Player's Moderation: Kick2

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

I agree with @RustyNail and if I understand @kayitsiz correctly, part of his complaint as well. The real problem is the fact that Tanki has created a game that is too difficult for new players and non-buying high ranks. The demand for crystals is too great. In my alternate account which is First Sergeant, I have reached a point where it is very difficult to compete. Skill is not enough. Even with skill it is very hard to compete against buyers. There are many very unskilled, over powered players that can easily win most of the battles because of better equipment and supplies. I can only imagine what it must be like for new inexperienced, non-buying players. I'm surprised any stay at all.

 

Tanki needs to re-work the whole in game economic system and hopefully they will do that for Unity.  This is a quote from the Alternativa platform website.  >>> LINK <<<

 

 

 

 We believe that people and their happiness are above all. Money is a smaller matter and is a consequence of a user's positive gaming experience. Five years ago we have released a game with a single currency and a fair free-to-play balance, despite the trends of paid content and intrusive monetization.

 

Lets try and hold them to this statement.

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

Also:

A pro pass option prevents friends entering the same battle

A pro pass option prevents entering the battle after 1/3 of the time.

Friends who removed friendship shouldn't be able to be friend again.

Incorrect. If you use a PRO pass you can turn auto balance off so all your friends could join the same team. I'm suggesting that people that are on your friends list would not be able to join the opposite team. It's not perfect but would help cut down on a big part of the problem.  Most players don't like to join against their friends anyway. Unless they want to sabotage the other team to help their friend.

[kayitsiz 621]

Incorrect. If you use a PRO pass you can turn auto balance off so all your friends could join the same team. I'm suggesting that people that are on your friends list would not be able to join the opposite team. It's not perfect but would help cut down on a big part of the problem.  Most players don't like to join against their friends anyway. Unless they want to sabotage the other team to help their friend.

They are options which also could prevent players playing as a clan if the creator doesn't want.

So, we can prevent raids and clans if we want.

As I said, optional  ^_^, we can prefer your way.

 

Also, I want to add what you say.

So, to solve the problem about crystals, we should add more thing to buy, then make every of them cheaper and let weaker players to buy at least one correcly.

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

The advantage that is given to a buyer should not be one that allows them to completely over power non-buying players in battle. There are many Generalissimo that have basically bought their rank. They still have little skill but are too difficult to play against. The ability to buy faster ranking and kits is not "fair" to other players.

 

I understand that money needs to be made but they could offer other perks to being a buyer other than such huge advantage on the battle field. Things like custom paints, special flags, banners etc. Why don't they offer the Tanki Online Store to other parts of the world? I do see they are working a new version of the store so maybe they will be. Time will tell.

 

My point is that Tanki created this whole problem, now hopefully they take the time to make it right with the Unity version. 

[kayitsiz 621]

The advantage that is given to a buyer should not be one that allows them to completely over power non-buying players in battle. There are many Generalissimo that have basically bought their rank. They still have little skill but are too difficult to play against. The ability to buy faster ranking and kits is not "fair" to other players.

 

I understand that money needs to be made but they could offer other perks to being a buyer other than such huge advantage on the battle field. Things like custom paints, special flags, banners etc. Why don't they offer the Tanki Online Store to other parts of the world? I do see they are working a new version of the store so maybe they will be. Time will tell.

 

My point is that Tanki created this whole problem, now hopefully they take the time to make it right with the Unity version. 

Then, to fight against mults and other cheats, we should make the game more easier and wider, instead of thinking cheats itself first.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Incorrect. If you use a PRO pass you can turn auto balance off so all your friends could join the same team

He means mults.

[xXx.RazoR.xXx 543]

well,nothing we write or suggest here will never ever make them to even consider honest ideas of improving..this will be my last ever post in this forum (726th),or untill they make some weapon against mults..had enough of this..I'm even close to leave the game..closer then ever..good luck to all of you who support any system (like this one) which would improve gameplay..hope I haven't insulted or offended no one here..see you guys,hopefully :) it would mean that devs finnaly made progress in "killing" mults :)

 

over and out

 

Andrija

[kayitsiz 621]

well,nothing we write or suggest here will never ever make them to even consider honest ideas of improving..this will be my last ever post in this forum (726th),or untill they make some weapon against mults..had enough of this..I'm even close to leave the game..closer then ever..good luck to all of you who support any system (like this one) which would improve gameplay..hope I haven't insulted or offended no one here..see you guys,hopefully :) it would mean that devs finnaly made progress in "killing" mults :)

 

over and out

 

Andrija

They did: daily missions.

Mults will be used as power-leveling and we will face less mults.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

They did: daily missions.

Mults will be used as power-leveling and we will face less mults.

But mult-like players are everywhere. Players just looking for supplies or just in there to get xp at their leisure without any due consideration for players who are battling for the win. Because you are a cheat, mult, power leveler etc... you will never see why honest players get upset.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

 

over and out

 

Andrija

Thanks for supporting...

Good luck.

[kayitsiz 621]

But mult-like players are everywhere. Players just looking for supplies or just in there to get xp at their leisure without any due consideration for players who are battling for the win. Because you are a cheat, mult, power leveler etc... you will never see why honest players get upset.

No one is honest because this is a game. I would explain this with ways but you aşready know.  -_-

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

Well I have now crossed over to the dark side.  If you can't beat em, join em.

 

I found an easy why to "be 1st in 3 battles"  Play 1 v 1  get the first kill and then hide in the garage until the end. Easy

 

I have given up trying to play team type battles. It is pointless. I've started to play DM where I can be as selfish as I like.  Nice job Tanki, you managed to turn one of your most honest players into a dishonest one like all the rest.     

 

 

That's assuming I even bother to play. 1 hour in the last week. LOL

[kayitsiz 621]

Well I have now crossed over to the dark side.  If you can't beat em, join em.

 

I found an easy why to "be 1st in 3 battles"  Play 1 v 1  get the first kill and then hide in the garage until the end. Easy

 

I have given up trying to play team type battles. It is pointless. I've started to play DM where I can be as selfish as I like.  Nice job Tanki, you managed to turn one of your most honest players into a dishonest one like all the rest.     

 

 

That's assuming I even bother to play. 1 hour in the last week. LOL

Welcome to my side, rookie!  :lol:

You will learn how to survive without help, and manage your own destiny! You won't blame anyone anymıre, you will just face how good are you!  :rolleyes:  I have a guide for you!

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=268409&hl=

 

Good luck!

[T.O.T.A.L.W.A.R 581]

 If you can't beat em, join em.

Welcome to my side, rookie!  :lol:

[RustyNail 1,538]

I gave a kick on the butt to Emperor when he sweetly proposed that I sould join the dark side. :D  Now I go by my rules..

I enter a battle and face a spoiled bratt that drugs like hell? If I can beat him I stay. If not, I leave.

Second battle with a drugger and I 'm off the game, untill next day.

Seriously reduced my logging time and restored my mental health.  :D

[dfoofnik 341]

You know,, I re-read this topic and it seems like you just want to gang up on the weaker players. Now I personally do not appreciate some noobs (or even Gizmos) trolling, not playing, or sabotaging. But where do we come off saying "you're too weak to be in our battle"...?

I have had games where I was the ranking, strongest player.

I have had games when I was the weakest player. But KICKING A PLAYER OUT in the *HOPE* of getting a stronger one is elitism. They are players like everyone else. Sometimes players help us win, sometimes players make us lose. Sometimes powerful players don't use common sense, and cause you to lose a battle. Sometimes they don't care.

Does the fact that someone has purchased "superior equipment" mean they have a right to kick others off their team???

How do you know if a certain player might be doing a great job wounding, just not killing enemies??? We don't count non-simultaneous damage. Or perhaps his skill is evading, causing enemies to have to hunt him down instead of shooting his teammates???

 

If we're going to have random teams, you can't have people voting off real players. Inactive mults, trolls, and saboteurs are usually obvious, and we've had no luck getting rid of them. Having other players decide someone is not good enough to play with them is not a solution.

Join a clan and battle there if you want to pick your own teams.

[kayitsiz 621]

You know,, I re-read this topic and it seems like you just want to gang up on the weaker players. Now I personally do not appreciate some noobs (or even Gizmos) trolling, not playing, or sabotaging. But where do we come off saying "you're too weak to be in our battle"...?

I have had games where I was the ranking, strongest player.

I have had games when I was the weakest player. But KICKING A PLAYER OUT in the *HOPE* of getting a stronger one is elitism. They are players like everyone else. Sometimes players help us win, sometimes players make us lose. Sometimes powerful players don't use common sense, and cause you to lose a battle. Sometimes they don't care.

Does the fact that someone has purchased "superior equipment" mean they have a right to kick others off their team???

How do you know if a certain player might be doing a great job wounding, just not killing enemies??? We don't count non-simultaneous damage. Or perhaps his skill is evading, causing enemies to have to hunt him down instead of shooting his teammates???

 

If we're going to have random teams, you can't have people voting off real players. Mults, trolls, and saboteurs are usually obvious, and we've had no luck getting rid of them. Having other players decide someone is not good enough to play with them is not a solution.

Join a clan and battle there if you want to pick your own teams.

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

You know,, I re-read this topic and it seems like you just want to gang up on the weaker players.

No, no & no!

 

It's not about voting off weak players. Weak or below average players are allowed under this system. Do you understand what 55% of the average means? It's the one that are exhibiting mult-like behaviour that can be voted for.  I you're the main reason why your side is losing, (or why the other side is gaining ground), then I say leave or be pushed and go find a battle that is more suited to your skill and equipment levels.

 

Scenario: 9 players have been in a battle for 10 minutes and have all scored 200pts each. This means their average score is 200pts and their average work-rate is 20 points per minute (ppm for short). 55% of these values is 110pts and 11ppm respectively. Let’s say you have joined the battle a little late and have been there for 8 minutes and have amassed 100pts. Because you have scored less than 110pts, you could get a maximum 4½ kick-votes against your name from the other 9 players. However, your work-rate will save you because that works out to 12.5 ppm. Therefore you cannot receive the 5 full votes necessary to put you on probation. Remember, you are only truly at risk of being kicked when both your score and your work-rate drops out of the safe zones.

 

 

Above scenario:

 

 

[kayitsiz 621]

No, no & no!

 

It's not about voting off weak players. Weak or below average players are allowed under this system. Do you understand what 55% of the average means? It's the one that are exhibiting mult-like behaviour that can be voted for.  I you're the main reason why your side is losing, (or why the other side is gaining ground), then I say leave or be pushed and go find a battle that is more suited to your skill and equipment levels.

 

So,

In this situation, can I kick everyone on my team?! Because I really wanted...

Would this system help me against that amount of mults? Believe me, everyone in this battle was mults, unless me and someone have zero points. Alsoi they were probably underequipped because I don't remeber any good equipped teammate at the end of the battle unless maybe 1 or 2 players...

 

 

You may think that they were full of my friends which worked together with me to show pretty impossible battle scenario to post there... 

If I were that strong, I wouldn't care any single crystals...  :unsure:

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

So,

 

In this situation, can I kick everyone on my team?! Because I really wanted...

Would this system help me against that amount of mults? Believe me, everyone in this battle was mults, unless me and someone have zero points. Alsoi they were probably underequipped because I don't remeber any good equipped teammate at the end of the battle unless maybe 1 or 2 players...

 

Not by normal voting simply because there were so many useless players there. But the bolt-on System Vote would help you kick some of them.

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

So,In this situation, can I kick everyone on my team?! Because I really wanted...

No, not everyone. We will use the numbers from that battle to illustrate how effective it really is. We will post something soon.

[kayitsiz 621]

Actually, ıf we consider that new daily mission has made the game easier to gain some crystals, and of course now they can power-level maybe we are ready to put the "hookworm" to the body! :)

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=217642&p=4796546  :D

Mults dropped I think, or at least they are less annoying.  :)  Now I just consider them as an hardness If I don't play for crystals.  :)

 

 

Daily missions are the best solution against mults, also works like an "insurance"  ^_^

[PuncherTank 37]

Well, it's time for me to punch in!

I agree that there must be an efficient system to deal with trolls (like me :D) in the game! The problem with automated systems is that there will always be ways to abuse it.

The presumption that players with a high Score and/or a high Work Rate are good ones while those with a Score or a Work Rate significantly below average are bad ones isn't necessarily true.

I'll give you two examples in CTF mode where the suggested system will fail:

Example 1: A defender who places mines around the flag and then goes to hide in a safe place may have a Score and a Work Rate way below team average. This player is not looking for any significant reward, except for the enjoyment of winning. This kind of player would be doing an important role in keeping enemies from reaching the flag, however your system would see this as a bad player and may put him in a vulnerable position where he can get kicked out by his unappreciative teammates.

Example 2: On the other hand, a sniper (shaft or railgun) who camps in a remote and safe place to shoot enemies may have a very high Score and Work Rate. However, this player is only working to advance his scores and not really helping his teammates guard their base or get the enemy flag. Although your system would see this as a good player, he's in fact not, and he may be one of the causes of his team's loss. Actually, an isida with poor scores may be more helpful to the team than this top scorer.

The suggested system in its current form may work fine in TDM mode where everyone is expected to have high scores, but it will fail in many scenarios in CTF and CP modes where winning is more than just about how high your teammates' scores are.

So, I'd like to suggest the addition of other factors in the formula for CTF mode. First, let's define the following:

Capture Score (CS): The number of times the player has captured the enemy flag. All players who carried the captured flag will get a point regardless of who did the capture.

Thwart Score (TS): The number of times the player has destroyed an enemy tank holding the team's flag.

Return Score (RS): The number of times the player has returned the team's flag.

Average Capture Ratio (ACR): The number of flags captured by "teammates that are currently in the match" divided by the current number of teammates.

Average Thwart Ratio (ATR): The number of times an enemy tank holding the team's flag has been destroyed by the current teammates divided by the current number of teammates.

Average Return Ratio (ARR): The number of times the team's flag has been returned by the currently playing teammates divided by the current number of teammates.

Safe Capture Score (SCS): ACR.

Safe Thwart Score (STS): 0.5 x ATR.

Safe Return Score (SRS): 0.5 x ARR.

Notes:

 

1. For SCS, STS and SRS the values should be rounded to the nearest integer if the value is above 1.

 

2. If the value of SCS, STS or SRS is below 1 it should be rounded as follows:

• SCS: Rounded to the nearest integer (below 0.5 becomes 0 | 0.5 and above becomes 1).
• STS and SRS: Rounded to 0 (this will give players some time to get in action).

Now we can have a revised formula for CTF mode where in order to be safe from voting you must satisfy the following conditions:

A. Satisfy Score and Work Rate requirements, AND:
B. Have a CS >= SCS OR TS >= STS OR RS >= SRS.

But, what about the fellow in Example 1? This still won't be good for him as he may come short on condition A above. Despite having low Scores and Work Rates these kind of "guardians" usually have exceptionally high D/L ratios.

So, it may be safe to assume that a player with a D/L ratio above 3 and who is helping his teammates defend the base by thwarting attackers and returning flags would be a good player and should be safe from voting REGARDLESS of his Score and Work Rate.

Finally, the formula for CTF mode becomes as follows:

In order to be safe from voting a player must satisfy the following:

A. Satisfy Score and Work Rate requirements, AND:
B. Have a CS >= SCS OR TS >= STS OR RS >= SRS.

OR:

A. Have a D/L ratio of 3 or above, AND:
B. Have a CS >= SCS OR TS >= STS OR RS >= SRS.

Now, for CP mode the formula must also incorporate captures as a requirement to be safe from voting. I've been in CP battles with some high scoring railgunners who camp behind buildings and never help their team capture points even when they're losing! I'll leave it for you to figure out a formula for CP mode!

Don't feel out of sorts if you didn't get it, I don't get it myself! :lol:

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

Example 1: A defender who places mines around the flag and then goes to hide in a safe place may have a Score and a Work Rate way below team average. This player is not looking for any significant reward, except for the enjoyment of winning. This kind of player would be doing an important role in keeping enemies from reaching the flag, however your system would see this as a bad player and may put him in a vulnerable position where he can get kicked out by his unappreciative teammates.

So what happens to the attackers? Are they not getting destroyed? Does the mine layer not earn points? Does he not have a turret? In fact, the mine layer around the flag has much more opportunity to score more heavily than most. Not only does he get attackers, he gets the benefit of a bonus for destroying flag holders. This doesn't wash. Sorry.

 

 

Example 2: On the other hand, a sniper (shaft or railgun) who camps in a remote and safe place to shoot enemies may have a very high Score and Work Rate. However, this player is only working to advance his scores and not really helping his teammates guard their base or get the enemy flag. Although your system would see this as a good player, he's in fact not, and he may be one of the causes of his team's loss. Actually, an isida with poor scores may be more helpful to the team than this top scorer.

The shaft that is selfish is at least playing the game and should be left alone. This kick2 is not to weed out those who are contributing. It's to weed out those who are not so you're clearly overthinking this. You're finding imaginary problems that don't need fixing.

 

An isida with poor scores? No, won't have that. The isida gets the best of both worlds. Granted the isida can have a poor d/l but luckily for him, kick2 doesn't touch d/l's. You're looking for imaginary problems again. If an isida is well below average in terms of score and in terms of work rate then he deserves no mercy from those actually trying to win the battle.

 

As for your suggestion, it's far too complicated and difficult to monitor, plus it would not protect below average players whereas kick2 does. It also seems to have many holes in it. Please delete it from here and suggest it elsewhere and discuss it on your own topic.

[PuncherTank 37]

You're looking for imaginary problems again.

I'm not imagining things! You seem to be looking at things from a narrow perspective without considering all possible scenarios. I've been in many battles where your suggested system would fail, i.e. it would allow honest and essential players to be voted out while granting safety to some selfish "top scorers". It's not in EVERY battle that defenders get many attackers to kill, especially on large maps where they may not see a single enemy tank in 5 minutes, and at the same time they cannot take the risk of attacking and leaving the base uncovered.

 

Also, a camping shaft who does not help his team capture/return flags would be better off playing TDM! CTF is not about destroying enemy tanks and getting high scores for that. I've lost many CTF battles where we had campers who never minded defending the flag or attacking for the enemy flag. Such players would be doing more harm than good to their team despite their high scores. I'd actually rather play with weak players who try to defend or capture than "top scorers" who only camp and mind their own business. Again, you can do that in TDM or DM, but not in CTF.

 

 

 Please delete it from here and suggest it elsewhere and discuss it on your own topic.

I would have if I knew you were going to act childishly!