That is a terrible argument. You're talking about creating something entirely new to be abused like any similar system is already abused.
I'm not talking about creating something entirely new. I'm talking about implementing an old system that I've used on other games without issue.
Oh and vote kicking before the end of the map can easily be solved. Just have a timelimit on the votekick. For example if someone isn't kicked before 5 or 10 minutes then they can't be kicked. It's not like instances in STO take a lot of time anyway.
I highly doubt that such a system would be abused more than leechbotting because there's very little reward in it besides lollollols. Where running a leechbot actually grants you some e-bling.
Even if there are a few premades going out of their way to try and trollkick that would be less of an issue than leechbotting is. Leechbotting affects the community as a whole through the economy. Where troll kicking would only result in a little rage and probably make the rager do what you suggest and only do premades.
if we could put those afk players on our ignore lists and never have them join our teams again that would be the fix all to this problem.. but we cant.
so a vote to kick is the next best thing.
[12:35] Vessel Two of Two Unimatrix 01 deals 225232 (271723) Plasma Damage to you with Plasma Lance.
[12:44] Vessel One of Two Unimatrix 01 deals 1019527 (1157678) Kinetic Damage to you with Plasma Energy Bolt Explosion.
who all here before for tie in the ignore with the pug system i put you on ignore im not team with you in pug ever again till the day my ignore list gets reset or i take you off show of hand any one?
This happens mainly with the crystalline entity (Elite) for me at least ... its so freaking annoying, 10 man team only 4 of us at doing anything EVERY TIME urgh.
The current system, which allows leechers, isn't working. Why? People are lazy and want others to work for them, while they reap the rewards. Unfair for people who actually work hard, and have to work harder for a greedy person. Cross this method off the list.
The proposed system of vote-kicking with a minimum of 3 or 4 players will not work. Why? Humans play this game, and certain humans will be nasty and troll in MMOs. There will be the group of people who kick for a reason OTHER than leeching, which opens another can of worms and brings tons of people in the crosshairs of trolls. Cross this method off the list.
The proposed system of a timer which auto-kicks after a set amount of keyboard/mouse inactivity (called "idle" by the game), has major flaws. Why? Server Disconnects and severe lag, from either a person's ISP or Cryptic's server, may cause the issue. Innocent people will be caught in the crossfire between Cryptic and leechers. Cross this method off the list.
These are the issues I have seen in the past 10 pages or so.
Let's not repeat the same arguments, and work towards a constructive solution for Cryptic's devs to use.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I can't be "abused" by a leecher at all in the current system, because as a rational adult, I understand that I have responses to that behavior, like leaving the match or teaming up with people I know and trust. Under a vote kick system, I suddenly become vulnerable to bad behavior by others, when I wasn't before.
I can't be "abused" by 4 vote kickers because as a rational adult, I understand that I have responses to that behavior, like teaming up with people I know and trust.
I can't be "abused" by 4 vote kickers because as a rational adult, I understand that I have responses to that behavior, like teaming up with people I know and trust.
If you're in that situation anyway, you won't have need of vote-kick anyway, no?
I can't be "abused" by 4 vote kickers because as a rational adult, I understand that I have responses to that behavior, like teaming up with people I know and trust.
So, I'm right that teaming can solve the problems of random bad behavior by unknown players? Thanks for conceding that, because if it is sufficient in the one case (vote/kick), why is it not sufficient to solve what is really, honestly, a much more minor issue (leechers)?
Remember - leechers are obvious - I can choose immediately not to play with them if I see them. Trolls abusing the Vote/Kick system may not be obvious, meaning I am more vulnerable to being taken advantage of. Vote/Kick also brings in all sorts of other nastiness as well, such as allowing players to use the system to vote out players who play 'wrong', or don't parse high enough dps, or whatever. Even if you think the number of instances of that happening will be small, why should we expose anyone to that in the name of avoiding an ultimately minor annoyance that is already (by your own admission) adequately managed by the current system?
So, I'm right that teaming can solve the problems of random bad behavior by unknown players? Thanks for conceding that, because if it is sufficient in the one case (vote/kick), why is it not sufficient to solve what is really, honestly, a much more minor issue (leechers)?
Remember - leechers are obvious - I can choose immediately not to play with them if I see them. Trolls abusing the Vote/Kick system may not be obvious, meaning I am more vulnerable to being taken advantage of. Vote/Kick also brings in all sorts of other nastiness as well, such as allowing players to use the system to vote out players who play 'wrong', or don't parse high enough dps, or whatever. Even if you think the number of instances of that happening will be small, why should we expose anyone to that in the name of avoiding an ultimately minor annoyance that is already (by your own admission) adequately managed by the current system?
Everything is abuseable. Everything. The only thing that matters is the degree to which it is abuseable.
Is a system that requires 4 people more abuseable or less abuseable than a system that requires only 1 person?
Everything is abuseable. Everything. The only thing that matters is the degree to which it is abuseable.
Is a system that requires 4 people more abuseable or less abuseable than a system that requires only 1 person?
Agreed. Abuse is always going to happen, which is actually a pretty good reason to learn to live with it in the status quo instead of constructing increasingly elaborate machinery that is itself vulnerable to greater abuses, all in the name of vainly trying to avoid using the obvious and easy solution at hand. In other words, this, just like your previous concession, only makes your case worse and mine better.
To answer your question:
A system in which 4 people can choose to victimize one person for whatever reason is always worse than a system in which 4 people might choose to allow themselves to be 'victimized' by a single other player. More specifically, the harm the leecher actually causes to you is that he/she annoys you by getting rewards he/she didn't deserve. That's it. That's all. You're annoyed. Oh well. Your proposal allows players to actually affirmatively damage others - as in, rob them of rewards they actually earned, or prevent them from even playing in the first place, for whatever trivial reason they choose.
Will it happen all the time? No, clearly not. Will it happen more than leeching happens now? No, of course not. Will it happen at least once? Yes, and that's all I need, because my argument is that from the standpoint of the victim, it would have been far, far better to have the current system than it was to allow them to be abused by the vote/kick system. Essentially what your system does is seek to end the small harm that you feel affects you by foisting a larger harm on someone else. That is a terrible idea, especially in light of the fact that the harm you are seeking to avoid is frankly trivial, and by your own admission is already solvable by simply forming a team with people you know.
Agreed. Abuse is always going to happen, which is actually a pretty good reason to learn to live with it in the status quo instead of constructing increasingly elaborate machinery that is itself vulnerable to greater abuses, all in the name of vainly trying to avoid using the obvious and easy solution at hand. In other words, this, just like your previous concession, only makes your case worse and mine better.
To answer your question:
A system in which 4 people can choose to victimize one person for whatever reason is always worse than a system in which 4 people might choose to allow themselves to be 'victimized' by a single other player. More specifically, the harm the leecher actually causes to you is that he/she annoys you by getting rewards he/she didn't deserve. That's it. That's all. You're annoyed. Oh well. Your proposal allows players to actually affirmatively damage others - as in, rob them of rewards they actually earned, or prevent them from even playing in the first place, for whatever trivial reason they choose.
Will it happen all the time? No, clearly not. Will it happen more than leeching happens now? No, of course not. Will it happen at least once? Yes, and that's all I need, because my argument is that from the standpoint of the victim, it would have been far, far better to have the current system than it was to allow them to be abused by the vote/kick system. Essentially what your system does is seek to end the small harm that you feel affects you by foisting a larger harm on someone else. That is a terrible idea, especially in light of the fact that the harm you are seeking to avoid is frankly trivial, and by your own admission is already solvable by simply forming a team with people you know.
What do the 4 people who are affected by a leecher lose? Time
What does the 1 person who is affected by griefers lose? Time
What do the 4 people who are affected by a leecher lose? Time
What does the 1 person who is affected by griefers lose? Time
Ergo, either both are victims, or neither are.
Leechbots affect the entire community through the economy.
If I were kicked from a random pug I would treat it just like pugging a bad kage team.
'Oh noes I got randomly put in with a group of trolls. Time to queue up for something else.' Click, click, PEW, PEW.
What bugs me about the whole "Report them" thing is this.
I reported a player last night for leeching in Azure Nebula. Less than 15 seconds later my phone buzzes, I have an email from Cryptic telling me that the report was looked into and resolved.
In 15 seconds.
The run was still in progress, the player was STILL sitting there leeching.
Leechbots affect the entire community through the economy.
If I were kicked from a random pug I would treat it just like pugging a bad kage team.
'Oh noes I got randomly put in with a group of trolls. Time to queue up for something else.' Click, click, PEW, PEW.
Yeah, no, it really doesn't. The rep/fleet marks can't be transferred, nor can the rep/fleet gear, and standard item drops can be acquired much faster and in greater numbers by using foundry gear grinding missions. That leaves only dilithium rewards that could be uniquely harming the economy, but given the refining cap, the only way leechers could begin to affect the economy as a whole is by running a fairly large number of bots (which is why you flag them so that GMs can see if a certain account is running multiple afk farmer bots), and even then, unless the bot network is all tied to one account, there is no way for the resources to be pooled other than the free market of the zen/dil exchange (since neither zen nor dilithium can be transferred directly to another character on a different account).
Basically, unless your argument is that leechers are so common that they are able to control the dil/zen exchange rate, there's really no economic harm being done. If that is your argument, I strongly suspect that Cryptic monitors the exchange closely enough to see something like that happening, and that, combined with people flagging the afk bots, probably is sufficient to quickly shut down those kinds of operations (if they ever existed in the first place).
Finally, given how irritated you clearly are at the incredibly minor issue of people getting something they don't deserve, I have to say I think your scenario of what you would do if you were actually robbed of your rewards is... optimistic.
What do the 4 people who are affected by a leecher lose? Time
What does the 1 person who is affected by griefers lose? Time
Ergo, either both are victims, or neither are.
Oh no no no no no! You don't get to walk back your admission that the degree of harm matters by turning to an arbitrary binary standard. Even if I were to accept your premise that 'loss of time' was sufficient to make one a 'victim', there are (by your own admission) still degrees.
Who has it worse?
1) The people who see someone AFK, know that this mission may take longer and/or be less successful, choose to proceed anyway, and then get to keep whatever mission rewards they earn.
2) The person who joins a mission and participates fully in the expectation that he/she will get a mission reward at the end, only to be booted so that she/he loses the time invested in the mission, as well as any reward.
At this point, your argument only makes any sense at all if you assert that causing anyone to lose any amount of time makes them a 'victim' in need of redress, which I think is an indefensible position that logically leads to players accusing each other of "griefing" because they aren't doing enough damage, or the like. If you go the other direction, and decide that nobody has really been harmed at all, then there's no problem worth spending dev time on to solve, so we may as well just keep things the same.
As soon as you look at the degree of actual harm being done to individuals here (as you previously asserted was important), it's obvious a vote/kick system does more harm than good (for the reasons I previously pointed out, and that you did not respond to), and in any case we both agreed like 3 posts ago that teaming with friends was enough to solve either problem (which I pointed out means there is really no cause for action here).
Apologies, the snide remark here was, upon mature reflection, unwarranted.
it's not about to kick or not to kick, but to contribute or not contribute.
it'd be better to have a game mechanic that can count player contribution than ability to kick a player. make every attacks counts, if players attack a target and if the target drop a loot, then who hit that target were eligible for loot roll, no matter how much dps they produce. if any player never hit that target, exclude them from loot roll. so if you do nothing, you got nothing, you do something, you may get something.
it's not about to kick or not to kick, but to contribute or not contribute.
it'd be better to have a game mechanic that can count player contribution than ability to kick a player. make every attacks counts, if players attack a target and if the target drop a loot, then who hit that target were eligible for loot roll, no matter how much dps they produce. if any player never hit that target, exclude them from loot roll. so if you do nothing, you got nothing, you do something, you may get something.
Knowing Cryptic they will choose the least popular, much hated and most illogical course of action. They will put in a kick system where the leader, chosen at random can kick any and all team members. Just look at Neverwinter to see what's in store.
Cryptic, and their lawyers, determine what is and isn't acceptable behavior in Cryptics game and they wrote it up in the TOS.
Idling in an instance is NOT against the TOS that every player agrees to abide by in order to play STO. You, me and the AFKers all agreed to the same TOS.
TOS clearly states that harassing or threatening other players is not acceptable behavior.
And you've admitted that you harass and attempt to intimidate other players by threatening and then reporting them to the GMs.
You're not supposed to violate TOS even when you think you are on the right side of the issue.
If you see something you don't like in game or here on the forums, by all means report it. BUT let those responsible for TOS enforcement, GMs and Mods, do their job of enforcing TOS.
That same ToS states that a person agrees (basically, and I've already copy/pasted this part in a previous post, so go read fer yerself) simply by being here to abide by the ToS.
Said ToS states that impeding upon another person's enjoyment of the game is disallowed. Verboten. Punishable. By reporting someone for idling, one is actually following the ToS, for the simple fact that the person idling is impeding the reporter's fun and enjoyment of the game.
Finally, given how irritated you clearly are at the incredibly minor issue of people getting something they don't deserve, I have to say I think your scenario of what you would do if you were actually robbed of your rewards is... optimistic.
I'm clearly irritated? LOL Dude you're hilarious and nice post. Y'know considering the number of times I've been disconnected from the server at the end of a match I'm already rather accustomed to losing out on e-rewards in this game.
Anyway I won't bother arguing with you because you're spinning way too much TRIBBLE in your head about me personally that is not even remotely connected with reality.
Before the nerf to the Crystalline Entity, I'd usually move to weapons range of the Entity, cloak my T'varo, and use torpedoes as my powers came out of cooldown because the instant I was decloaked through one of the Entity's firing cycles if it had more than a couple of recrystallizes, it would kill me, and I'd have to respawn. Someone could very easily have seen me sitting still and cloaked and thought I was idling through the encounter, when I was doing the best my build and current equipment would allow.
Oh no no no no no! You don't get to walk back your admission that the degree of harm matters by turning to an arbitrary binary standard. Even if I were to accept your premise that 'loss of time' was sufficient to make one a 'victim', there are (by your own admission) still degrees.
Who has it worse?
1) The people who see someone AFK, know that this mission may take longer and/or be less successful, choose to proceed anyway, and then get to keep whatever mission rewards they earn.
2) The person who joins a mission and participates fully in the expectation that he/she will get a mission reward at the end, only to be booted so that she/he loses the time invested in the mission, as well as any reward.
At this point, your argument only makes any sense at all if you assert that causing anyone to lose any amount of time makes them a 'victim' in need of redress, which I think is an indefensible position that logically leads to players accusing each other of "griefing" because they aren't doing enough damage, or the like. If you go the other direction, and decide that nobody has really been harmed at all, then there's no problem worth spending dev time on to solve, so we may as well just keep things the same.
As soon as you look at the degree of actual harm being done to individuals here (as you previously asserted was important), it's obvious a vote/kick system does more harm than good (for the reasons I previously pointed out, and that you did not respond to), and in any case we both agreed like 3 posts ago that teaming with friends was enough to solve either problem (which I pointed out means there is really no cause for action here).
Apologies, the snide remark here was, upon mature reflection, unwarranted.
Who turned it into an arbitrary binary standard? I took into account the degrees. You obviously haven't as seen by your conclusion of who has it worse.
Want to know who really has it worse when you actually factor in the degrees? The first one. Why? Because there are more leechers than vote kick griefers, and that adds up over time.
As I said before, you are rewarded for leeching, but you aren't rewarded for griefing.
Leeching is a solo job; all you need is yourself to TRIBBLE someone else.
Griefing via vote kick requires 3 others with the same mentality.
A vote kick will be abused, this topic has been beaten to death in the forum already.
I say, if a spawn point camper stays there without moving for 4 minutes, they should be considered a "hostile", and open to accidental,"friendly fire."
who all here before for tie in the ignore with the pug system i put you on ignore im not team with you in pug ever again till the day my ignore list gets reset or i take you off show of hand any one?
this is a gold ide and no one jumps for it why????????????????????????
i question ppl who dont jump on this ide to maybe some are right and just want a system to abuse it
Sure, once they are already in a match with the leecher who will still get a reward for doing nothing. And all they are doing is passing the buck to the next person as you did. Still does nothing to solve the underlying problem.
soon he/she will be block by all don't act as if they wont be I mean really sound like excuses excuses
No, it's not an excuse. You've no idea how long it would take for any given leecher to get ignored by every single player, if at all. They won't be ignored automatically by new players either.
you act as if no one will put a leecher on ignore.......
and to be frank I don't see you coming up with any thing but ways to shoot down ides
Comments
I'm not talking about creating something entirely new. I'm talking about implementing an old system that I've used on other games without issue.
Oh and vote kicking before the end of the map can easily be solved. Just have a timelimit on the votekick. For example if someone isn't kicked before 5 or 10 minutes then they can't be kicked. It's not like instances in STO take a lot of time anyway.
I highly doubt that such a system would be abused more than leechbotting because there's very little reward in it besides lollollols. Where running a leechbot actually grants you some e-bling.
Even if there are a few premades going out of their way to try and trollkick that would be less of an issue than leechbotting is. Leechbotting affects the community as a whole through the economy. Where troll kicking would only result in a little rage and probably make the rager do what you suggest and only do premades.
so a vote to kick is the next best thing.
[12:44] Vessel One of Two Unimatrix 01 deals 1019527 (1157678) Kinetic Damage to you with Plasma Energy Bolt Explosion.
system Lord Baal is dead
Why? People are lazy and want others to work for them, while they reap the rewards. Unfair for people who actually work hard, and have to work harder for a greedy person.
Cross this method off the list.
Why? Humans play this game, and certain humans will be nasty and troll in MMOs. There will be the group of people who kick for a reason OTHER than leeching, which opens another can of worms and brings tons of people in the crosshairs of trolls.
Cross this method off the list.
Why? Server Disconnects and severe lag, from either a person's ISP or Cryptic's server, may cause the issue. Innocent people will be caught in the crossfire between Cryptic and leechers.
Cross this method off the list.
These are the issues I have seen in the past 10 pages or so.
Let's not repeat the same arguments, and work towards a constructive solution for Cryptic's devs to use.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I can't be "abused" by 4 vote kickers because as a rational adult, I understand that I have responses to that behavior, like teaming up with people I know and trust.
If you're in that situation anyway, you won't have need of vote-kick anyway, no?
So, I'm right that teaming can solve the problems of random bad behavior by unknown players? Thanks for conceding that, because if it is sufficient in the one case (vote/kick), why is it not sufficient to solve what is really, honestly, a much more minor issue (leechers)?
Remember - leechers are obvious - I can choose immediately not to play with them if I see them. Trolls abusing the Vote/Kick system may not be obvious, meaning I am more vulnerable to being taken advantage of. Vote/Kick also brings in all sorts of other nastiness as well, such as allowing players to use the system to vote out players who play 'wrong', or don't parse high enough dps, or whatever. Even if you think the number of instances of that happening will be small, why should we expose anyone to that in the name of avoiding an ultimately minor annoyance that is already (by your own admission) adequately managed by the current system?
Everything is abuseable. Everything. The only thing that matters is the degree to which it is abuseable.
Is a system that requires 4 people more abuseable or less abuseable than a system that requires only 1 person?
Agreed. Abuse is always going to happen, which is actually a pretty good reason to learn to live with it in the status quo instead of constructing increasingly elaborate machinery that is itself vulnerable to greater abuses, all in the name of vainly trying to avoid using the obvious and easy solution at hand. In other words, this, just like your previous concession, only makes your case worse and mine better.
To answer your question:
A system in which 4 people can choose to victimize one person for whatever reason is always worse than a system in which 4 people might choose to allow themselves to be 'victimized' by a single other player. More specifically, the harm the leecher actually causes to you is that he/she annoys you by getting rewards he/she didn't deserve. That's it. That's all. You're annoyed. Oh well. Your proposal allows players to actually affirmatively damage others - as in, rob them of rewards they actually earned, or prevent them from even playing in the first place, for whatever trivial reason they choose.
Will it happen all the time? No, clearly not. Will it happen more than leeching happens now? No, of course not. Will it happen at least once? Yes, and that's all I need, because my argument is that from the standpoint of the victim, it would have been far, far better to have the current system than it was to allow them to be abused by the vote/kick system. Essentially what your system does is seek to end the small harm that you feel affects you by foisting a larger harm on someone else. That is a terrible idea, especially in light of the fact that the harm you are seeking to avoid is frankly trivial, and by your own admission is already solvable by simply forming a team with people you know.
Flag someone as a leecher if that person does not do anything useful after a period of time the flagged leecher is then booted for leeching.
That is better then a vote to kick.
What do the 4 people who are affected by a leecher lose? Time
What does the 1 person who is affected by griefers lose? Time
Ergo, either both are victims, or neither are.
starts making popcorn
Leechbots affect the entire community through the economy.
If I were kicked from a random pug I would treat it just like pugging a bad kage team.
'Oh noes I got randomly put in with a group of trolls. Time to queue up for something else.' Click, click, PEW, PEW.
I reported a player last night for leeching in Azure Nebula. Less than 15 seconds later my phone buzzes, I have an email from Cryptic telling me that the report was looked into and resolved.
In 15 seconds.
The run was still in progress, the player was STILL sitting there leeching.
:mad:
Yeah, no, it really doesn't. The rep/fleet marks can't be transferred, nor can the rep/fleet gear, and standard item drops can be acquired much faster and in greater numbers by using foundry gear grinding missions. That leaves only dilithium rewards that could be uniquely harming the economy, but given the refining cap, the only way leechers could begin to affect the economy as a whole is by running a fairly large number of bots (which is why you flag them so that GMs can see if a certain account is running multiple afk farmer bots), and even then, unless the bot network is all tied to one account, there is no way for the resources to be pooled other than the free market of the zen/dil exchange (since neither zen nor dilithium can be transferred directly to another character on a different account).
Basically, unless your argument is that leechers are so common that they are able to control the dil/zen exchange rate, there's really no economic harm being done. If that is your argument, I strongly suspect that Cryptic monitors the exchange closely enough to see something like that happening, and that, combined with people flagging the afk bots, probably is sufficient to quickly shut down those kinds of operations (if they ever existed in the first place).
Finally, given how irritated you clearly are at the incredibly minor issue of people getting something they don't deserve, I have to say I think your scenario of what you would do if you were actually robbed of your rewards is... optimistic.
Oh no no no no no! You don't get to walk back your admission that the degree of harm matters by turning to an arbitrary binary standard. Even if I were to accept your premise that 'loss of time' was sufficient to make one a 'victim', there are (by your own admission) still degrees.
Who has it worse?
1) The people who see someone AFK, know that this mission may take longer and/or be less successful, choose to proceed anyway, and then get to keep whatever mission rewards they earn.
2) The person who joins a mission and participates fully in the expectation that he/she will get a mission reward at the end, only to be booted so that she/he loses the time invested in the mission, as well as any reward.
At this point, your argument only makes any sense at all if you assert that causing anyone to lose any amount of time makes them a 'victim' in need of redress, which I think is an indefensible position that logically leads to players accusing each other of "griefing" because they aren't doing enough damage, or the like. If you go the other direction, and decide that nobody has really been harmed at all, then there's no problem worth spending dev time on to solve, so we may as well just keep things the same.
As soon as you look at the degree of actual harm being done to individuals here (as you previously asserted was important), it's obvious a vote/kick system does more harm than good (for the reasons I previously pointed out, and that you did not respond to), and in any case we both agreed like 3 posts ago that teaming with friends was enough to solve either problem (which I pointed out means there is really no cause for action here).
Apologies, the snide remark here was, upon mature reflection, unwarranted.
Sure, they could fly around aimlessly all match, but at that point why don't you just jump in and shoot things instead...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
it'd be better to have a game mechanic that can count player contribution than ability to kick a player. make every attacks counts, if players attack a target and if the target drop a loot, then who hit that target were eligible for loot roll, no matter how much dps they produce. if any player never hit that target, exclude them from loot roll. so if you do nothing, you got nothing, you do something, you may get something.
Officially Nerfed In Early 2410
Edit: Whoopsie. Thought this said something else. Carry on!
Occam's Razor makes the cutting clean.
That same ToS states that a person agrees (basically, and I've already copy/pasted this part in a previous post, so go read fer yerself) simply by being here to abide by the ToS.
Said ToS states that impeding upon another person's enjoyment of the game is disallowed. Verboten. Punishable. By reporting someone for idling, one is actually following the ToS, for the simple fact that the person idling is impeding the reporter's fun and enjoyment of the game.
Nice try, though.
Occam's Razor makes the cutting clean.
I'm clearly irritated? LOL Dude you're hilarious and nice post. Y'know considering the number of times I've been disconnected from the server at the end of a match I'm already rather accustomed to losing out on e-rewards in this game.
Anyway I won't bother arguing with you because you're spinning way too much TRIBBLE in your head about me personally that is not even remotely connected with reality.
Who turned it into an arbitrary binary standard? I took into account the degrees. You obviously haven't as seen by your conclusion of who has it worse.
Want to know who really has it worse when you actually factor in the degrees? The first one. Why? Because there are more leechers than vote kick griefers, and that adds up over time.
As I said before, you are rewarded for leeching, but you aren't rewarded for griefing.
Leeching is a solo job; all you need is yourself to TRIBBLE someone else.
Griefing via vote kick requires 3 others with the same mentality.
I say, if a spawn point camper stays there without moving for 4 minutes, they should be considered a "hostile", and open to accidental,"friendly fire."
this is a gold ide and no one jumps for it why????????????????????????
i question ppl who dont jump on this ide to maybe some are right and just want a system to abuse it
its a WIN WIN for the whole game but leechers
system Lord Baal is dead
and they can use ignore just like me
system Lord Baal is dead
soon he/she will be block by all don't act as if they wont be I mean really sound like excuses excuses
system Lord Baal is dead
you act as if no one will put a leecher on ignore.......
and to be frank I don't see you coming up with any thing but ways to shoot down ides
system Lord Baal is dead