Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 887
# 21
02-26-2013, 08:59 AM
I am not in favor of a vote-to-kick feature. Why? People in PUG's will end up kicking low-DPS characters like Sci Captains flying Sci Vessels. The only players anyone will ever want to play with are Tacscorts. Not a tacscort? Votekicked.
Career Officer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,802
# 22
02-26-2013, 09:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
The tracking will work both ways too. If your being voted out an inordinate amount then system flags are raised as well, perhaps locking you out for a period of time.
You're opening up the system to allow for groups of griefers to kick anyone who is low DPS or isn't built the way they want. Just about any option you come up with is exploitable.

Quote:
I agree with your 'best defence' suggestion, but thats not an option open to everyone.
What is preventing anyone from joining a fleet or teaming with friends they know?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecosmic1 View Post
Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,325
# 23
02-26-2013, 09:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspartan1 View Post
I had three STFs PUGs today where people went AFK. In principle I'm against such things as suggested in the OP as they tend to be popularity tools. With that said, if Cryptic can work something out where the person being voted on has not been in combat at least 75% as the average of other players (discounting respawn time) - I'm all for it damn it!
To be honest, I was afk in an eSTF for several minutes once. I changed my ship and forget to put the skills on the skillbars. You can imagine the mess it was. So I took several minutes to put them in order, and then joined my team.

So far, I haven't seen any leechers in STF, maybe I'm lucky.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,483
# 24
02-26-2013, 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by valoreah View Post
You're opening up the system to allow for groups of griefers to kick anyone who is low DPS or isn't built the way they want. Just about any option you come up with is exploitable.
Are you FOR people not having a choice about who they run content with?

If your genuinely not meeting the group's consensus of adequate participation then that group majority should have the right to choose not to carry you/spend time with you.

Forcing other people to play with you is a rather repugnant notion.

Quote:
What is preventing anyone from joining a fleet or teaming with friends they know?
What if they don't have friends they know?
What if they don't want to participate in the fleet system?
What if their gametime doesn't coincide with their friends/fleet?
nynik | Join Date: Dec 2009
<Dev> Oaks@dstahl: *checks for CBS listening devices in the office*
Career Officer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,802
# 25
02-26-2013, 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
Are you FOR people not having a choice about who they run content with?
You do have a choice who you run content with. Run it with friends or fleetmates or by yourself if you can. Nothing is preventing that.

Quote:
If your genuinely not meeting the group's consensus of adequate participation then that group majority should have the right to choose not to carry you/spend time with you.

I don't think you're understanding what has been suggested in the replies to your comments. What you are asking for creates the situation where any random group can kick people out for any reason, not just AFK griefers. Some examples of non-AFK griefers;

Not piloting an escort? Kick.
No MKXII gear? Kick.
Science ship or Cruiser without any heals? Kick.
Don't like your ship name? Kick.

Quote:
What if they don't have friends they know?
Try to make new ones?

Quote:
What if they don't want to participate in the fleet system?
What if their gametime doesn't coincide with their friends/fleet?
Participation in a fleet isn't a requirement to run teamed content. If you don't want to be in a fleet, you don't have to. Also, none of these have anything to do with the game mechanics being broken. These are all correctable by you as the player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecosmic1 View Post
Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 44
# 26
02-26-2013, 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
What if they don't have friends they know?
If you have problems making friends, then you've got problems beyond STO.

Quote:
What if they don't want to participate in the fleet system?
There's nothing stopping you from starting up a fleet without having to participate in the fleet system. Heck, set up your own private channel if you want.

Quote:
What if their gametime doesn't coincide with their friends/fleet?
See above: Make more friends.

And what's to prevent the rest of us from voting to kick you from every PUG we catch you on?
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,495
# 27
02-26-2013, 10:41 AM
Both vote kick and metrics based rewards are a bad idea for this game.

For reasons mentioned by many Vote Kick will be abuse and there's already a AFKer grief avoidance system by means of the queue system.

The current ways the game has of tracking basics is far behind the types of effective gameplay.
  • There is no tracking of shield damage either by weapon damage or Sci Shield debuffs. It's only hull damage that's tracked.
  • Many Sci Debuff/CC abilities won't show up at all, but can be used effectively.
  • Resist boosts reduce the need for repairs. This allows for more effective uses of actually repairs. But, someone tossing around resist boosts won't get recognized.
  • People who use not only resist buff but defensive debuffs on targets will increase team damage, but get no credit for it, eg APD APB FOMM Sensor Scan etc.
  • Combined w/Votekick scoreboard chasers will boot those doing better than themselves in order to get better gear.
  • In addition to gear chasers griefers will boot non-"Blue" pugmates just before finish for lolz.
  • It will encourage specific builds that chase the scoreboard vs builds that accomplish team goals more effectively or are just different and fun.

Last edited by p2wsucks; 02-26-2013 at 10:43 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,483
# 28
02-26-2013, 11:03 AM
I made those "What if..." points about friends and being in a fleet (or your playtime not coinciding with both) because if the alternative is having to subject yourself to afk prone pugs in order to play, then that isn't a better choice. We should be looking for a better solution.

valoreah I do understand the point your making about griefer teams. But I've addressed that already as being countered by conditions in the voting mechanic. Restrictions on allowing people who vote too 'liberally', especially those of the same fleet (for example), will prevent continued abuse against newcomers. I'm not saying its abuse-proof. I am saying that on the whole the community (which is not made up of a majority of griefer teams) can police itself better than rudimentary participation checks which negatively effect active participants who do not have a particular gamestyle.


Quote:
Originally Posted by p2wsucks View Post
Both vote kick and metrics based rewards are a bad idea for this game.

For reasons mentioned by many Vote Kick will be abuse and there's already a AFKer grief avoidance system by means of the queue system.

The current ways the game has of tracking basics is far behind the types of effective gameplay....
I don't agree that its a bad idea. Your point on kicking before final reward could be addressed by removing the ability to initiate votes during and shortly after combat (for example, until rolls are completed).

However, you have made excellent points as far as showing what is and is not tracked (at least by way of the current reward system). If Cryptic announce a swathe of measures for PVE and PVP group content which account for and therefore reward significantly higher for those aspects of play, then that would be a step towards having a better solution, which is all I want to see.
nynik | Join Date: Dec 2009
<Dev> Oaks@dstahl: *checks for CBS listening devices in the office*
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,495
# 29
02-26-2013, 11:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik View Post
I made those "What if..." points about friends and being in a fleet (or your playtime not coinciding with both) because if the alternative is having to subject yourself to afk prone pugs in order to play, then that isn't a better choice. We should be looking for a better solution.

valoreah I do understand the point your making about griefer teams. But I've addressed that already as being countered by conditions in the voting mechanic. Restrictions on allowing people who vote too 'liberally', especially those of the same fleet (for example), will prevent continued abuse against newcomers. I'm not saying its abuse-proof. I am saying that on the whole the community (which is not made up of a majority of griefer teams) can police itself better than rudimentary participation checks which negatively effect active participants who do not have a particular gamestyle.




I don't agree that its a bad idea. Your point on kicking before final reward could be addressed by removing the ability to initiate votes during and shortly after combat (for example, until rolls are completed).

However, you have made excellent points as far as showing what is and is not tracked (at least by way of the current reward system). If Cryptic announce a swathe of measures for PVE and PVP group content which account for and therefore reward significantly higher for those aspects of play, then that would be a step towards having a better solution, which is all I want to see.
There are PvP and PvE channels that players can join/create to form private matches to avoid griefing (AFKer or otherwise).

You underestimate Bots, those who would get lolz from kicking, to wanna-be-know-it-alls who would abuse Votekick.

They cannot create a system based on the current abilities to track the effectiveness of playstyles.

For example, a Tractor Beam on an alpha run maybe trackable if you account for the xtra damage done by oneself or teammates. But, how would you track damage avoidance by pinning and escorts DHCs away from an allied target or oneself? Or would you just give benefits to all TB usage regardless of how effective it actually is?

Spike damage dealer (in PvP escpecially) may have low overall damage scores, but they can be responsible for significant kills that break a teams defense. On the otherhand someone spamming CVS and plasma and ewp can rack up damage scores that may or maynot have been particularly usefull pressure damage.

Using CPB to decloak a target w/no shields has it's uses, using CPB on a target w/full shield is usually the least effective time to use it.

Tossing a Hazzard Emmitters on someone w/95% hull and full shields taking light plasma burn damage is basically useless but will show up as repairs. Letting a Tac get very low hull before using HE, so the Tac can get max benefit from GDF isn't.

No logs will show these kind of differences. The only metric for PvP should be did the team achieve victory or not.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 734
# 30
02-26-2013, 11:48 AM
Here's an idea that simple in its presentation (but I'm not a programmer so the database issues could be non-trivial):

Have a blacklist of users you do not want to be in queues with. When you queue up for a pug, it will wait until you can get a team with no one on your blacklist. Users may get something like this:
* If you use the system responsibly, you'll be teamed up with some AFKers initially. You'll blacklist them and never join a match with them again. Your future queues may be with some newbies, but they'll at least be trying their best. Etc etc.
* If you're an AFKer who has been blacklisted by a number of people, you may have to wait a long time for a pug.
* If you blacklist everyone who uses a ship design you don't like or something extremely picky, you may have to wait a long time for a pug.

(for those who were wondering, you currently do queue up with people on your ignore list)
Fleet holding costs | Accolade Points: 18745 (Fed Engineer), 16400 (KDF Tactical)
Subscribe to Accolade thread | Join channel Accolades | Idea: Mail Revamp
New on STOwiki: Spire projects | STO Timeline | Fed-KDF Disparity | upcoming content
Fed Fleet: Section 31 (level 20) | KDF Fleet: Klingon Intelligence (level 20)
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 01:20 PM.