Community Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 863
# 1 Let's talk AFK Players
08-22-2012, 12:53 PM
So, it's a long despised issue, and I dare say most Endgame players have seen it at some point or other - so let's talk about solutions!

The Problem
Various events - Fleet Activities, PVP Matches, STFs reward players for taking part in them. This reward is given out regardless of player participation so a player can queue up, sit at the Transwarp gate in PVP three times a day and get 1440 Dilithium.

Similarly in STFs, the player can come in, sit at spawn and do nothing, and as long as the match completes, get their two EDCs and 1100 dilithium.

Personal Rant: Played a Khitomer Accord Space Elite today with a PUG group (yes yes I know, don't PUG...but humour me) where I had two 'genius' level players. The first of which sat on spawn for the first five minutes, and when, out of pure spite, I pulled a Cube onto him RAN AWAY to the other side of the match and AFK'd there instead...and the second who came in and after a few minutes said 'what do I have to do?' and when asked if he'd done the normals said 'I didn't see the need, lesser rewards'.....geez!

Anyway off the rant, let's find a solution - now as I see it we have too main issues here - PVP AFKing where there's a winner, and PVE where it's cooperative.

So take a moment, propose your own solution - one for the competitive PVP, and one for the PVE where it's cooperative...

Competitive PVP
I like a particular idea here, and it's something that tech wise should be relatively simple, introduce a new wrapper mission in addition to the current 'play 3' mission. A second wrapper 'Win 3 PVP Matches'.

This way players who are pretty casual can come in, play three matches have some fun and not worry about winning, get their 1440 and go home.

However it should motivate most players to try and win their matches so they can grab the extra 1440 - and if they only win one that day? That's fine, it can roll onto the next day, or they can play another match, and another...think how the Klingon 'Ship hunter' wrappers work I guess.

Cooperative PVE
This I find a bit harder, the optional objective is clearly designed to encourage players to take part - but as we've discovered in our fleet? The optional loot is generally pretty poor, to the stage where we all shrug if we don't get it and move on with no qualms.

I've got a few thoughts here - first of all introduce a small dilithium reward on the optional that ALL players get, 440 or whatever the 'small' dilithium containers contain. That said, I don't like this - it feels wrong. I think there needs to be some sort of scoring in STFs, perhaps invisible, but enough as to split the missions into 'parts' such as they already are, each player must 'score' a certain number of points in each part - nothing major, take down a couple of drones, resurrect a single player, heal X health points, don't take part in all parts? Don't earn at the end. Again messy - but an idea.


So STO community, let's see what you think - how do we deal with these guys without just hiding in private queues?
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online Forums. My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment.
If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a 'forums and website' support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 53
# 2
08-22-2012, 01:05 PM
Perhaps establish a scaling system of rewards that is based on the level of individual participation in the mission?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 214
# 3
08-22-2012, 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrowdash View Post
Perhaps establish a scaling system of rewards that is based on the level of individual participation in the mission?
how would we gauge that tho? damage dealt? damage received? healing done? buffs given? ... a lot of the STFs require say one person guarding a spot so it doesn't fail that person would obviously end up dealing and receiving less damage along with every other metric being lower in number but is just as vital and is participating just as much as those DPSing

I don't see a system that could reliably gauge participation short of a live person being a referee
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 891
# 4
08-22-2012, 01:17 PM
I'd love to help and discuss and provide suggestions about how to deal with AFKers, but........






[Poster has been AFK for 5 minutes....]

Last edited by boglejam73; 08-22-2012 at 01:29 PM.
Community Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 863
# 5
08-22-2012, 01:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by boglejam73 View Post
I'd love to help and discuss and provide suggestions about how to deal with AFKers, but........






[Poster has been AFK for 5 minutes....]
You sir, win the internet
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online Forums. My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment.
If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a 'forums and website' support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 110
# 6
07-25-2013, 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by liquidacid29 View Post
how would we gauge that tho? damage dealt? damage received? healing done? buffs given? ... a lot of the STFs require say one person guarding a spot so it doesn't fail that person would obviously end up dealing and receiving less damage along with every other metric being lower in number but is just as vital and is participating just as much as those DPSing

I don't see a system that could reliably gauge participation short of a live person being a referee
I have played way too many games where people don't pay attention to the Kang. One of my biggest problems is that I have a wireless modem and so sometimes I might appear AFK but am really waiting for the server to come back.

One of the better solutions would be that if you don't press a key every two minutes or so you get dropped from the game.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 359
# 7
08-22-2012, 01:15 PM
sort in pve mission will be hard but if you say dps will be calculated and only top 3 dps players get loot the others typical stf destroyers nothing i vote for yes.


on that way nuubs will never more come on the idea to join random stfs only for free reward, it will become useless for them all.

but in ground mission this system will not work or be fair, but in space yes,



only the prob with kithomere grspace like the othr one say if 2 protect vortex the cant outdps the structur destroyers.

Last edited by lostmoony; 08-22-2012 at 01:19 PM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 120
# 8
07-28-2013, 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostmoony View Post
sort in pve mission will be hard but if you say dps will be calculated and only top 3 dps players get loot the others typical stf destroyers nothing i vote for yes.


on that way nuubs will never more come on the idea to join random stfs only for free reward, it will become useless for them all.

but in ground mission this system will not work or be fair, but in space yes,



only the prob with kithomere grspace like the othr one say if 2 protect vortex the cant outdps the structur destroyers.
So, if you don't run an escort, you don't get paid?

Let's face it. Against comparably equipped starships and equally skilled players, an Escort will rule in DPS. Using ONLY DPS as a metric to guage effectiveness is bad. Here's an example of why.

Khitomer Accord, Space, Elite. As a sci captain in an Atrox, I *CANNOT* pump out the damage that, say, an Andorian Escort, or Fleet HEC can. It just isn't going to happen. But... I have all sorts of nifty movement control skills... tractor beams, beam target engines, 2X gravity well, heavy graviton beam, and hangars with danubes, to name a few. So I play to my role. I help on the trans/gens/gates when I can, but in between, I take down the probes, holding them and destroying them before they can cause the optional, and mission, to fail.

Im the above example, I have contributed significantly to the success of the team. However, my DPS is significantly lower than that of the Andorian escort. Using DPS as the only metric means that, while someone else blew stuff up, doing more DPS, but contributing less to the overall success of the mission, they get paid better than I do, despite my being one of the main contributors.

As for other measurement systems, inclusion of DPS isn't a bad thing. Including heals (this part is important...) GIVEN TO OTHER PLAYERS (otherwise, someone can just sit and heal themselves over and over, and be rewarded), ressurection, skill use, distance moved, damage prevented (ie, beam target weapons causes a weapons disable, the average DPS of that ship is added to the player's score for the match), damage increases given (disruptor breaches, which boost EVERYONE's damage, the difference being given to the player causing the breach), and so on, would need to be included.

I like the idea of scoring effectiveness as a part of the reward for players, I just think that DPS is not the sole determining factor that should be used to determine effectiveness.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,593
# 9
08-22-2012, 01:18 PM
Some options (based on the old AD+D alignment system choose the one that suits you best)

Lawful good option
Simply reduce the reward til its not worth them doing this , a reward that goes down and down as the timer ticks away would do this
Tighter rules for the public good

Neutral Good option
Log out anyone who doesn't move or fire for 30 seconds and bring in someone else
(reseting the timer By a minute each time)

Chaotic good option
Log out yourself that will teach them

Lawful neutral option
Set the missions so if it Fails there is NO reward they pull their weight or it fails

True Neutral option
leave it alone it will find its own balance

Chaotic neutral option
Automatically phase shift afkers into an instance together and pull together the people ACTIVE into one instance (longer clock and lesser number of targets carry over)

Lawful Evil option
Anyone who fails to respawn when downed in ground combat accumulates ALL injurys the rest of the team gets
Anyone further than 100 metres from team at end (and not Dead) gets no reward
anyone who LEAVES the match leaves with a full set of injurys
In space the ship takes the damage
and distance is 50 km

Neutral evil option
Create an AFK instance
sit in it for 30 minutes you get the reward

Chaotic evil option
randomly delete the account of one AFK every hour on the hour
Lieutenant
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 58
# 10
07-28-2013, 05:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax View Post
Some options (based on the old AD+D alignment system choose the one that suits you best)

Lawful good option
Simply reduce the reward til its not worth them doing this , a reward that goes down and down as the timer ticks away would do this
Tighter rules for the public good

Neutral Good option
Log out anyone who doesn't move or fire for 30 seconds and bring in someone else
(reseting the timer By a minute each time)

Chaotic good option
Log out yourself that will teach them

Lawful neutral option
Set the missions so if it Fails there is NO reward they pull their weight or it fails

True Neutral option
leave it alone it will find its own balance

Chaotic neutral option
Automatically phase shift afkers into an instance together and pull together the people ACTIVE into one instance (longer clock and lesser number of targets carry over)

Lawful Evil option
Anyone who fails to respawn when downed in ground combat accumulates ALL injurys the rest of the team gets
Anyone further than 100 metres from team at end (and not Dead) gets no reward
anyone who LEAVES the match leaves with a full set of injurys
In space the ship takes the damage
and distance is 50 km

Neutral evil option
Create an AFK instance
sit in it for 30 minutes you get the reward

Chaotic evil option
randomly delete the account of one AFK every hour on the hour
I'll be a devil's advocate here

Lawful Good
What if you're kicked out due to networking issues and had to rejoin the STF?

Neutral Good
I can see alot of legitimate players being kicked out due to networking issues, and the rest of the teammates complaining why STO is so xxxx

Chaotic Good
If team leader can log out and bring down the game himself, i can foresee alot of trolls doing this at the very last minute, to obtain self satisfaction. From exp in Me3, One can also find themselves replaying the mission if the team leader gets kicked out due to lag.


Lawful neutral
Not effective

True neutral
Good option. Current system is fine the way it is

Chaotic neutral
it will create more problems, server side in implenting this


Lawful Evil
Discriminates alot of legitimate games. Why should games be penalised and forced to play a game on rails ( following the team anand staying within x metres of them )

Neutral Evil
This is good.

Chaotic Evil
i do not see how this will fit in and it would further aggravate legitimate gamers who find their own accounts being deleted


I used to play Mass Effect 3 before STO, and i see similar problems being paralleled here.

Examining the situation
The root cause of AFK is that of players looking for an easy way out to earn in-game currency. This was further exacerbate when Tour was removed.

What is the definition of AFK
Using time as a gauge of AFK is not very reliable. A 2 min kick timer was implemented in Mass Effect 3 and it had the irritating effect of being kicking you out when you had to go to the restroom or answer a call. This then made you waste a good amount of your time in the STF / Mission because of the kick timer. This method can be circumvented via a macro that does something every x min

Having a vote kick option is an acceptable method, but then, we will have scenarios where a player is rejected simply because his build does not do enough DPS.

A proper gauge of AFK is that of a reasonable amount of damage inflicted that does not favour DPS whores but yet also allows for support players to fall within the reasonable DPS range, is imo an effective gauge.



Aside from addressing the direct problems, Cryptic also should address the indirect problems of how a player can expect to earn in-game currency effectively, passively, without a high barrier to entry.

Last edited by eugenesys; 07-28-2013 at 05:49 PM.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:51 AM.