Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,457
# 111
01-09-2013, 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuatela View Post
Really, the only formula you need is "Did the player participate for more than 50 - 75% of the STF? Yes = loot. No = no loot, what you would have gotten is split among the players who did."
The idea behind his formula is to guage participation. What actions define participation? If someone sets another person on follow and engages a keyboard macro to repeatedly spam spacebar on target of target (who they are afk following)... are they then participating?

A player regulated vote to kick feature is the best option (with inbuilt safeguards naturally).
nynik | Join Date: Dec 2009
<Dev> Oaks@dstahl: *checks for CBS listening devices in the office*
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,201
# 112
01-09-2013, 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
The idea behind his formula is to guage participation. What actions define participation? If someone sets another person on follow and engages a keyboard macro to repeatedly spam spacebar on target of target (who they are afk following)... are they then participating?

A player regulated vote to kick feature is the best option (with inbuilt safeguards naturally).
A kick feature will always be abusable, but removing any rewards or mission-completion credit for AFK'ers destroys any incentive to even enter the map to waste everyone's time. This also addresses the player who plays only 1 minute, then goes away to watch TV.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 658
# 113
01-09-2013, 06:20 PM
In my opinion there are simply too many kinds of participation for any scaling approach to work. Remember, we already have a system like that for Fleet Actions and it is infamous for rewarding Escorts above other ship types. Yes, it's exclusively based on damage, and one that also includes healing will be some improvement, but not enough. Just think about how many potentially valuable abilities there are that don't do damage or healing: FOMM, Sensor Scan, APB, just every damage resistance debuff in the game, SNB, Science Fleet and all the resistance buffs, Energy Siphon, all shield drains (shield damage doesn't currently count as damage), the list goes on and on. A scaling approach based only on healing and damage would penalize any build using these abilities, in many cases double penalizing it because it would boost the amount of damage and healing the other players could put out. Sure, you could add in another of these things, and another, and another, but I doubt that all of them would be successfully accounted for.

The much better solution would be a vote kick system. It allows the active players to remove the inactive ones, and even allows them to remove griefers. Now, it is theoretically possible for a group of 4 people to queue up together and kick all players added, but I doubt that would happen very much, there's simply no motive for that, unlike AFKing, and it doesn't even seem like it would give the amusement of conventional griefing.

Of course, a good Ignore system would be nice too, and would cover much of the problem.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 255
# 114
01-09-2013, 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
The idea behind his formula is to guage participation. What actions define participation? If someone sets another person on follow and engages a keyboard macro to repeatedly spam spacebar on target of target (who they are afk following)... are they then participating?

A player regulated vote to kick feature is the best option (with inbuilt safeguards naturally).
It would be better for the system to keep tabs on players. Anyone who is afk is automatically ejected from the event with a hour penalty. It would be set up so that a person can't just fly afk at the lowest impulse speed or do little participation. It's not a perfect system, but it's better than anything else out there for Cryptic to do. You can debate vote kicking til you're blue in the face but it WILL be abused the second PUG team members start having words with each other and someone gets booted for being an asshat. Of course I would enjoy seeing that happen, but it's abuse of the system nevertheless if the intent is solely to deal with AFK players. I could see the half retarded player who thinks someone is slacking and starts a chain reaction of agreements that the person should be kicked, regardless that no one else has been paying attention or whatnot. I could also see the elitist leading the way to vote kicking the weakest link of a group. Abuse at it's finest.

The point of anything they do is to stop people from leeching off the work of others. Whatever attains this goal is fine by me. I think simply implementing an ejection feature will surprise you at how well it works. People no longer can afk so they know when they enter, they have to play ball.

You also have to look at the reasons people afk. I guarantee you the most common if not the only reasoning for it is people who are currently busy and cannot afford to focus on the game, but they don't mind logging in anyway to piss around and leeching STFs because they're selfish. So, you eliminate their ability to leech and they simply won't do it anymore. Anyone who keeps trying past that point is probably RMT at best. I'm sure they use the dilithium to craft and make EC. If you know anything about how RMT works, you know they are more difficult to get rid of than a cockroach or spider infestation. They are real life leechers so they do the ingame leeching at all costs.


I do see the benefits of vote kicking, but I'm just being realistic. We need to get away from something that isn't going to happen and start focusing on ideas Cryptic will take seriously that harms them the least, financially.
Ensign
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1
# 115 Designate as hostile
01-10-2013, 05:57 AM
Let's have a voting system that allows the the other participating players to designate the AFKer as hostile. If all the other players designate the AFKer as hostile he becomes a targetable enemy ship that you can destroy. Anybody destroyed by the other players receives no rewards for that mission.

I personally would get a lot of satifaction blowing them up
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 238
# 116
01-10-2013, 07:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eaughoti View Post
Let's have a voting system that allows the the other participating players to designate the AFKer as hostile. If all the other players designate the AFKer as hostile he becomes a targetable enemy ship that you can destroy. Anybody destroyed by the other players receives no rewards for that mission.

I personally would get a lot of satifaction blowing them up

You already have a voting system, it is called warping out. And it works 100% of the time when you have an AFK person on your team.

Listen, I know you want your shiny for completing the STF. I know you want to play the STF on that character and you enjoy doing it. I know you don?t want to let your team down and you want to do your part. So, you are willing to work harder to get your shiny and theirs too. It?s okay, really. There is nothing wrong with that. The only part I don?t understand is why you want Cryptic to do something about it. If you complete the mission for the AFK?er then you support their behavior.
If I were Cryptic, then I wouldn?t do anything either.

For me, no way. I refuse to do for another player what they won?t do for themselves. It doesn?t bother me in the least to leave a team in a position where they can?t complete the STF to stop an AFK?er from exploiting me, game or not. If that toon gets time penalty, so what. I switch characters and keep going.

I know I am going to get flamed for saying this considering how unpopular this is. But I have to leave you with one question, which of us is doing something to stop it- the one completing the mission for them or the one stopping everyone from completing it?

? to thine own self ?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 203
# 117
01-10-2013, 07:14 AM
In one CSE STF yesterday one guy had combat log on and he linked the results of match.
I was in new toon, lvl 50 for 2 days and got 1st place with 3.9 mill damage with 6.5k DPS in common Advanced escort with MKXI weapons amd consoles doing solo kang guard duty in MRRMLL tactic.
BUT i had very low healing.
Other guy in Atrox had 1.5mill damage and 12.5 mill healing which he used on himself with transfer shield strength, repair drones and hazard emitters i presume.

So that formula, damage plus healing would be broken beacuse healing accounts for self heals.
It is enough to have threat control, a carrier with repair drones and engage in stationary AoE attacks to beat anyone if healing is counted.
Players with less damage per kill(which is great) and more kills(which is even better) would get smaller rewards then a cruiser, or heavy sci with threat control+high healing+beam FAW+gravity well for example.

So that system would be completely broken.
As for AFKers, i mostly see them in all Romulan missions, PvP and rarely STF.
Azure nebula is worst, because it seems that no matter how much you do, or how many scimitars spawn, you always get max 18 rom marks except when rep event is active.
AFKers there really dont need to contribute to get the SAME rewards.
PvP is even worse because doing nothing finishes the game faster then actually fighting which is used by many ppl. Just queue in any fed pvp and see how many ppl actually fight.

Kick for inactivity is only solution for leechers.
Most MP games have it.
-if you need to get AFK you shouldn't complain that you got kicked from game automaticaly.
-i you're "AFK", ie leeching , it is right thing for game to kick you for inactivity.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,234
# 118
01-10-2013, 07:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cletusdeadman View Post
You already have a voting system, it is called warping out. And it works 100% of the time when you have an AFK person on your team.

Listen, I know you want your shiny for completing the STF. I know you want to play the STF on that character and you enjoy doing it. I know you don?t want to let your team down and you want to do your part. So, you are willing to work harder to get your shiny and theirs too. It?s okay, really. There is nothing wrong with that. The only part I don?t understand is why you want Cryptic to do something about it. If you complete the mission for the AFK?er then you support their behavior.
If I were Cryptic, then I wouldn?t do anything either.

For me, no way. I refuse to do for another player what they won?t do for themselves. It doesn?t bother me in the least to leave a team in a position where they can?t complete the STF to stop an AFK?er from exploiting me, game or not. If that toon gets time penalty, so what. I switch characters and keep going.

I know I am going to get flamed for saying this considering how unpopular this is. But I have to leave you with one question, which of us is doing something to stop it- the one completing the mission for them or the one stopping everyone from completing it?

? to thine own self ?
Completely, 100%, agree.

Had an instance a few days ago, in ISE, where a K'Tinga warped in with the rest of the team. As soon as everyone started moving the idiot in the K'tinga cloaked, flew off to the left and stayed there.

It (quickly) became obvious that said dumbarse was A: clicking need on anything that dropped and B: remained cloaked and stationary. The remainder of team agreed that the 'player' in question was an idiot and agreed bail on the mission, leaving Captain Dumbass to sit in the map alone.

As you say, FAR better to, in the worst case, take the penalty over allowing some lazy idiot to benefit from everyone else's work.

STAR TREK BATTLES - HIGH DPS PLAYERS NEED NOT APPY

Last edited by reyan01; 01-10-2013 at 08:57 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 658
# 119
01-10-2013, 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cletusdeadman View Post
You already have a voting system, it is called warping out. And it works 100% of the time when you have an AFK person on your team.

Listen, I know you want your shiny for completing the STF. I know you want to play the STF on that character and you enjoy doing it. I know you don?t want to let your team down and you want to do your part. So, you are willing to work harder to get your shiny and theirs too. It?s okay, really. There is nothing wrong with that. The only part I don?t understand is why you want Cryptic to do something about it. If you complete the mission for the AFK?er then you support their behavior.
If I were Cryptic, then I wouldn?t do anything either.

For me, no way. I refuse to do for another player what they won?t do for themselves. It doesn?t bother me in the least to leave a team in a position where they can?t complete the STF to stop an AFK?er from exploiting me, game or not. If that toon gets time penalty, so what. I switch characters and keep going.

I know I am going to get flamed for saying this considering how unpopular this is. But I have to leave you with one question, which of us is doing something to stop it- the one completing the mission for them or the one stopping everyone from completing it?

? to thine own self ?
Completely, 100%, disagree.

Warping out is not a solution, because the people punished by it are the people who warp out. The AFKer is completely free to queue again, while the people who attempted to "punish" them are banned from doing any event for a full hour. I suppose that might not be a problem for people who have a dozen active toons, but I barely have time to keep up with my 2, and that penalty is simply not something I can afford. I can't be throwing away time like that, and I really can't throw it away on missions doomed by AFKers or greifers, either.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,201
# 120
01-10-2013, 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharxtreme View Post
In one CSE STF yesterday one guy had combat log on and he linked the results of match.
I was in new toon, lvl 50 for 2 days and got 1st place with 3.9 mill damage with 6.5k DPS in common Advanced escort with MKXI weapons amd consoles doing solo kang guard duty in MRRMLL tactic.
BUT i had very low healing.
Other guy in Atrox had 1.5mill damage and 12.5 mill healing which he used on himself with transfer shield strength, repair drones and hazard emitters i presume.

So that formula, damage plus healing would be broken beacuse healing accounts for self heals.
It is enough to have threat control, a carrier with repair drones and engage in stationary AoE attacks to beat anyone if healing is counted.
Players with less damage per kill(which is great) and more kills(which is even better) would get smaller rewards then a cruiser, or heavy sci with threat control+high healing+beam FAW+gravity well for example.

So that system would be completely broken.
As for AFKers, i mostly see them in all Romulan missions, PvP and rarely STF.
Azure nebula is worst, because it seems that no matter how much you do, or how many scimitars spawn, you always get max 18 rom marks except when rep event is active.
AFKers there really dont need to contribute to get the SAME rewards.
PvP is even worse because doing nothing finishes the game faster then actually fighting which is used by many ppl. Just queue in any fed pvp and see how many ppl actually fight.

Kick for inactivity is only solution for leechers.
Most MP games have it.
-if you need to get AFK you shouldn't complain that you got kicked from game automaticaly.
-i you're "AFK", ie leeching , it is right thing for game to kick you for inactivity.
An easy fix for the above situation is to evaluate damage and healing ratio's separately, then add them together in the end for a final average. This still gives both numbers equal weight for determining rewards:

Player's Average Performance = (Player Damage ratio + Player Healing Ratio) / 2

Player Damage Ratio = Player's Damage Total / Match Damage Total

Player Healing Ratio = Player's Healing Total / Match Healing Total

Therefore,


Player's Average Performance = ((Player's Damage Total / Match Damage Total) + (Player's Healing Total / Match Healing Total)) / 2

So if a Player deals 20% of the total damage and 10% of the total healing, then he can expect 15% of the match's total reward pay-out.

I can see the above being a problem if one person is so over-geared and over-skilled above everyone else that he carries the team and gets rewarded well above the rest.

If the scaled rewards option is not wanted, then the formula above and still be used to identify not only AFK'ers, but outright leechers as well. Both will be very hard pressed into getting above 1% without doing anything. I would actually lean closer to 2% as the performance cut-off before flagging someone an outright leecher / AFK'er since each player is supposed to be around 20% in a 5-man match. Those not making the cut-off value get no loot.

Since all of this is automated and updated at real time, AFKer's and Leechers have to keep playing to continue getting loot drops.
Reply

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 05:54 PM.