22 replies to this topic

[Railgun05]

Evening Sirs.

So I have had several matches where the countdown timer hits zero, and a specific player opens fire from his Atlas into his team. It is intentional, as he will try to kill everyone in the group.

I would very much like a way to "Ban" him, or Ban myself from ever being teamed with him.

I realize there will be people like this in every game, but there really needs to be a way to deal with it.

Thank you for your time.
-R

[Stickjock]

Simply submit a ticket to support@mwomercs.com with any relavant information you have. Support will investigate the issue and if warranted will take action.

[Nightfangs]

Railgun05, on 08 November 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Evening Sirs.

So I have had several matches where the countdown timer hits zero, and a specific player opens fire from his Atlas into his team. It is intentional, as he will try to kill everyone in the group.

I would very much like a way to "Ban" him, or Ban myself from ever being teamed with him.

I realize there will be people like this in every game, but there really needs to be a way to deal with it.

Thank you for your time.
-R

I don't recall his name, but I met that atlas once. I gunned him down with two team mates, but a way to "ignore" him, severe penalties for friendly fire or better both would be great!

[Railgun05]

Stickjock,
Understood, but the larger point is, eventually things like this will escalate.
The Hacks will come (Regardless of whatever any software comapny says), the obnoxious people will be there, and whatever other reason you can think of to not to want to play alongside/against another player.

Leaving all this in the hands of the devs does not usually lean to a quick or easy resolution.
They will have to deal with the whining, and have to investigate whether or not accusations are valid and go through hundreds, possibly thousands of e-mails a day mostly consisting of "OMFG!!! THIS GUY HAX SO BAAAAAD!!! BAN HIM NOW." or some such drivel, with most of the complaints coming from people who dont understand that thier twitch game talent doesnt really translate to a game like MWO.

I just think that some sort of black list in the social section would be much simpler.
And I dont mind if I am the one kicked from a game because someone in my list is in it. I would rather not play than play with them. (Though I would prefer matchmaking to handle it.)

I think this would make life on the admin side a lot easier, and I dont have to play with people I feel are abusive/un-sportsman like.
Hence, I put this in suggestions rather than formally complaining about some ***** and wasting DEV/Admin time that could be better spent elsewhere improving other aspects of the game.

Thanks,
-R

[Stickjock]

There's an in-game "ignore" list... sadly, doesn't keep you from being in a battle with them as far as I know...

That aside, again, if players would simply report behaviour like you mention above (griefing in any form)... let support get enough reports and that player won't be playing anymore...

Either way tho', yours OR the report way and possible ban... doesn't stop players from coming back with a new account and continuing the cycle... we can just hope that those players would eventually get bored and move on to Hello Kitty Online...

[Railgun05]

Wow, Tight filters... I didnt curse and it censored me...

One more thought, I ask for a user controlable list because the systems that are run by a corporate admin are generally less than effective.
Case in point:
Steam
I play a great deal of FPS games there. Thier "Report User" Function is a joke.
I have yet to see anyone banned from them unless there was a monetary issue at hand.
Cheating/Hacking/Abusive behavior is all but ignored.

When you go into games and the entire group knows the hacker before the game starts because they have seen him that much you know the system doesnt work.

[Ceribus]

I totally agree with the Idea of having a blacklist of people you do not want to be teamed up with.... I don't see any point in having a "don't want to play against function" though

[WitchZero]

I remember when I used to play America's Army they had a Friendly Fire system that would kick players for too much friendly fire. It was severe at the start of the round. If you shot a guy on your team at the start of the map you immediately got send to the jail and had to wait like five to ten minutes bit before you could play. It eased up as the match went on but again if you crossed a threshold you got booted.

Edited by WitchZero, 09 November 2012 - 07:14 AM.

[DeadlyNerd]

AA is a completely different situation, as there even 1 shot means a player could die due to all the realism. Here even if it's a shot from a gauss you're still not in that immediate danger unless you're a light mech where getting hit with a gauss is the fruit of your own stupidity or sheer enemy(or TKer) luck.

That aside, I'd very much like to see a list of players I don't want to play with. The "against list" is a bit pointless as if it's a hacker, he'll probably get banned, if it's a TKer or suicider or DCer you'll end up with an easier match.

[WitchZero]

I agree AA's severity was a result of its realism but Friendly Fire effects can be scaled. It is not completely different.

Say if you start the round and you do 35 points of damage to a friendly player within the first 8 seconds of the map then you get kicked. During the match FF happens often, but unless you are just oblivious you wont cross a larger threshold for kick.

Devil's Advocate:

What is to stop people from blacklisting good groups so they can try to pad their K/D ratio. Seems silly but possible.

Edited by WitchZero, 09 November 2012 - 08:44 AM.

[Tyrzun]

Railgun05, on 09 November 2012 - 05:42 AM, said:

Stickjock,
Understood, but the larger point is, eventually things like this will escalate.
The Hacks will come (Regardless of whatever any software comapny says), the obnoxious people will be there, and whatever other reason you can think of to not to want to play alongside/against another player.

Leaving all this in the hands of the devs does not usually lean to a quick or easy resolution.
They will have to deal with the whining, and have to investigate whether or not accusations are valid and go through hundreds, possibly thousands of e-mails a day mostly consisting of "OMFG!!! THIS GUY HAX SO BAAAAAD!!! BAN HIM NOW." or some such drivel, with most of the complaints coming from people who dont understand that thier twitch game talent doesnt really translate to a game like MWO.

I just think that some sort of black list in the social section would be much simpler.
And I dont mind if I am the one kicked from a game because someone in my list is in it. I would rather not play than play with them. (Though I would prefer matchmaking to handle it.)

I think this would make life on the admin side a lot easier, and I dont have to play with people I feel are abusive/un-sportsman like.
Hence, I put this in suggestions rather than formally complaining about some ***** and wasting DEV/Admin time that could be better spent elsewhere improving other aspects of the game.

Thanks,
-R

I actually really like the blacklist idea.

I have serious issues with people refusing to work as a team and rushing out there to die and farm creds and exp, suicide players, afk players. Give us the black list. When you see 1 person getting 5+ reports a day that should flag them, but it also lets the player base effectively "freeze" them out too.

[DragonOChaos]

I concur. A blacklist is a really good idea.

it isn't even a new concept to MMOs. Multiple games support a blacklist.

It would take time to implement into their matchmaking system. But, in the long run I think this would be a very good idea.

[Qicmee]

FPS games have dedicated servers with admins to ban griefers in real time. Even then, admins for games like Global Offensive install automated tools to handle team killers. I'm assuming that PGI has something similar planned.

A personal blacklist would resolve a personal concern, but it wouldn't help the community. I'd prefer a system enabling players to immediately report griefers during the game. This data could trigger automated responses during the game depending on the situation.

Lots & lots of excellent ideas have already been suggested on this topic in the past. PGI hasn't mentioned or implemented any plans. PGI has all the game data & sever control. It's their ballgame.

Edited by Qicmee, 09 November 2012 - 01:53 PM.

[Starburster]

For a while now I have been hoping they will eventually make it so when someone is on your ignore list, not only will you no longer read their drivel but would never end up queued with them on your team. Would like to think they wouldn't have it so you don't even face them. Be a rather lame way to blacklist someone simply to not face a superior mechwarrior.

Edited by Starburster, 09 November 2012 - 02:13 PM.

[Kittamaru]

Railgun05, on 09 November 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

Wow, Tight filters... I didnt curse and it censored me...

One more thought, I ask for a user controlable list because the systems that are run by a corporate admin are generally less than effective.
Case in point:
Steam
I play a great deal of FPS games there. Thier "Report User" Function is a joke.
I have yet to see anyone banned from them unless there was a monetary issue at hand.
Cheating/Hacking/Abusive behavior is all but ignored.

When you go into games and the entire group knows the hacker before the game starts because they have seen him that much you know the system doesnt work.

STEAM leaves banning for hacking and such up to individual servers, for the simple fact that it's much easier for a local (read, server) admin to review the information than to keep on staff a team big enough to review every complaint from every game they support... you realize you'd be employing a few dozen THOUSAND people globally to review all the "OMG HAX" reports they get, right?

[IceWendigo]

I would rather have a Friendly Fire system where both the threshold and the consequences get increasingly more severe for players that cause FF up to a suspension of game for 15 min, 30m, 1 h, 1 day. This automated system will make it less likely you will need a blacklist since the a33hole gamer will be suppressed before he gets in your game. With a blacklist, its an extra matching parameter for a occurence that is almost never going to happen, so it protects you from someone youd most likely never see again ( or soon) while leaving eveyone else to get the crap, one after the other.

[ltwally]

+1 to blacklist.

Not just for Team-Attackers and Team-Killers, but also for the repeat first-round disconnecters and suiciders. I don't want to game with any of them.

[Kaijin]

Unfortunately, a blacklist wouldn't do much good. Career griefers create multiple accounts in F2P games. A 'report' button is vital so such miscreants can be nailed down by the GMs and IP-banned.

[pnaksone]

The crux is it is very easy to get a new email address to set up a new account. As well as there are ways to make a your IP address look like a different one. So blacklisting would help but likely futile.

Friendly fire happens in a mech knife fight. I have both walk in to line of fire of a teammate and had a teammate walk into my line of fire. Proving a teammate deliberately kill another teammate in all but a few situations is difficult at best.

[Kaijin]

pnaksone, on 09 November 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

The crux is it is very easy to get a new email address to set up a new account. As well as there are ways to make a your IP address look like a different one. So blacklisting would help but likely futile.

Friendly fire happens in a mech knife fight. I have both walk in to line of fire of a teammate and had a teammate walk into my line of fire. Proving a teammate deliberately kill another teammate in all but a few situations is difficult at best.

Well, unloading into your teammates backs as soon as the start timer ticks down is a pretty clear situation.

Of course, persistent griefers are persistent, but IP-bans suffice for the casual ones.