Jump to content


Will we get some mechanics against "unsportsmanlike behaviour" as in the upcoming WoWS Patch...


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

BdW_Marecc #1 Posted 18 April 2018 - 08:27 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 10402 battles
  • 105
  • [BPG_G] BPG_G
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

For reference: https://worldofwarsh...lic-test/PT074/

 

System for Prevention of Unsportsmanlike Conduct

World of Warships is a game in which players team up for a single purpose—outfighting the opponent at sea and in the air. But let's make it clear—players are all human. We all have emotions, and sometimes tempers can flare. It definitely won't do any good to your team if you miss a teammate's manoeuvre and send your torpedoes right into his path, or if you succumb to anger or frustration and send a salvo at your ally, or if you forget that you've already pressed the "Battle" button and go do something else.

In World of Warships, we've always kept an eagle eye on players and tried to act when their behaviour does not always correspond to the rules of the game. The upcoming Update 0.7.4 introduces an enhanced tool for tracking offenders, increasing the responsiveness of our violations system, which brings it to a whole new level.

Like in the previous version, the main indicator of a player's own status will be the colour of his nickname in the game:

  • If it's white, the player has not committed any violations recently.
  • A nickname that's gone pinkmeans the player has had a warning and should mend their [in-game] manners.

 

  • The colour orangemeans the player has been punished for foul conduct.

Let's take a quick look at the main violations which can result in a warning or penalty followed by a change in the player's nickname colour:

  • Inactivity in battle
  • Damage to Allies/Team kills
  • Fleeing the battle

For violation of the rules, AFK/sleeping status in battle or fire at allies, the system will display a warning in the Port, informing the player of a change in their status and explaining the actions that caused the change. If the warning does not produce the desired effect and the player continues to violate the rules, the next step will be a ban on entry to certain types of battles, in particular, those where individual performance may affect the final result. To be allowed access to encounters with real players in Random, Ranked and Scenario Battles, violators will have to play several Co-op battles against bots.


Personally, I would love to see something to sanction damned quitters. I just had a game where a blue player no less suicided in his arty while the game was still in the balance by driving straight off a cliff.

It would really help the game out if it was possible to round up all those quitters, map pingers, "we lost"-at-the-start-of-battle writers, those 30 second-yolo-players and those AFK bots, put them all into their own special matchmaking. Or maybe force them to replay the tutorial before they can join a battle again.

 



DracheimFlug #2 Posted 18 April 2018 - 08:43 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014
Pink has been in WoWs for a long time, over a year at least. The shooting others just damages yourself system is pretty good, especially giving torpedo issues in WoWs.

Strappster #3 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:02 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23965 battles
  • 9,019
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
I'm intrigued by "Fleeing the battle". Is that penalising people who withdraw from a fight or those who quit out rather than play?

BdW_Marecc #4 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:03 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 10402 battles
  • 105
  • [BPG_G] BPG_G
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

Yes but I am not talking about Pink. Pink means nothing, your team mates cannot even shoot you like when you are blue in WoT. There was no consequence to it except for the shaming and most people who play like that  couldn't care less.

But the upcoming changes mean some real sanctions. If you can't behave, you can't participate in most types of battles until your penalty has been removed. That is some real progress.

 

View PostStrappster, on 18 April 2018 - 08:02 AM, said:

I'm intrigued by "Fleeing the battle". Is that penalising people who withdraw from a fight or those who quit out rather than play?

 

I understand fleeing from battle is someone who quits the battle while his ship hasn't been sunk yet.
 

DracheimFlug #5 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:09 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostStrappster, on 18 April 2018 - 09:02 AM, said:

I'm intrigued by "Fleeing the battle". Is that penalising people who withdraw from a fight or those who quit out rather than play?

 

Quit out.

Enforcer1975 #6 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:16 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,859
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Only if WG introduces a system that punishes bad players for not playing properly.  

DracheimFlug #7 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:34 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostEnforcer1975, on 18 April 2018 - 09:16 AM, said:

Only if WG introduces a system that punishes bad players for not playing properly.

 

As defined by who, you?

HaZardeur #8 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:41 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 33402 battles
  • 1,182
  • Member since:
    08-14-2010

View PostBdW_Marecc, on 18 April 2018 - 08:27 AM, said:

For reference: https://worldofwarsh...lic-test/PT074/

 

 

 

  • The colour orangemeans the player has been punished for foul conduct.

 

 

I like that, plz WoT devs... sit down with your competent colleagues of WoW and let them help you :)  this would also solve the arti problem... all those "I dont care if a friendly is nearby were I shot" clickers would be gone in no time :great:

Enforcer1975 #9 Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:42 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,859
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostDracheimFlug, on 18 April 2018 - 09:34 AM, said:

 

As defined by who, you?

 

Actually defined by themselves....and their abysmal winrate. 

Edited by Daxeno, 18 April 2018 - 05:48 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to use of the red color.


TwistedDrake #10 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:00 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1697 battles
  • 225
  • Member since:
    04-20-2015

View PostBdW_Marecc, on 18 April 2018 - 08:27 AM, said:

...

 

 

Isn't it somewhat a problem that we don't have a bot mode for them to learn things in, unlike WoWs?

CmdRatScabies #11 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:06 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37603 battles
  • 4,334
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
I don't see team damage/killing as a large problem in WoT.  Do too much damage / griefing and players get banned either automatically or by customer support.

DracheimFlug #12 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:22 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostEnforcer1975, on 18 April 2018 - 09:42 AM, said:

 

Actually defined by themselves....and their abysmal winrate. 

 

So.. everyone below a certain win rate should be tossed out? On an ongoing basis? Good luck with that. I take it then that you are in favour of skill based match making?

Enforcer1975 #13 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:24 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,859
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostDracheimFlug, on 18 April 2018 - 10:22 AM, said:

 

So.. everyone below a certain win rate should be tossed out? On an ongoing basis? Good luck with that. I take it then that you are in favour of skill based match making?

 

It's not about skill based MM. It's about giving them an incentive to actually think when they play and not just press W and LMB. 

Condor1976 #14 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:31 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5064 battles
  • 255
  • [KWA] KWA
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013

View PostEnforcer1975, on 18 April 2018 - 10:24 AM, said:

 

It's not about skill based MM. It's about giving them an incentive to actually think when they play and not just press W and LMB. 

 

But then we would first need some kind of co-op mode like WoWS has. 

Then you can give some sort of "back to the classroom" penalty (preferably with set goals so you can actually learn things.



Enforcer1975 #15 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,859
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostCondor1976, on 18 April 2018 - 10:31 AM, said:

 

But then we would first need some kind of co-op mode like WoWS has. 

Then you can give some sort of "back to the classroom" penalty (preferably with set goals so you can actually learn things.

 

And that mode will probably be very hard to implement...at least in a quality where a player can learn something. It's easier in WoWS for AI since the battlefield is basically flat with a few islands....WoT is a challenge to get right or you will have hordes of AI tanks driving down Overlord cliff because they want to go beach or them flipping on every occasion or hitting buildings. 

Edited by Enforcer1975, 18 April 2018 - 10:35 AM.


eldrak #16 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:50 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47424 battles
  • 1,040
  • [NE-VO] NE-VO
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

We already have all of that in WoT, what's new?

You turn blue for doing teamdamage and can get banned for it.

You can get bans from repeated afk/desertions and you get removed rewards for it.



DracheimFlug #17 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:55 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostEnforcer1975, on 18 April 2018 - 10:24 AM, said:

 

It's not about skill based MM. It's about giving them an incentive to actually think when they play and not just press W and LMB. 

 

There are already incentives to play well. You get better rewards for doing more and bonuses for winning. With skill based MM you would have bad players on your team a lot less often and there would be bad players on the other team a lot less often. They would (mostly) be matched up with other bad players and against other bad players. Is that not what are trying to achieve?

HaZardeur #18 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:55 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 33402 battles
  • 1,182
  • Member since:
    08-14-2010

View Posteldrak, on 18 April 2018 - 10:50 AM, said:

We already have all of that in WoT, what's new?

You turn blue for doing teamdamage and can get banned for it.

You can get bans from repeated afk/desertions and you get removed rewards for it.

 

But currently "You will lose hitpoints for team damage" is missing... which would be a huge step forward to stop asshats and careless clickers.

DracheimFlug #19 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View Posteldrak, on 18 April 2018 - 10:50 AM, said:

We already have all of that in WoT, what's new?

You turn blue for doing teamdamage and can get banned for it.

You can get bans from repeated afk/desertions and you get removed rewards for it.

 

Blue players do not currently damage themselves if they shoot more friendlies.

Rooikat_ZA #20 Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:58 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 6817 battles
  • 182
  • [A-W-F] A-W-F
  • Member since:
    02-19-2016

Without breaking out in sarcasm....

 

It's really very simple. Accidents happen, so this needs to be taken into account. 'Accident' can be defined as hitting the teammate who decides he's going to squeeze in front of you to take a shot at the same point you squeeze the trigger. (example)

This does happen more often than you think, and the action is not deemed malicious by either player however the fact that you have shot your teammate does go down in WG's 'big black book'. There is no immediate sanction however this book allows for monitoring of repeat offenders. This is the only way WG can separate the salt from the sugar. 

 

The key words are 'reasonable practicability'. There is no way to please everyone and at the end of the day this is a business so the logical option is to provide the most reasonable and practical solution possible.

 

Lack of participation, suicide or leaving battle. The only reasonably practicable way to monitor this is with what is already in place. (replays and the warning and subsequent monitoring you receive for leaving the field of battle early.)

 

To end, think twice, use logic or face the sarcasm

 

gg

;)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users