Player's Moderation: Kick2

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Well most of us do not like the "team kick" as people will still try to abuse it...

Which one? The old one? This is not about the old one. Tell me where this one can be abused and I'll fix it.

[Mr.SV.ENS 738]

If you're only contributing towards kills and not actually making them then your score will be low and so too your average. You'd be a target for the kick. Some would say quite rightly. Others would see you're contributing and working hard and leave you alone.  I know if I was not scoring, I'd probably leave willingly because I'd see myself as a nuisance rather than a help.

 

Instant dismissal could be an option but I'd rather be given a chance to improve before getting kicked.

I mean that you damage every single enemy in their defence for 95% and another teammate finish the kill off, you're still doing a very good job for your team... Thanks to you they can capture. The old system was good enough, if everyone just joins against their own rank there was nothing wrong with it  -_-

[dilsharox 2,395]

u should repost this article of yours in the newspaper section

[dezenho 8]

maybe we must translate this to russian to have feedback that deserves..

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

maybe we must translate this to russian to have feedback that deserves..

Can you translate to russian?

[dezenho 8]

Can you translate to russian?

no i can´t

[Jovanos 21]

None generlissimus want WO5 to join their team, right? That's why this is usefull. Because WO5 in gissimo battle (prob. drug war) don't have much points per minute, so every player can vote him and he get kicked.

[Satans-Rotweiler 45]

In theory I fully support your idea and am in no doubt as to its necessity.  But I would like to see the following changes to game in order to ensure everybody is getting a fair representation of their effort.

1. There can be no material gain from a removal, the only benefit can be freeing up a place for an active player ie : if a player is kicked then their score will be tallied at the end and the gems they would have received be removed from the prize fund. If the player is useless and not contributing then this will make little difference to the pay-out, if it is large enough to cause you annoyance then you probably should not have kicked said player.
2. There are people quite skilled at flipping opponents tanks or putting them out of bounds which receives no credit but are both valid tactics. If you are the last person to shoot a tank before it self destructs or suicides by going off map then you should get the points and also for if you push them off map.
3. There are many times if I use freeze  and hang around my base my score will drop, yet our defense more solid. I usually use the freeze to slow a drugging enemy while a team mate on shaft/rail or rico finish them off. I don’t get any credit for this, score in flag games should be the same as in death match, you get shared points for a kill depending on how much life you took off them.

Good luck with your well thought out and articulate suggestion for cleaning up the game.

[Satans-Rotweiler 45]

No matter how perfect you make a system it will be open to abuse, systems evolve to counter the threats and new threats appear. I think the argument that some people are making is that we should do nothing because it will be abused. To them I would say the current system of no kick is being highly abused by opportunists.

[Satans-Rotweiler 45]

 

 

ignore.

[moarkrabs 6]

I guess people will try to start stealing peoples kills a lot more often to avoid being kicked then,not only that what about defenders of the flag and they have very little to no kills coming there way yet they are doing well defending but somehow getting kicked out due to lack of points.So theres always going to be some flaws no matter what.this can also be abused like how some people will kick others out well...just because they want too.also what if others force you to drug in a game or else they will kick you out? or what if people block strategic positions with mines but get few points. yes this idea could get rid of alot of multing, but what about the people who are not so lucky but are helping the team?

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

1. There can be no material gain from a removal, the only benefit can be freeing up a place for an active player ie : if a player is kicked then their score will be tallied at the end and the gems they would have received be removed from the prize fund. If the player is useless and not contributing then this will make little difference to the pay-out, if it is large enough to cause you annoyance then you probably should not have kicked said player.
2. There are people quite skilled at flipping opponents tanks or putting them out of bounds which receives no credit but are both valid tactics. If you are the last person to shoot a tank before it self destructs or suicides by going off map then you should get the points and also for if you push them off map.
3. There are many times if I use freeze  and hang around my base my score will drop, yet our defense more solid. I usually use the freeze to slow a drugging enemy while a team mate on shaft/rail or rico finish them off. I don’t get any credit for this, score in flag games should be the same as in death match, you get shared points for a kill depending on how much life you took off them.

Good luck with your well thought out and articulate suggestion for cleaning up the game.

Thanks, I like the idea of no material gain for someone being kicked. This is a good suggestion and help minimise abuse. I don't have time to fully respond but will this evening and will think of a way to incorporate it into my first post. Not sure what your 2nd point has to do with this suggestion. With regard to your 3rd point, if you're trying and not scoring much but are proving useful, your teammates would be crazy to vote for you. But even if you do get voted for, you still get an opportunity to stay, move out from the base and go score some points.

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

Thanks, I like the idea of no material gain for someone being kicked. This is a good suggestion and help minimise abuse. I don't have time to fully respond but will this evening and will think of a way to incorporate it into my first post. Not sure what your 2nd point has to do with this suggestion. With regard to your 3rd point, if you're trying and not scoring much but are proving useful, your teammates would be crazy to vote for you. But even if you do get voted for, you still get an opportunity to stay, move out from the base and go score some points.

Do you mean no material gain for the team from kicking someone? I like this idea as well.  

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Do you mean no material gain for the team from kicking someone? I like this idea as well.  

I had a think about this today and although it sounds good, it might put people off voting for saboteurs if they think that their reward will be even lower than it should be. The only time you want the voters not to have gain is when they have abused the kick system for their own benefit. The focus should be there, ie minimise abuse in the first instance and not after.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

I guess people will try to start stealing peoples kills a lot more often to avoid being kicked then,not only that what about defenders of the flag and they have very little to no kills coming there way yet they are doing well defending but somehow getting kicked out due to lack of points.So theres always going to be some flaws no matter what.this can also be abused like how some people will kick others out well...just because they want too.also what if others force you to drug in a game or else they will kick you out? or what if people block strategic positions with mines but get few points. yes this idea could get rid of alot of multing, but what about the people who are not so lucky but are helping the team?

I don't think stealing kills will happen any more than it does currently. You talk as if it will be easy to kick someone. I don't think it will be. The way this is structured makes it extremely difficult to get somebody booted, especially if you have a better score than those voting for you. No system is perfect but this team kick is a million % better than the old one.

[blackopspaul 753]

Yea we need this.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Yea we need this.

Thanks, please support it by giving the first post a +1

[Jovanos 21]

Nice, this would be nice

[Guest Maserati]

wasnt there something about a battle violation mod in v-log episode 5?

 

plus some people aint skilled and then people call them 'mults' they dont deserve bans or getting kicked from the battle..

just cause they aint skillful doesnt mean they need to be kicked...

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

wasnt there something about a battle violation mod in v-log episode 5?

 

plus some people aint skilled and then people call them 'mults' they dont deserve bans or getting kicked from the battle..

just cause they aint skillful doesnt mean they need to be kicked...

There was a lot in vlog5 about a new bunch of violation mods. At the time, I praised tanki in the vlog5 topic. I'm still not seeing any benefit in fact things have gotten much worse since then.

 

Who says anything about "needing" to be kicked. You've voted this suggestion down already. I'm looking for positive feedback, something to reinforce this suggestion to make it flawless as possible. If you don't want it to succeed then I have to ask the question why? What's your problem? Do you like mults and saboteurs or something? Tell me what part of this suggestion warrants a negative vote from someone like you?

[Klape_unbeatable 2]

Hi im Tanki

[Satans-Rotweiler 45]

I had a think about this today and although it sounds good, it might put people off voting for saboteurs if they think that their reward will be even lower than it should be. The only time you want the voters not to have gain is when they have abused the kick system for their own benefit. The focus should be there, ie minimise abuse in the first instance and not after.

Their reward wouldn't be affected if they are voting sincerely. If they are put off voting and the saboteur remains then the saboteur would receive the gems anyway , so they wouldn't be divided out. The vote should only be used if the person is not contributing towards a team victory. Basically it would ensure you are voting based on their performance and not how many crystals you could gain by their removal. If the person is genuinely a mult then their staying jeopardises victory and everyones gems.

[Satans-Rotweiler 45]

 

Just a thought, might ba all crap or might be something of worth in it.

I used the old pic from first page on this.

The top pic is the old system.

I think that you should have the option to vote the person up as well as the option to vote them down. To support them if you think kick is unfair.

The other system is vote them down or don't vote which means only half the people have the power to remove you. not very democratic.

In the above scenario it is a 7 man team, the person cannot vote for themselves so there are 6 possible votes.

For 7 man team we say 3 votes is required to start the timer for a kick so in the second pic the person has received 4 votes so the timer has started. During this time the players have the option to cancel their own vote or others may vote up if the person shows improvement.

Now in the third picture , 4 people have decided to kick the player, 2 have voted to keep so the timer has reset and stopped because there is only a +2 majority in favour.

In the above scenario, 3 unchallenged votes start the timer, 3-1 would not allow a kick, 4-1 would start the timer, 4-2 would not allow kick. As one third of the team feel the player is fulfilling some role worthy of keeping that the other players may not see.

If nobody changes their vote in a non kick scenario then the system would reset votes after a minute or two.

Perhaps if everyone voted down then the kick would be instant, no need for countdown.

Top player cannot be voted for.

I just think it would make it more balanced.

 

 

Note : To the player gbrger I hope you do not mind my using this as example, no reflection on you at all, it is just the only kick picture I had available and I am not skilled enough to make larger alterations.

[AbsoluteAlphaZero 2,027]

I totally agree with you AbsoluteZero, IMO people should have 3 kills (or 30 points) per minute except if that guy is longer then 30 minutes in the battle.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Their reward wouldn't be affected if they are voting sincerely. If they are put off voting and the saboteur remains then the saboteur would receive the gems anyway , so they wouldn't be divided out. The vote should only be used if the person is not contributing towards a team victory. Basically it would ensure you are voting based on their performance and not how many crystals you could gain by their removal. If the person is genuinely a mult then their staying jeopardises victory and everyones gems.

But we could have a case where 4 or 5 people have been kicked in a 5 hour battle. What of the end reward then?

If there is another way around it then I'm all ears. Keep thinking, I appreciate it.