valid Kicking mults from battles

[Cor7y 13,862]

I'm sure we all are sick of coming across mults - i.e players that hinder team performance and cause you to lose the match - in our games. A typical example would be a Wasp Shaft who can't rotate his turret camping in Control points mode, or a Legend player with 4k G/S scoring 58 points with a K/D of 0.09 in a 15 minute game.

 

So, I propose a simple solution to this: Kick people from battles if they don't get a certain score / time limit. 

For example, it could be getting atleast 100 points every 5 minutes in Control points mode, lf you fail to complete this, you automatically get booted from the map as the system detects you're a hinderance to your team and a shame to the game.\

 

Now, some people might call this idea a tad harsh, but consider this: "Do you really want to be on the same team as someone who can't even score 100 points in 5 minutes in Control points mode? Is it not obvious that the player is a mult?"

[Spy 14,741]

Valid

Similar idea: Pro Battle option: auto-kick players with low EXP/time ratio

[LambSauce 1,891]

If this were implemented the MM system would start placing players in already started battles to try to fill the gaps, thereby defeating the purpose of the pre-battle wait period.

Also, I doubt anyone likes being placed in a battle that’s been going on for more than a couple minutes.

Edited February 22, 2022 by LambSauce
Grammar

[Debt-Collector 1,617]

5 hours ago, Cor7y said:

So, I propose a simple solution to this: Kick people from battles if they don't get a certain score / time limit. 

Does this pertain to when a player joins at any time due to auto-fill?  Or is it when it starts the match? Or both.

[Dopamine 2,161]

27 minutes ago, MysticBlood said:

Does this pertain to when a player joins at any time due to auto-fill?  Or is it when it starts the match? Or both.

I could imagine it working like the inactivity timer (although less obtrusive of course). You would get a warning that you need to gain at x more points in x min or you will be kicked out.

 

Edited February 22, 2022 by frederik123456

[tank7 320]

Actually (if I remember rightly) there was a time when a similar idea was there when players could report a tanker for multing (through voting system like among us). However what happened was people started kicking the top players or genuine guys from battles to get more crystals which eventually made devs remove this feature. Hence the only way this can be done is by system without any player interference .But most players dislike these kind of AI related changes (MM update being the most controversial one).Your idea is good but difficult to implement , maybe that's why this is still an issue even now.

[wolverine848 13,097]

5 hours ago, Cor7y said:

I'm sure we all are sick of coming across mults - i.e players that hinder team performance and cause you to lose the match - in our games. A typical example would be a Wasp Shaft who can't rotate his turret camping in Control points mode, or a Legend player with 4k G/S scoring 58 points with a K/D of 0.09 in a 15 minute game.

 

So, I propose a simple solution to this: Kick people from battles if they don't get a certain score / time limit. 

For example, it could be getting atleast 100 points every 5 minutes in Control points mode, lf you fail to complete this, you automatically get booted from the map as the system detects you're a hinderance to your team and a shame to the game.\

 

Now, some people might call this idea a tad harsh, but consider this: "Do you really want to be on the same team as someone who can't even score 100 points in 5 minutes in Control points mode? Is it not obvious that the player is a mult?"

Teams that are getting dominated/spawn-killed could have plenty of players not meeting that threshold.

[Dopamine 2,161]

2 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Teams that are getting dominated/spawn-killed could have plenty of players not meeting that threshold.

Such battles are doomed to early end anyway + if the time limit is like 5min, the battle would be already over before the limit sets in.

[wolverine848 13,097]

14 minutes ago, frederik123456 said:

Such battles are doomed to early end anyway + if the time limit is like 5min, the battle would be already over before the limit sets in.

Not true.

Many of the battles are partial domination, but not 100% over.

I've been in many battles where one team's players are far short of the 300 score (100/5 minutes) requires.  So what ya gonna do? Kick out all those players who are trying to complete a mission?

That just promotes everyone leaving a battle as soon as their side starts losing.  Once the first couple tanks leave you will struggle to score.  Might as well leave immediately since you're gonna get booted anyway.

Kicking out inactive tanks is fine.  Booting those who would actually qualify for stars is just dumb and will end TO sooner than later.

Edited February 22, 2022 by wolverine848

[Dopamine 2,161]

3 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Not true.

Many of the battles are partial domination, but not 100% over.

I've been in many battles where one team's players are far short of the 300 score (100/5 minutes) requires.  So what ya gonna do? Kick out all those players who are trying to complete a mission?

That just promotes everyone leaving a battle as soon as their side starts losing.  Once the first couple tanks leave you will struggle to score.  Might as well leave immediately since you're gonna get booted anyway.

Kicking out inactive tanks is fine.  Booting those who would actually qualify for stars is just dumb and will end TO sooner than later.

Well, it could be worked around. There could be 2 conditions, at least one of which needs to be fulfilled to stay in the battle.

Example : 100pts/5min or 30percentil pts of the team.

Another thing that could be done is to guarantee 2stars for kicked players, if they were eligible for them.

Also to prevent the battle from being emptied, these players would be kicked only if another player is ready to replace them.

I think this idea has its potential and if it was to be implemented in some form, it could have been done gradually - at first the treshold could be only 20pts/5min, then it could be brought up to 40pt/5min, data analysed, counter-measures taken to prevent weak players who are actually trying from being kicked out etc.

[Cor7y 13,862]

10 hours ago, LambSauce said:

If this were implemented the MM system would start placing players in already started battles to try to fill the gaps, thereby defeating the purpose of the pre-battle wait period.

What do you mean? I don't get your point.

6 hours ago, MysticBlood said:

Does this pertain to when a player joins at any time due to auto-fill?  Or is it when it starts the match? Or both.

When a player joins the battle, of course. It would be quite unfair if I'm put in a battle that has 11 minutes remaining, and I get kicked because I couldn't score 100 points in 1 minute, wouldn't it?

6 hours ago, frederik123456 said:

I could imagine it working like the inactivity timer (although less obtrusive of course). You would get a warning that you need to gain at x more points in x min or you will be kicked out.

Yes, this.

6 hours ago, tank7 said:

Actually (if I remember rightly) there was a time when a similar idea was there when players could report a tanker for multing (through voting system like among us). However what happened was people started kicking the top players or genuine guys from battles to get more crystals which eventually made devs remove this feature. Hence the only way this can be done is by system without any player interference .But most players dislike these kind of AI related changes (MM update being the most controversial one).Your idea is good but difficult to implement , maybe that's why this is still an issue even now.

The only difficulty I see here is determining how many points a player needs to score in order to remain in the battle. Yes, mults getting removed would be automatic (AI), but it would be correct in 99% of the cases.

 

 

[LambSauce 1,891]

9 minutes ago, Cor7y said:

What do you mean? I don't get your point

I actually misunderstood the pre-battle wait period that was announced in the latest Vlog, in that I assumed that Hazel wanted to remove equipment changing entirely.

This being said, that point of mine isn’t valid however my point that players don’t want to join already started battles still stands.

[YANUKFIN 493]

6 hours ago, frederik123456 said:

data analysed, counter-measures taken to prevent weak players who are actually trying from being kicked out

That would be 75% of the team then. On a good day.

Edited February 22, 2022 by YANUKFIN

[JustBlackWolf 878]

On paper, it sounds good, in practice it's terrible and has a lot of issues that would need good coding to be fixed.

The devs tried to fix this by adding a votekick system back in the day, but it would be abused to kick good performing players.

(I still remember getting kicked from a battle myself, yet i was carrying the team)

Edited February 28, 2022 by JustBlackWolf