Jump to content


Feature suggestion: Mute dead players as OPTIONAL OPTION. (Entirely Optional btw)


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

StronkiTonki #1 Posted 14 August 2019 - 06:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

Disabling chat entirely is something that i'd rather not do, since I occasionally sitll communicate with allies, or sometimes there's some laughs to be had.

Most of the time when people are toxic, it's right after they die. They will blame their team and call them stuff, they will spam the minimap. All out of anger because they died.

This flaming and pingspamming often also causes me to lose focus during a battle, and sometimes even resuls in me making some stupid mistakes.

I'd love to have an option to just not see any messages or pings from allies who have died. The only positive thing a dead player might bring is some HP info of enemies, or a the direction of where an unspotted enemy may have killed them from. Other than that, a dead player MIGHT give some tips. (Which honestly almost never happens, you know it)

Other than that, here's absolutely nothing useful that a dead player could provide me with. So why should I see their messages/pings?

 

I am aware that dead allies can give positive things as well, like stated above. However:

In my experience, I get more negative impact from dead allies than positive ones.

-Every single match I get distracted by dead allies, and I need to waste precious seconds trying to block them.

-I also lose my patience a lot quicker because of the spamming.

-I'll aim worse when annoyed by spam.

-I'll react slower when annoyed by spam.

 

These are all negatives that could mean the difference between winning and losing.

 

Only rarely do I get positive feedback:

-The location of an unspotted enemy.

-A falling tree or destroyed object that I don't see getting destroyed. (genuinely never seen a dead player tell me this)

-Some tips that I honestly do not need. Not trying sound like a "know it all jerk" here. But I know what I'm doing. 100% of the times I have followed advice from dead players, it has lead me to death.

 

All of the above also just barely ever happens.

Yet the negatives seem to happen every single battle.

 

So over all, it will give me more negative performance than positive performance.

 

 

We also already have an option to disable all chat.

This is something that stops any communication happening with live allies. Something that I always consider turning on.

However, a big negative, in my opinion, is that this disables any possibility of communicating with live allies.

Communicating with live allies is something I do almost every match.

I'm pretty sure for a lot of people, dead spammers/flamers are the reason they have entirely turned off all chat.

So potentially, this option could lead to plenty of people turning their chat back on, as long as they can keep the dead players muted.

 

 

Here are my answers to most counter arguments:

 

-But I want to give help when I'm dead/receive help from dead allies.

Great! You can leave it on, since it's an option. Plenty of players already have chat disabled altogether anyway, so not everyone will be able to read your tips, or will bother to help allies after death anyway. Some people might actually turn chat back on with this feature. So it will most likely even out the amount of players who will still be able to read chats from dead allies.

Newer players, who need tips the most, will most likely keep the dead allies chat on anyway, since they're less likely to go into the settings and mute chat.

 

-But you can block or blacklist people who spam!

Spam and flaming is annoying to see as well. So even if I decide the block someone, they have already annoyed and distracted me by doing so.

During heated moments I simply have no time to block people, because I'm concentrating at a point where an enemy might pop up any second. A scenario that can potentially mean the difference between winning or losing.

Me and the last enemy might both be a oneshot: Oh, let me just block this guy who spammi- *enemy pokes and kills me*

See what I mean?

And if he keeps spamming, he will just annoy me and make me lose concentration, which can cause my reaction time to be bad, or maybe I'll just aim badly during a crucial moment.

 

-But you could just ignore the chat flaming or ping spamming.

The pingspams are unavoidable to hear. Simple fact. The beeps work on my nerves.

I keep looking at the minimap, trying to make tactical decisions. So seeing the blinking sectors is also unavoidable and will annoy me and distract me.

I also stated that often enough I still use the chat to communicate with allies who are alive. So obviously I'll look at the chat to communicate with them. So this will also force me to see the flame in chat from dead players.


Edited by StronkiTonki, 14 August 2019 - 08:27 PM.


Anna_Kalashnikova #2 Posted 14 August 2019 - 06:48 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 14606 battles
  • 6,269
  • [ST0RM] ST0RM
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011

View PostStronkiTonki, on 14 August 2019 - 07:45 AM, said:

Disabling chat entirely is something that i'd rather not do, since I occasionally sitll communicate with allies, or sometimes there's some laughs to be had.

Most of the time when people are toxic, it's right after they die. They will blame their team and call them stuff, they will spam the minimap. All out of anger because they died.

This flaming and pingspamming often also causes me to lose focus during a battle, and sometimes even resuls in me making some stupid mistakes.

I'd love to have an option to just not see any messages or pings from allies who have died. The only positive thing a dead player might bring is some HP info of enemies, or a the direction of where an unspotted enemy may have killed them from. Other than that, a dead player MIGHT give some tips. (Which honestly almost never happens, you know it)

Other than that, here's absolutely nothing useful that a dead player could provide me with. So why should I see their messages/pings?

I'm absolutely fine with trading the only few positive things that a dead player could potentially provide me with, to just having some peace and quiet from everyone raging because they just died.


STRGCTRL + right click on the flamers name -> mute for this battle

 

:honoring:

 

 

Edit: Oh sorry, you are probably using a keyboard, with CTRL instead of STRG :D


Edited by Anna_Kalashnikova, 14 August 2019 - 06:49 AM.


StronkiTonki #3 Posted 14 August 2019 - 06:51 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostAnna_Kalashnikova, on 14 August 2019 - 05:48 AM, said:


STRG + right click on the flamers name -> mute for this battle

 

:honoring:

 

I use that all the time. I honestly would rather just have it automated with the way I suggested it.

When I'm trying to focus in a heated moment, I might not even have the time to block someone.

Yes, it only takes a second, but that second can mean the difference of winning or losing. Plus it's simply annoying to have to block people every single time, multiple times even in plenty of battles.

An option to just mute dead players would be appreciated by me.



8126Jakobsson #4 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:00 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 77138 battles
  • 4,760
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Please no. What's the next step after that? This "battle against toxicity" have already gone too far. It's a multiplayer battle game. There will be negative emotions. Instead of making it a single player adventure game can't we just deal with it? And can't we just play something else if not? Let me tell my allies who shot me and from where thanks.  

StronkiTonki #5 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:07 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Post8126Jakobsson, on 14 August 2019 - 06:00 AM, said:

Please no. What's the next step after that? This "battle against toxicity" have already gone too far. It's a multiplayer battle game. There will be negative emotions. Instead of making it a single player adventure game can't we just deal with it? And can't we just play something else if not? Let me tell my allies who shot me and from where thanks.  

 

"option"



mateyflip #6 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:08 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 35327 battles
  • 346
  • [-NMZ-] -NMZ-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
Sometimes dead players can be helpful OP, advice etc. As the other have said just block the sulkers as I do.

StronkiTonki #7 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Postmateyflip, on 14 August 2019 - 06:08 AM, said:

Sometimes dead players can be helpful OP, advice etc. As the other have said just block the sulkers as I do.

 

Pretty sure I stated exactly what you said, and gave plenty of arguments against it already.



mateyflip #8 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:19 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 35327 battles
  • 346
  • [-NMZ-] -NMZ-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

Sir, its 7.15am and I need to get ready for work, get my off spring to nursery and then deal with the fine people of North Yorkshire.

 

So needless to I cant get into a debate on blocking players.  If you find it a bind to block for a game only- add to your black list.

 

Problem solved.

 

Have a cracking day good sir and hopefully ( I trust) you have less sulky spammers in the matches you play.

 

Mateyflip.



TheJumpMaster #9 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:21 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 50181 battles
  • 5,180
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011
I've had games where "dead" players have been much more useful than some of the live players. I would advise against muting those in the afterlife.

SovietBias #10 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:27 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37792 battles
  • 1,404
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013

View PostStronkiTonki, on 14 August 2019 - 06:07 AM, said:

 

"option"

 

You already have that option. Right click and mute.



StronkiTonki #11 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:31 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Postmateyflip, on 14 August 2019 - 06:19 AM, said:

Sir, its 7.15am and I need to get ready for work, get my off spring to nursery and then deal with the fine people of North Yorkshire.

 

So needless to I cant get into a debate on blocking players.  If you find it a bind to block for a game only- add to your black list.

 

Problem solved.

 

Have a cracking day good sir and hopefully ( I trust) you have less sulky spammers in the matches you play.

 

Mateyflip.

 

My point is that it's too annoying to have to block people every single time someone spams or flames in chat.

It's annoying to see as well. So even if I decide the block someone, they have already annoyed and distracted me by doing so.

I also stated that during heated moments I simply have no time to block people, because I'm concentrating at a point where an enemy might pop up any second. A scenario that can potentially mean the difference between winning or losing.

 

Me and the last enemy might both be a oneshot: Oh, let me just block this guy who spammi- *enemy pokes and kills me*
See what I mean?

And if he keeps spamming, he willt just annoy me and make me lose concentration, which can cause my reaction time to be bad, or maybe I'll just aim badly during a crucial moment.

 

 

 

View PostTheJumpMaster, on 14 August 2019 - 06:21 AM, said:

I've had games where "dead" players have been much more useful than some of the live players. I would advise against muting those in the afterlife.


This happens few and far between. At least as an "option" you can still keep it turned on. I'd rather just not have the spam anymore.

 

View PostSovietBias, on 14 August 2019 - 06:27 AM, said:

 

You already have that option. Right click and mute.

 

Do you read this topic at all? I have already said why that is not sufficient multiple times.

Even in this post. Here's another copy of it:

 

"It's annoying to see as well. So even if I decide the block someone, they have already annoyed and distracted me by doing so.

I also stated that during heated moments I simply have no time to block people, because I'm concentrating at a point where an enemy might pop up any second. A scenario that can potentially mean the difference between winning or losing.

 

Me and the last enemy might both be a oneshot: Oh, let me just block this guy who spammi- *enemy pokes and kills me*
See what I mean?

And if he keeps spamming, he willt just annoy me and make me lose concentration, which can cause my reaction time to be bad, or maybe I'll just aim badly during a crucial moment."



fwhaatpiraat #12 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:33 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 56346 battles
  • 1,438
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
No.

StronkiTonki #13 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:40 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View Postfwhaatpiraat, on 14 August 2019 - 06:33 AM, said:

No.

 

Very constructive. I am so convinced that this idea for an option is a bad idea that would worsen the game experience for 100% of the playerbase.



SovietBias #14 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:42 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37792 battles
  • 1,404
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013

View PostStronkiTonki, on 14 August 2019 - 06:31 AM, said:

 

Do you read this topic at all? I have already said why that is not sufficient multiple times.

Even in this post. Here's another copy of it:

 

"It's annoying to see as well. So even if I decide the block someone, they have already annoyed and distracted me by doing so.

I also stated that during heated moments I simply have no time to block people, because I'm concentrating at a point where an enemy might pop up any second. A scenario that can potentially mean the difference between winning or losing.

 

Me and the last enemy might both be a oneshot: Oh, let me just block this guy who spammi- *enemy pokes and kills me*
See what I mean?

And if he keeps spamming, he willt just annoy me and make me lose concentration, which can cause my reaction time to be bad, or maybe I'll just aim badly during a crucial moment."

 

If you are going to block all chat coming from destroyed players, in the event one of them might do whatever that you don't like, what's the difference of blocking the chat all together? Guess what? You also have that option.

 



TheJumpMaster #15 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:43 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 50181 battles
  • 5,180
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011
I do understand what you are saying and know the feeling of annoyance  when "great" generals come back from the afterlife to "guide" us, but I would prefer to use the Mute function.

StronkiTonki #16 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:46 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 33682 battles
  • 937
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostSovietBias, on 14 August 2019 - 06:42 AM, said:

 

If you are going to block all chat coming from destroyed players, in the event one of them might do whatever that you don't like, what's the difference of blocking the chat all together? Guess what? You also have that option.

 

 

I already stated the same in my original post.

I actually communicate with people who are alive.

In my experience, 90% of toxicity and spam in chat is from dead players. So it would get rid a big amount of annoyance.

 

View PostTheJumpMaster, on 14 August 2019 - 06:43 AM, said:

I do understand what you are saying and know the feeling of annoyance  when "great" generals come back from the afterlife to "guide" us, but I would prefer to use the Mute function.

 

That's great! That's why I am suggesting it as an option. You can keep using the manual mute function, while others use this option. Everyone wins.



If_I_Die_You_Die_Too #17 Posted 14 August 2019 - 07:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9660 battles
  • 865
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016

When you're dead you're dead

 

Except in WoT which has an afterlife which allows idiots to screw up the game

 

I prefer my team to lose if it has a Psycho pinger, winning encourages them to ping more


Edited by If_I_Die_You_Die_Too, 14 August 2019 - 08:07 AM.


Luther_Huss #18 Posted 14 August 2019 - 08:05 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4096 battles
  • 6
  • [761ST] 761ST
  • Member since:
    04-15-2018

Not sure why so many people are against this. I like the idea and, as the OP has already mentioned several times, it would be optional. You know, like a choice? You don't have to use it?

Can't see what the problem with this would be.......those dead spam pingers drive me mad as well.



fwhaatpiraat #19 Posted 14 August 2019 - 08:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 56346 battles
  • 1,438
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostStronkiTonki, on 14 August 2019 - 07:40 AM, said:

 

Very constructive. I am so convinced that this idea for an option is a bad idea that would worsen the game experience for 100% of the playerbase.


Yes indeed it's very constructive, since it's my opinion. In the end game I really want to know - from someone that just died - where the certain enemy is. Muting the ping-spammers or trash-talkers takes less than a second. Also, if someone f'ed up, by being too late, not spotting at all, blocking me, etc, I want to tell it to him/her. The bot-like player that is a big detriment to the team doesn't need more protection against those 'malicious players'. Also, if I f'ed up, I also want to say that. You can just ignore the chat, block a really annoying player, block the chat all together. But I don't have to be censored.


Edited by fwhaatpiraat, 14 August 2019 - 08:08 AM.


Jumping_Turtle #20 Posted 14 August 2019 - 08:08 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 67880 battles
  • 6,957
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013
Agreed, but for me it would be solved for 80% if they do something about mappingspam.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users