test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Dealing with Disreputable Players in Public Queues

frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
edited April 13 in PvE Discussion
How feasible would it be to implement some kind of rating system, a little like the one used for pawns in Dragon’s Dogma:Dark Arisen? Only instead of rating another player’s pawn, we would rate the people we queued with.

1-5 stars for what, though? I don’t know:

Participation? – four-five stars for players who are active during the run; one star for the useless leeches
Friendliness? – one star for the juvenile who cusses you out because you opened the door instead of him; five stars for simply not being a jerk?
Timeliness? – one star for the players who are afk for half the dungeon; five stars for the players who reach the circle within seconds of the rest of the party

Then I’d like the option to sort available queues by ratings so if I wanted, I could queue with players that have better than average ratings, or maybe be automatically queued with players that are within +/- one star of myself.

Or at the very least, I’d like to see a player’s average rating when I enter a dungeon/skirmish so I know what I’m getting into, and whether or not it would save me a lot of time and grief to bail then and there.

What do you think? It’s probably been suggested before, but I couldn’t find anything through search.
Post edited by frogwalloper#6494 on
«1

Comments

  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
    I definitely see what you're all saying, and maybe you're right. Still, I can't help thinking.
    Okay, so downvoting is out, but what if you were able to upvote someone for being a great player, and that information was readily available on everyone's Stats page? It would only be available for Random Queues in PvE, not PvP, and of course you would be unable to upvote other members in your guild/alliance. You would not get the option of upvoting if you queued with a group.

    And maybe that's a bad idea too, but there must be some kind of red flag - something - a bit of useful data mined by the game itself that would tip off other players before they find themselves stuck in an online hostage situation - which it literally is sometimes.

    How about displaying the number of times a player's been reported? Or percentage of times a player's disconnected, or percentage of time spent idling/afk? Warframe, for instance, let's you see the percentage of times a player has just up and quit in the middle of a match. Only takes a second to check at the beginning of a match.

    Failing that, I'd like some way to block a limited number of people so I never have to land in their queues again. Can Cryptic give each of us 10 block slots?
  • gromovnipljesak#8234 gromovnipljesak Posts: 855Member Arc User
    It would be a good idea maybe to add those ratings and keep them private just for the devs - tho the scale instead rates how likely someone is to be a bot. If someone gets a lotta those, ezpz.
  • kharkov58kharkov58 Posts: 94Member Arc User
    There is already a list of people I do not want to play with. It is your ignore list. The queue matching system ignores it.
  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
    kharkov58 said:

    There is already a list of people I do not want to play with. It is your ignore list. The queue matching system ignores it.

    I'm assuming you mean it ignores your ignore list, right?
  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User

    It would be a good idea maybe to add those ratings and keep them private just for the devs - tho the scale instead rates how likely someone is to be a bot. If someone gets a lotta those, ezpz.

    I like this. Instead of only being able to report someone for harassment, maybe we could also flag him/her for being AFK, leeching/causing intentional interference, potentially being a bot, etc...

    A player can only flag the same person once and can't flag that person again if another member of the guild already did. Past a certain threshold, they'd come up as someone worth monitoring, reprimanding, or in some cases (bot) banning.

    Or, maybe better still would be if Cryptic had a place for us to submit video evidence of abusers. If they're receiving incontrovertible evidence against the same player on multiple occasions, by multiple players, you'd think that would empower them to take steps, wouldn't you?

    But I suppose what I really, really want is a big red button that lets me apply a minor electric shock to these kinds of people through their device - solely to be used as a corrective measure, of course - totally for their own edification, I assure you.
  • ragequittingdc#8599 ragequittingdc Posts: 206Member Arc User
    maybe if there was a way to check other players achievements like clears or something else important instead of a rating system players can troll with easily.
    im actually the gwf carry
  • c1k4ml3kc3c1k4ml3kc3 Posts: 911Member Arc User
    I do not think it would be a good thing to doo simply because people would use it to exploit it and put one stars on anyone they dislike. Not to even mention the bots who might also utilize this feature to give a one star to everyone involved with them.

    Bad idea I think.
    True Neutral
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Posts: 2,208Member Arc User

    bad idea. while idealistically I see where you're coming from there is a lot of room for abuse. there are a lot of rivalries out there. some people would get dinged for their guild or because of this or because of that because vindictive.

    Rating system should be based on performance in the dungeon: Death, kills, healing, damage in (tank), etc...that is how a rating system should work. Not by players.
  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User

    Rating system should be based on performance in the dungeon: Death, kills, healing, damage in (tank), etc...that is how a rating system should work. Not by players.

    Kill rate could be helpful, but I think the number of times someone has disconnected, been kicked, voted to kick someone, or added to other players' block lists might be even more useful.

  • karvarekarvare Posts: 79Member Arc User
    Any kind of rating system will surely be abused, down votes or up votes. In the end it would become as meaningless as IL is today.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Posts: 2,208Member Arc User
    edited April 12
    karvare said:

    Any kind of rating system will surely be abused, down votes or up votes. In the end it would become as meaningless as IL is today.

    But you do know that a 18K GWF with T-Rex will always be rated higher than a 14K buff DO DC without a legendary mount. :)

    Rating systems are bad.

    What is needed is an update to the scoreboard at the end.

    The scoreboard should show, damage to mob, damage to boss, pick ups, damage mitigation by DR, etc...it should be expanded. What we have now is a joke.
  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
    - been having a really lousy time with afk/leech/bot players in the queues lately, and it got me thinking again. We're all talking about how ratings, data displays, or flagged behavior would just be abused, but anything the devs do is likely going to be open to abuse. People keep pointing to shorter kick times or giving players more kicks to spend as a definite solution, but that's just another weapon in everyone's hands - easily open to abuse.

    Still, improved kicking isn't likely to be something afk/leeches/bots would want since they're hardly likely to kick all the people doing their work for them are they. The other solution that makes a lot of sense is working on a way to utilize players' blocked lists when arranging queues. That's another one that the vast majority of abusive players would hate because again, it limits the number of people they can harass.

    It's a little frustrating because it seems the community has been talking about both solutions for a long time now. Whatever it is, something has to be done, though 'cause in the end, the one thing that's abused more than anything else is doing nothing at all.
  • spunkmeierspunkmeier Posts: 394Member Arc User

    - been having a really lousy time with afk/leech/bot players in the queues lately, and it got me thinking again. We're all talking about how ratings, data displays, or flagged behavior would just be abused, but anything the devs do is likely going to be open to abuse. People keep pointing to shorter kick times or giving players more kicks to spend as a definite solution, but that's just another weapon in everyone's hands - easily open to abuse.

    Still, improved kicking isn't likely to be something afk/leeches/bots would want since they're hardly likely to kick all the people doing their work for them are they. The other solution that makes a lot of sense is working on a way to utilize players' blocked lists when arranging queues. That's another one that the vast majority of abusive players would hate because again, it limits the number of people they can harass.

    It's a little frustrating because it seems the community has been talking about both solutions for a long time now. Whatever it is, something has to be done, though 'cause in the end, the one thing that's abused more than anything else is doing nothing at all.

    You are where I was about six months ago when RQ's started. We are told the devs are talking about RQ's every day but nothing has really happened yet about bad players and no fixes for any of the problems have dropped into the game.

    There is one solution, it is not good, but it does limit your exposure...get many more alts.

    Then you can swap away to your hearts content and if you start avoiding bad players quickly, and add in the quality of life changes so you never run spellplague or caverns, and dodge low item level and/or low character level players then RQ's start to become both profitable and much more tolerable.

    Out of interest what percentage of runs contain a afk, leech, or bot in them?
  • greywyndgreywynd Posts: 2,686Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User



    There is one solution, it is not good, but it does limit your exposure...get many more alts.

    Then you can swap away to your hearts content and if you start avoiding bad players quickly, and add in the quality of life changes so you never run spellplague or caverns, and dodge low item level and/or low character level players then RQ's start to become both profitable and much more tolerable.

    ...and then you become part of the problem.
    Who watches the watchmen?

    With your shield or on it.
  • spunkmeierspunkmeier Posts: 394Member Arc User
    If the devs dont care why should we?

  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
    edited April 15

    There is one solution, it is not good, but it does limit your exposure...get many more alts.

    Then you can swap away to your hearts content and if you start avoiding bad players quickly...

    I remember you advising something like this a little while back, and it has definitely come in handy - so thanks, I wouldn't have known about it if you hadn't said something.

    If it's just me and one or two AFKers, I feel no compunction about ditching them. But the thing is, I hesitate to do that if there are still other legit players around 'cause I don't want to mess them up even more. Like early this morning, I was running a bunch of DM Beholder queues and kept landing with the same two AFKers. It was either one or the other, and it was so frustrating because every time we got to the next rally point, we all had to wait for them to come back to move their character into the circle. They probably added a good ten-fifteen extra minutes to my play time- easily - maybe more since they didn't fight a single thing. The closest I came to bailing was after waiting for two minutes for the one jerk. I messaged everyone my intention to leave if he/she didn't get moving, but wound up dithering nearly another minute before that player finally budged.

    This is where blocking would have been wonderful. I would have had to deal with each of them just once, and never again. Even flagging/rating would have been helpful. Everyone would have seen what we were dealing with from the get go, and we all could have bailed together!

    So in answer to your question, it depends on what I'm playing. AFK/leeches seem to come out of the woodwork for Skirmishes and special events. I probably run into that kind of behavior 30-40% of those queues. This morning was bad, about 8 out of 12 of my queues - nearly 70%. Regular dungeons aren't nearly so awful, only about 10% of the time, but that's where I see botty-looking players every now and then. I'm never really sure about them though. I feel funny asking. Besides, they don't bug me nearly as much as the 15k leech whose game tags reads Highly Skilled, belongs to a guild with the word "Elites," or "Best," or "Warriors," in the title and sits uselessly on the other end of the map like a head kicked svirfneblin.

    While we're on the subject. When another player switches characters, do they show up as Disconnected? Is that how you know?
    Post edited by frogwalloper#6494 on
  • greywyndgreywynd Posts: 2,686Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    They show up as disconnected. Then you right click on their empty avatar to get their @handle. Find person using that @handle. They will either be "player not found", in which case it may be a legit disconnect, or you will find them on another character being an HAMSTER.
    Who watches the watchmen?

    With your shield or on it.
  • greywyndgreywynd Posts: 2,686Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User

    If the devs dont care why should we?

    Be better.
    Who watches the watchmen?

    With your shield or on it.
  • namelesshero347namelesshero347 Posts: 1,492Member Arc User
    Seems the problem exists mainly in random leveling dungeon. Since the content is trivial for lvl 70s, people will bot it. And throw in new players who don't know what the heck is going on, the easy leveling dungeon becomes a painful experience.

    I only do random epics, trials, and skirmishes. I've haven't had any problem with epics. The content is not trivial so botting them is impossible. You can't AFK for too long because there is plenty of time to kick. And rarely do you get a totally new player in them.

    Trials are relatively trouble free. The biggest problem are AFKers since the maps are arenas and you don't have to move at all to finish. And you can't kick from them.

    Skirmishes, except for PoM and ToDG, there are no gates, and can be done in three minutes. I don't really care if there is an AFK. Chances are, its some low level trash toon that queued up for the skirmish that allows me to run it now.
  • omegarealities#7219 omegarealities Posts: 991Member Arc User

    Rating system should be based on performance in the dungeon: Death, kills, healing, damage in (tank), etc...that is how a rating system should work. Not by players.

    Kill rate could be helpful, but I think the number of times someone has disconnected, been kicked, voted to kick someone, or added to other players' block lists might be even more useful.

    What about support characters? Low kills = bad rating?
  • frogwalloper#6494 frogwalloper Posts: 271Member Arc User
    edited April 15

    What about support characters? Low kills = bad rating?

    - a very good point.
«1
This discussion has been closed.