - 08:18 AM.

[Felbombling]

Interesting post this one… I have a few ideas on it.

I would have a hard time flagging someone as 'Unskilled'. Perhaps they have a poor connection speed and you are just reading their skill level wrong. I cannot get behind an idea that has such potential for abuse, even though I can see use for flagging myself as 'new' in an effort to get some feedback/help from veteran players. Having said that, I'm a guy who would want a flag system in place to point the finger at potential hackers or someone I thought was using a cheat, based on what I can see with my own eyes, not what I read on a statistics board at the end of a match. So, I guess I want my cake and eat it too.

As for player abuse, I have no time or use for jerks. If there is a flagging system in place to report players like this, let it have a high enough standard to make it stick. Say, if a player gets twenty-five flags for abusive behaviour toward other players, that player is sent a warning that his/her conduct has become an issue. If it continues, then punt them in the corner for a bit. **** players don't fade into nice and back to **** again. They tend to be jerks 100% of the time, because they either don't care, think it is funny or are oblivious to the fact that they are, indeed, jerks. So, if thirty flags say this player is a ****, it is safe to say another one hundred players thought he was a **** and did not bother to report the abuse. If that is the case, I am sure the community can agree that that particular player needs time to rethink his/her attitude while playing a game within the MWO environment.

[Felbombling]

Funny how the word 'jerks' is ok, but the same word without an 's' on the end is considered a expletive.

[TheRulesLawyer]

LoL does a similar system. Flag people for various things, but with a twist. That gets the case sent to tribunal- a player to player moderation system. A player reviews it and decides if its justified or not.

TK/TD can auto flag.
People who AFK/DC/leave can similarlly be auto flagged.
Foul language also can be auto flagged.

Its stuff like cheaters, abusive in chat, deliberately losing, etc that need player flagging.

Unskilled isn't so much just you suck. Its the people who grief by playing so bad that they might as well be AFK, but don't get flagged since they're still moving.

[TimberJon]

Unskilled was a slip perhaps. I suggest we stay focused on the core of this concept.

[Aegis Kleais]

You guys do know that this is F2P, right? There is no banning.

Griefing and hacking will be most often fought by any client-based kick systems implemented along with a minimum duration. If no game browser is provided, then a kick would be sufficient, as the faulting player would just be randomly thrown to another server.

[Exilyth]

This reminds me of the incidents in WoT where griefers provocate players into fits of rage, only to report them for abusive language.

Still, a report feature is a must. Requiring the reporting party to send in a screenshot and having each incident reviewed by humans (log files and all other evidence) would prevent people from being falsely kicked/banned/moderated/whatever.

[Dlardrageth]

Could as well ask for a preliminary IQ test before being able to register for MWO. Not going to happen. That's the main MMO quality right there, you have to keep up with all three of Moe, Larry and Curly. Best you can hope for is not having them on your team/in your Mech company in a battle by joining a player unit who regularily fields full companies. For PUGs you can pretty much forget about any efficient sorting mechanism. Even with a implemented reporting fucntion, you are aware what kind of manpower PGI would need to dedicate, to sort all that stuff properly?

Yes, other games run with it (WoT since recently), but you ever wonder what happens to those "reports"? Chances are, not much, they are a cheap means to pay lip service to placate the customers who believe it works... somehow. I'd rather have a working customer support staff (probably regionally dislocated some, covering multiple timezones), which is able to adress really important matters directly (even if it requires to send screenshots via E-mail and receive a reply likewise).

And in case of a cheat/exploit a report function will do zip all. You will need to have a GM/customer support monitor the occurence. Which means experience it in game, which means that might take a while before you end up in a match that has it. Logically this implies that person has to play/monitor the game instead of reading into a plethora of "reports" which could be as much as 90% spam/false accusations.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 27 February 2012 - 02:27 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Aegis Kleais™, on 27 February 2012 - 01:43 PM, said:

A screenshot rarely ever is able to capture any behavior that is indicative of a cheat/griefing/etc.

If the game ends up supporting battle recording, that would be a better way. Submit it via sending the recording, but again, what's the worst you can do to a player in a F2P game? Ban the account? Then they open a new one since the only thing they'll probably be required to have is a unique email address, and boom, they're at it again.

If the client is something that has to be installed on one's computer, perhaps they could ban by a combination of account, IP address, and unique token (with said token being built into some sort of confirmation code that becomes part of the install itself)?

Then, getting around a ban would/should require a combination of wiping one's install and reinstalling, getting a new confirmation code, changing one's IP address, AND starting a new account - more trouble than it would/should be worth, yes?

And if that isn't enough, there is "hardware banning" that apparently links itself to the serial number(s) of one's hard drive(s); PunkBuster apparently uses such a system...

EDIT: Also, what Dlardrageth said...

Edited by Strum Wealh, 27 February 2012 - 02:11 PM.

[TheRulesLawyer]

There will always be a way around any protection you throw up. You just have to make it secure enough to deterr the majority of the griefers. Even a weak hardware based account ban would stop a ton of people.

[Strum Wealh]

Aegis Kleais™, on 27 February 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

Well, in short.

My name is Chuck. My email is "chuck@mail.com", offered by one of millions of places that offer free email service. I create an account, start griefing someone and get banned. I can now, under no expense to me other than some time, create another free email like "upChuck@mail.com" and register than unique value to the game and start all over again.

With traditional games, the cost of the game $50 being tied to your "Unique Key" (ie, a "Serial") is what makes the account being "banned" have an impact on the cheater. There's a financial cost, not just one's free time.

Hardware banning is what is known as MAC banning (where the unqiue MAC number from a Network adapter is taken as a "serial" and "banned". Problem is, this can be easily spoofed via software so that the game never receives a legitimate MAC to begin with, and banning it can, in effect, actually ban a legitimate player instead.

"As with previous PunkBuster GUID global bans, the new hardware GUID bans are permanent and will not be lifted. Even Balance has not disclosed which hardware parts are used to ban players, but trial and error has shown that the hardware GUID is based on the serial numbers of all available hard drives but not the MAC addresses."

It would seem that PunkBuster uses (among other things?) the serial numbers of the computer's hard drives, and not the MAC addresses, probably for the very reason outlined ("...it can, in effect, actually ban a legitimate player instead").

So "Chuck", for his troubles, would have to either find/acquire new hard drives or find/acquire another computer (in addition to creating new accounts) if it gets to the point of a warranting a hardware ban.

TheRulesLawyer, on 27 February 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

There will always be a way around any protection you throw up. You just have to make it secure enough to deterr the majority of the griefers. Even a weak hardware based account ban would stop a ton of people.

Agreed.

I would imagine that a tiered approach would work:

1st warning
2nd warning
Temporary account/IP ban
Permanent account/IP ban
Temporary hardware ban
Permanent hardware ban

Your thoughts?

[FinnMcKool]

Im all for an EZ way to report hacks or cheats and griefers but this will be abused, its just human nature to want control/power and its human nature to have blind spots go overboard treat some people different than others.

just look threw the forums

[Roughneck45]

TimberJon, on 27 February 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Unskilled was a slip perhaps. I suggest we stay focused on the core of this concept.

If there is a ranked based matchmaking system, unskilled could be used. At least, if you really didnt like that person, you could report unskilled and it would not match you with them anymore.

[Dlardrageth]

Roughneck45, on 28 February 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

If there is a ranked based matchmaking system, unskilled could be used. At least, if you really didnt like that person, you could report unskilled and it would not match you with them anymore.

Big "if" there. As you would have to determine what influences ranking exactly. And even then, if someone were my next neighbor on the "ranking ladder", he could still be in my book a total scrub I wouldn't want to play with ever. And actually make me log out of the game once I get teamed up with him.

So even with this "if" included, not adressing the whole new can of worms it could open up, might not be the solution we're looking for, I fear.

[TimberJon]

No insinuations. They were either griefing or not, and you report that. You don't report that they cant hit the broad side of the local mall.