under review Make public the quota of battles a player finished

[von_Cronberg 258]

One major issue of the game is players quitting battles before their end. While apparently legitimate in some instances, like leaving a hours long PRO battle because of need of food, sleep or just a restroom visit, it annoys gameplay in many respects, from the morally despicable aspect of devaluing the efforts of teammates to compromising the working of the otherwise fine MMS.

I do understand that Tanki does not want to outright punish players for abandoning their comrades in a battle, and there are good reasons to not do such punishment. However, there are very good reasons to calculate every player's finishing quota, as well as making it public. I herewith petition Tanki to implement, for every player, a calculation of the quota of finishes among the battles they joined or were assigned to, and to make this information public on the profile page of every player.

• The MMS algorithm could make good use of every player's finishing quota, to work even better for players than it does now.
• If public, this information would both help community disciplining of quitters and creating a sense of pride in being a finisher.
• Optionally, the beneficial effect could be increased by giving some rewards to players proportional to their finishing quota.
• Various violations and abuses in PRO battles are associated with quitting, a known quota would help with fighting these.

[von_Cronberg 258]

As time goes by and this suggestion stays on hold from being published for discussion, I would like to add the thought that a player's finishing quota (which probably could anyway be calculated only ex nunc, but not for the past, for lack of data) probably should not be an account lifetime quota, but the running quota of the last 100 or 1000 battles or the like. This would also add an incentive to be a proper tankist, because everyone would have it in their own hands to significantly improve their quota at any time.

[Maf 32,305]

Under review

Very low chances for this idea. In PRO it wouldn't happen because players should be free to play PRO battles in whichever way they like. If this was 2014, I'd say that it could be added as an additional optional setting for PRO battles (something like a "high stakes" game), but nowadays it's unlikely that any more features will be developed specifically for PRO.

As for MM - those battles are meant for casual players with no commitment, which is why you are always free to leave these battles at any point. Besides, the MM system usually replaces leavers with new players, so it's not a big issue.

Developers did discuss the idea of adding ranked matches, which would work in a similar way as many other games. These matches would be optional, and would probably require some kind of free to join, with higher difficulty and greater rewards. In that case leaving prematurely would be discouraged by the mere fact that just joining such a battle already gives the player a reason to stay.

Although, in general, I do agree with having a W/L ratio available to view somewhere - would be interesting to know.

On 5/21/2020 at 5:16 PM, von_Cronberg said:

this information would both help community disciplining of quitters

You mean... harassment? I don't see how else the community could "discipline" a player based on the information that the player often leaves matches.

On 5/21/2020 at 5:16 PM, von_Cronberg said:

Various violations and abuses in PRO battles are associated with quitting

Please explain this in more detail. How is leaving an unfinished PRO battle equivalent to abuse?

[von_Cronberg 258]

Calculating a quota (and also publishing it and/or also using it for special rewards), that is no coercion as you paint it to be. It still leaves freedom to everyone. Like when the girls in a town talk about which guys hooked up with them and then left them high and dry, that is no infringement on the open society, but rather its improvement. Like when businesses in a town exchange records of who paid back his past debt as scheduled and who did not, that is not an infringement on the market economy, but rather its improvement. Social reputation is an instrument that makes society work and that is nudging human behaviour to the better, for the ultimate benefit of everybody.

The answers to each of your questions can easily be deduced from the general concept of social reputation.

On the second bullet point, by "community disciplining of quitters" I do of course not mean harassment, but the usual mechanics of social reputation. When someone sends me an ingame friendship request, when someone applies to become a member of my clan, and sometimes even when I just consider joining a PRO battle that will probably last very long, I may take a look at the account profiles concerned. For my own respective attitude, an exceptionally high or low finishing quota would have considerable weight as a factor in my personal decisionmaking. And I would take more pride in an exceptionally high finishing quota on my own profile than in high K/D or high efficiency ratio.

I do understand your extreme libertarian worldview, I consider myself a moderate libertarian myself. However, the concept that any human conduct which is not criminal (or in our case, which is not violating the written rules of Tanki) should be by all means shielded from any negative social consequences, this is a vulgar degeneration of the libertarian idea for 10-year-olds. Society, and a game like Tanki, works and works well on the basis of a complex and sophisticated net of social reputation. A world where everyone shall be the authors of their own lives cannot seperate freedom from social responsibility and social consequences of conduct.

Other than you, I am cautiously optimistic that developers might consider this suggestion. Probably motivated not by the desire to promote chivalry in the game, as I would wish, but motivated by the fact that the suggestion would support and reinforce the current development path of the game.

 

9 hours ago, Maf said:

I do agree with having a W/L ratio available to view somewhere - would be interesting to know.

I do not think it would be interesting to know a win-lose-ratio for an account. A "good" win-lose-ratio would in the overwhelming number of cases only suggest that a player habitually deserts their team when it is about to lose. So a win-lose-ratio would, if at all, only make sense in combination with a finishing quota.

 

[von_Cronberg 258]

8 minutes ago, sharifsahaf said:

suppose im in a match outnumbered 8 to 4 and getting wrecked why should i stay anymore

You are aware that the situation of being "outnumbered 8 to 4 and getting wrecked" is a consequence of other teammates of you quitting that battle before, right?

 

10 hours ago, Maf said:

Besides, the MM system usually replaces leavers with new players, so it's not a big issue.

We both know that it is a big issue. A huge share of complaints about the game in this forum concerns exactly this issue, both from the perspective of the abandoned teammates, like exhibit A above, and from the perspective of players who are angry about being assigned to battles in a late stage.

[Maf 32,305]

7 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

We both know that it is a big issue. A huge share of complaints about the game in this forum concerns exactly this issue, both from the perspective of the abandoned teammates, like exhibit A above, and from the perspective of players who are angry about being assigned to battles in a late stage.

Okay, fair enough. But before implementing any kind of penalty/disadvantage for leaving battles, developers must first fix the issues that cause players to leave battles in the first place. This includes: badly designed maps, inability to pick maps or at least see which map/mode you're about to be put in, poor balance, and missions being the main incentive for gameplay, so players leave once a mission is completed.

However, even if these issues get fixed for the most part, I still doubt any leaving penalties will be added to MM. Like I said in the first post - the more likely outcome is a new type of competitive battle being added, where the prizes are higher, and leaving prematurely will impact your position in ratings and potentially reduce your final prize.

[von_Cronberg 258]

Maf, I am not talking about "leaving penalties", I explicitly wrote that in the original suggestion:

On 5/21/2020 at 3:16 PM, von_Cronberg said:

I do understand that Tanki does not want to outright punish players for abandoning their comrades in a battle, and there are good reasons to not do such punishment.

 

All I am talking about here is a little bit of benevolent social nudging.

[sharifsahaf 656]

16 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

You are aware that the situation of being "outnumbered 8 to 4 and getting wrecked" is a consequence of other teammates of you quitting that battle before, right?

not always .sometimes players dont join yet the match is like halfway through .and sometimes the opponents are filled with hordes of buyers making lots of people rage-quit.and btw u didnt address the other issues like power -outrage

[sharifsahaf 656]

2 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

Maf, I am not talking about "leaving penalties", I explicitly wrote that in the original suggestion:

 

All I am talking about here is a little bit of benevolent social nudging.

so just an   indicator ?we should get rewards weekly if we stay and play every match we were in.that would be so much better

[Maf 32,305]

3 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

Maf, I am not talking about "leaving penalties", I explicitly wrote that in the original suggestion:

 

All I am talking about here is a little bit of benevolent social nudging.

I got that, and it's what I meant by "disadvantage". Devs have no intention of making it so that leaving a battle harms the player in any way. But it would be possible to implement if ranked MM is added.

[Viking4s 10,791]

Shaming directly or indirectly player is the last thing Tanki should do. I do not see tanki why TA will do something regarding improving the behaviour of player in pro-battles as it clearly make MM shinner.

However there has been players complaining of being blocked and removed from battle for sabotage, so it looks like in the shadow they have added some kicking bot. No too efficient as the said players were not sabotaging but had connection issues according to them.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

if ranked MM or deserter status penalties from Tanki X comes to Tanki Online. I'm quitting.

[Viking4s 10,791]

5 minutes ago, yellowghetto said:

if ranked MM or deserter status penalties from Tanki X comes to Tanki Online. I'm quitting.

it could be useful in Pro though, you will know if your teammates are loyal or made of opportunists. It is an kind of information that make you decide to join or not a specific team.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

Just now, Viking4s said:

it could be useful in Pro though, you will know if your teamates are loyal or made of made of opportunists.

agreed. I'm talking about IF a ranked MM mode replaced current MM and deserter status applied to it, then I'd be extremely upset. 

[Viking4s 10,791]

Have some tags or badges like: Loyal, neutral or opportunist.

Opportunist is not as bad as deserters but bear the same idea. Maybe add Mercenaries too 

[von_Cronberg 258]

10 minutes ago, Viking4s said:

Shaming directly or indirectly player is the last thing Tanki should do.

A published finishing quota would be no more "shaming" than the existing personally and socially useful statistical information on the account profiles, like K/D ratio, efficiency ratio, or any other statistical information on the account profiles. It would be gentle nudging, like all the other statistical information is.

[Viking4s 10,791]

7 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

A published finishing quota would be no more "shaming" than the existing personally and socially useful statistical information on the account profiles, like K/D ratio, efficiency ratio, or any other statistical information on the account profiles. It would be gentle nudging, like all the other statistical information is.

It would be interpreted as information for shaming. I guess it would be about the right wording. When you see the chat in battle of player fighting verbally over trial words, if this quota is badly implemented it would be source of further unnecessary fight.

[3dL 454]

Great idea, but you can explain more like number additions, etc.

[wolverine848 13,097]

On 5/25/2020 at 6:11 AM, von_Cronberg said:

A published finishing quota would be no more "shaming" than the existing personally and socially useful statistical information on the account profiles, like K/D ratio, efficiency ratio, or any other statistical information on the account profiles. It would be gentle nudging, like all the other statistical information is.

Then what is the point of including these statistics at all?  Who will use them and how will they be used?  K/D ratio? You think that's a valid statistic for naything besides TDM?

Which is worse - leaving a battle you have no intention of playing in, and allowing another player to join?  Or doing nothing almost entire battle and taking up a slot on a team that someone else might be better suited to fill?  Cuz I've had a bunch of the latter on my teams and frankly I'd rather have that person leave to be replaced by someone who will actually play.

Be honest - you want the stats to be able to judge players.  Players that don't have the same playing habbits you have.

[Gauss-Hornet 489]

Why not fix MM instead so people don't leave battles?

[yellowghetto 3,206]

On 5/28/2020 at 1:42 PM, At_Shin said:

I do not think a ranked battle system will replace the current MMS. I think it will become available for high and mid  ranked players as an extra game mode. 

an EXTRA game mode? Ranked mode for Legend players? 

[von_Cronberg 258]

I just read in another thread about anger of players due to some abusing the TJR mode in MMS battles for boosting their K/D ratio, by quitting battles they are assigned to until they start as Juggernaut, and then in case they are about to be destructed quit that battle, too. This abuse would also lose its charm for the perpetrators, if an abysmal finishing quota would taint the stellar K/D ratio next to it on the profil page.

[Gauss-Hornet 489]

I guess most people leave battles for justified reasons (after all, we all are here to have fun, and facing a complete blow-out isn't considered fun by many people). So even if a system is enacted to punish real quitters that quit to get into favourable one-sided battles, it will also punish others who leave due to valid reasons like map size not being suitable to the equipment they use (if they don't have any other combo), joining battles with few minutes left, their team lagging far behind in the battle objective or getting hopelessly massacred, etc.

[wolverine848 13,097]

1 hour ago, Gauss-Hornet said:

it will also punish others who leave due to valid reasons like map size not being suitable to the equipment they use (if they don't have any other combo)

My alt account at Marshal rank equipped hornet-gauss to get some kills in TDM for a mission.

MM placed me in... wait for it.... wait for it... Archipalego.  Bleccchhh.  Can't believe that map is used for TDM.

Instead of exiting or wasting time in garage I stuck it out.  Needless to say my K/D ratio suffered.  And I was the only Marshal - the rest were Legends.  Oh Snap!

I think in this case my team would have welcomed me exiting - but - you know... that's bad form and all.  amirite?