Something needs to be done about voting

[yankeeboy]

today i got kicked for being "too frickin good at this game"

there are many other times when things like this happen, such as ppl voting away an ffa with 1 min to go b/c they r losing or they just got into the room. or ppl spamming the vote system in general

[jeppew]

yeah there has been alot of abuse lately.
maybe the servers should have admins that can veto votes altogether?
you'd just need to find active responsible people.

[duck]

a "level 60 only" server would solve this problem nicely.

Although it probably wouldn't be very good for expanding the userbase

[Triped]

Originally Posted by duck

a "level 60 only" server would solve this problem nicely.

Although it probably wouldn't be very good for expanding the userbase

Yeah, please don't do that.

[skywalker]

Today I kicked someone for "Using too many Your Mom jokes in teamchat". FYI.

[Valarauka]

Heh, I got kicked because my "plane is the wrong color" today ... completely random.

I think the required percentage for kick votes could be revised upwards.
Also, not entirely sure if it's not done this way already, but vote passage needs to be calculated as a percentage of players on the server, not players who voted. IOW, not entering a vote should count as a default No for determining vote resolution.

[protest boy]

Originally Posted by Valarauka

Also, not entirely sure if it's not done this way already, but vote passage needs to be calculated as a percentage of players on the server, not players who voted. IOW, not entering a vote should count as a default No for determining vote resolution.

I've thought about this too...I think at least with map changes it calculates based upon how many people actually voted, not the number of players in the game.

I think it should work two different ways. With kick votes, a 'non-vote' should count as a NO and it should use the number of players on the server, not the number of players who voted for the percent calculation.

But with map change votes, a lot of the time I won't vote because I have no preference, or maybe I just showed up to the server and I don't know what has been most recently played. In the case of map change votes, it should only consider the people who voted.

[nesnl]

Maybe just include a third option when people vote kick. So for example if someone calls a stupid vote like it would look like this:

"Noob123 has called a vote to Kick Player123, Reason: Likes goats."

1. Yes
2. No
3. Kick Noob123 for abuse.

5. Close

Might discourage people from voting for things if they knew they would be on the chopping block at the same time.

[Triped]

I think it already counts non-votes as noes for kicks. I survived a 2-1 vote to kick me with four players on the server, and the failure reason was "more than 50% votes required."

[gameguard]

Originally Posted by nesnl

Maybe just include a third option when people vote kick. So for example if someone calls a stupid vote like it would look like this:

"Noob123 has called a vote to Kick Player123, Reason: Likes goats."

1. Yes
2. No
3. Kick Noob123 for abuse.

5. Close

Might discourage people from voting for things if they knew they would be on the chopping block at the same time.

good idea. That should be easy to implement.


but then again. You never can trust people lol. They might kick people off even if the vote was legit.

[Snowsickle]

I've failed a vote 3-7 against people spamming to get registration codes in chat, had some idiot start a vote against me for 'trying to get someone kicked' and had it fail 6-4. As far as I'm concerned trying to pirate the game on a server that Karl/Lamster pay for is one of the most legitimate reasons to vote kick out there. Basically, I think giving people the third option is just going to result in more abuse. This isn't a problem with the people initiating the votes, its a problem with the people passing them.

I think at this point some form of moderation is pretty much the only way to significantly decrease this kind of behavior. Right now the respective hosts can and should be trying to moderate their own servers, but I'm of the opinion that official servers should have some kind of loose list of rules written up and enforced as much as possible. Vote abuse, pirating, severe racism/spamming, simple rules like that could be enforced loosely and hopefully curb this behavior a bit.

EDIT: It isn't foolproof but limiting vote kick to paid users might be worth a shot. There are some exceptions, but a lot of the truly random and malicious vote kicks don't seem to come from people who've had access to a credit card or a desire to support the game.

[protest boy]

Originally Posted by nesnl

Maybe just include a third option when people vote kick. So for example if someone calls a stupid vote like it would look like this:

"Noob123 has called a vote to Kick Player123, Reason: Likes goats."

1. Yes
2. No
3. Kick Noob123 for abuse.

5. Close

Might discourage people from voting for things if they knew they would be on the chopping block at the same time.

That seems like a pretty good idea. Legit kick votes might sometimes end up in the wrong person getting kicked but no system is perfect.

[Vi*]

Originally Posted by Snowsickle

EDIT: It isn't foolproof but limiting vote kick to paid users might be worth a shot. There are some exceptions, but a lot of the truly random and malicious vote kicks don't seem to come from people who've had access to a credit card or a desire to support the game.

I agree here. People are less likely to try and **** up something they've invested money in.

[Valarauka]

Heh, I saw someone trying to kick a player for not being good enough, which seems to me awfully counter-productive. If you kick all the bad / beginner players how will they ever learn to play better?

I'm not sure about the "paid-players-only" suggestion though - it sounds like it could lead to more abuse of the system rather than less; if only paid players count for votes, a single one on a server full of demo users could kick people arbitrarily.

Really, the arbitrary and capricious nature of vote-kicking makes any kind of real solution difficult.

[protest boy]

I think the idea was only paid players can initiate a vote-kick. Anybody can vote.

[Triped]

Originally Posted by protest boy

I think the idea was only paid players can initiate a vote-kick. Anybody can vote.

I think I like that, but what if only demo players are on a server, or the only paid account on the server is misbehaving?

[DevilsAdvocat]

meh, i dont actually think that people need to be kicked that often, so making the requirements for kicking higher, say 65% or so, could work.

Also, i definatly agree that not every1 should have the power to start a vote kick. However, i think that simply putting the limit at any1 willing to fork over 20 bucks is a bit harsh... there are plenty of rich brats out there who are probably already some of the worst offenders.
I think that "admins" only being able to start kicks is the best idea. I just think that there should just be a whole bunch of "admins" who can start the votes chosen by the owner of the server. It would leave the crappy servers crappy, but at least some of the official servers could have a decent list of people who wont abuse it. Someone would just have to be chosen to choose who can start votes or not.
(bear in mind i was using the term admin loosly, its a regular player + the ability to start a vote kick)

[jeppew]

i just played a game where two spanish guys (atleast i think they where spanish, the XDDDDD and JAJAJAJA after every kill and death got very irritating fast) tried to kick me for "being too good", "miranda fag" and tried to kick [flb]BG1 for running away.

admins that can veto any vote, and kick abusers that are protected by teammates and friends would be the best solution imho.

[Vi*]

Originally Posted by Triped

I think I like that, but what if only demo players are on a server, or the only paid account on the server is misbehaving?

As Blank would say, bad players are bad. But in normal cases, people who pay money to play a game should have more control over the game environment (which they paid for, remember) than any arbitrary person in the world, and will wield that power more responsibly, because, y'know, they paid for it.

Dev's idea for having players with Admin capabilities could work too, except that you need a way to pick a ****load of 'responsible' players. I can't think of a way to do it that wouldn't be an annoyance/work for Lams+Karl.

[nesnl]

Anyone who has over 1 million xp should be considered an admin imo.

[yankeeboy]

admins= ppl who have high play time/been playing a while, high exp, ppl who comment here daily, n whoever started this thread

[DevilsAdvocat]

Originally Posted by Vi*

people who pay money to play a game should have more control over the game environment (which they paid for, remember)

meh, i dont think that you are paying for control over the game, otherwise we would have to completely ignore those who didnt pay. You're payin for the perks/planes imo

Originally Posted by Vi*

you need a way to pick a ****load of 'responsible' players. I can't think of a way to do it that wouldn't be an annoyance/work for Lams+Karl.

yea, that is totally true... i guess they would have to at least start the selection process, however once there are a good amount it could just be left up to the already selected people to pick more. (sry Lams/Karl =D)

[as red as black]

for last second map changes, there should be a time limit to when you can vote changemap. Something like 3 minutes in maybe. Or, make it so that after 2-3 minutes, it requires a 70% vote to changemap.

I've gotten kicked for everything. Being too good. Being arab (at least twice a day when I was known as A.R.A.B.), not supporting Israel by being arab (lol), by quoting snoop dogg after dropping a bomb, by playing Miranda (apparently, it's unfair to those who haven't bought the game....wtf?), by ??????.......just about every reason.

Maybe some vets can be assigned admin. status and have the ability to veto votes and report vote abusers?


-------I must admit though, some vote kicks are damn funny.

[yankeeboy]

well, it looks like its up to lam/karl to see who will have admin status on official servers.

I nominate myself, ill always be there (just check my playtime)

[tyr]

Ferret just got kicked out of official #1 because he was using miranda.
Wtf seriously.

[yankeeboy]

once again, the best solution is admins

If u take everybody on TS and V + other responsible ppl not on those teams i.e. ferret, at almost all times of the day 1 of those ppl is on

[Valarauka]

Yeah, I'd tend to agree - having a good set of admins is far more likely to be effective than anything else at controlling vote abusers..

[Vania]

Restrict votekicks to your own team. When a votekicked is called in TBD only the affected team should be able to vote.
Otherwise the opposing team can vote to kick your best player, or vote no to keep griefers on your team.

[Triped]

Originally Posted by Vania

Restrict votekicks to your own team. When a votekicked is called in TBD only the affected team should be able to vote.
Otherwise the opposing team can vote to kick your best player, or vote no to keep griefers on your team.

Make the votekick success threshold the K/D ratio.

[DevilsAdvocat]

just got kicked for time warping/teleporting too much >>

[Triped]

What if failed vote cooldown for kicks got worse and worse? Five for the first, ten for the second, twenty for the third, etc.?

[protest boy]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocat

just got kicked for time warping/teleporting too much >>

You probably deserved it

now that time anchor is even longer...yikes. I find the only way to counter your constantly warping behind an obstacle with the bomb is to delay your progress long enough for reinforcements to come and flush you out. The problem is when your reinforcements arrive first...

There are a lot of ideas in this thread as far as kicking goes. I think the best honestly is to only allow paid accounts to initiate a vote kick. That would solve 99% of the problem and probably most importantly, it would be very simple for lamster to implement.

[DevilsAdvocat]

Originally Posted by protest boy

now that time anchor is even longer...yikes. I find the only way to counter your constantly warping behind an obstacle with the bomb is to delay your progress long enough for reinforcements to come and flush you out. The problem is when your reinforcements arrive first...

i actually think that it being longer is a bit of a nerf. it means i have to fly farther to max out my line. It essentially raised the cooldown on it for me >> (not to say that it has no advantages).

and i certainly didnt deserve it, its not abusing it, im just good at it. I have yet to see anyone else use timeanchor as i do.

[lamster]

The intention was definitely NOT to nerf time anchor. I agree that a longer anchor is sometimes bad; if you have any ideas for imiproving anchor please post them!

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by lamster

The intention was definitely NOT to nerf time anchor. I agree that a longer anchor is sometimes bad; if you have any ideas for imiproving anchor please post them!

The cooldown shouldn't be anchor length based in my opinion. It should be just like the reverse cooldown in terms of when you can use it. That is it should be a timed cooldown that is related to how much energy you have left.

I am not sure what the exact limits are on time anchor right now but if it is setup that you can't use it unless you have a full length anchor line, then I think that is a bad idea. Maybe the anchor line should always be full length (minus when you are spawning). So if you use time anchor, when you go 'back in time' the line will still be there representing your history when you were at that point (I hope that makes sense).

You could also consider making time anchor do damage. Maybe similar to how the afterburner does damage on Miranda.

[skywalker]

I think it's time to put these here. This was within like 15 minutes. This is like 1/3 of them.




and here's the best part, in my opinion

Failed.


Succeeded.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by skywalker

I think it's time to put these here. This was within like 15 minutes. This is like 1/3 of them.
Succeeded.

But wait.. Thats what the majority of the server wanted.. so it must be right.....

[duck]

I think a 3rd option of "kick vote starter for stupid vote" would make things better.

[michael]

Originally Posted by duck

I think a 3rd option of "kick vote starter for stupid vote" would make things better.

agreed

and i forgot ten char limit. yay me

[DiogenesDog]

easy possible buff for time anchor - allow players to use it before it's at full length.