Not sure if you're referring to my post. If not, eh, I got time to kill anyway...
If I'm reading logicalspock right, what he's talking about is an alternative to the votekick system, where players who "vote down" a target just add a demerit of some sort to the target's record. Once the target accumulates enough demerits, he/she/it is banned from the queue for a certain amount of time. So it's not a 4-votes-you're-out system.
Given that the current chat ban system works on a similar basic model, and given the nature and number of complaints concerning abuse of that system here and in CO, the griefing potential should be apparent.
Again, if I'm reading things right, logicalspock is claiming that a sufficiently well-designed system will ignore "background noise" from casual griefing (e.g., people voting someone down for character or personal names, or even just nuisance effects). My argument is that the system, if automated, can be easily broken to the point of uselessness, and that there are people who will happily band together to do so.
Of course, if I'm not reading him right, I'd welcome clarification.
IMO a vote-kick system simply meets abuse with more abuse, but maybe that's another thread...
It is not that you are "not reading this right". It is that your belief is disproved by the central limit theorem. If it really can be, "broken to the point of uselessness," please point out how. Similar systems have proven incredibly reliable in other applications.
Vote to kick works fine in every other game I play. You guys are freaking out over nothing. As normal. Bring it on.
I've had exactly the opposite experience with such systems, so I guess both our opinions are equally valid or invalid and therefore do not really further the discussion.
Considering the difficulty Cryptic has with introducing most new things into the game can you really guarantee it will "work as intended" first off and if it will be a perfect systems even after patching?
as it stands I couldn't make that claim on behalf of Cryptic.
It is not that you are "not reading this right". It is that your belief is disproved by the central limit theorem. If it really can be, "broken to the point of uselessness," please point out how. Similar systems have proven incredibly reliable in other applications.
You know CLT is not perfect right and does not always return accurate normal distributions.
You know CLT is not perfect right and does not always return accurate normal distributions.
The central limit theorem is proved true. I think you mean to say that real distributions involving a finite number of data points will not always conform to normal distributions.
It proves nothing as it does not work accurately with human beings as variables. Especially when they can have multiple accounts and alts, this is not the simple solution you think it is, applying statistical systems to human beings has always been flawed in practice when it often seems perfect in theory.
I would be interested in you actually pointing out specific weaknesses in the idea. However, making vague and unsubstantiated claims is not useful.
For example, you claim people have multiple accounts and alts, but you fail to point out how that is relevant. Of the millions of STFs that have been played, do you really think that such a large number of the players are part of some grand conspiracy to alter game mechanics? It would be a rather easy theory to test.
And it would also be a rather easy problem to solve. Just like the developers would have to pick and monitor a reasonable critical point to ban players from STFs for receiving too many reports, they would have to pick and monitor a critical point to ignore a players who report others too often.
It would be trivial to build in safeguards, such as using a hypothesis test to determine if a certain day's data is too skewed to be a coincidence.
The key would be to spend months gathering the data before the ban system was turned on, so there is a sufficient amount of test data from which to draw conclusions.
You know CLT is not perfect right and does not always return accurate normal distributions.
Even if it did (and you're right, it doesn't), it completely falls apart outside the domain of independent random variables - which is exactly where you'd be when a group of players take it upon themselves to mess with the system.
If the system is designed to figure out a "reasonable" amount of demerits (or whatever) to trigger a queue ban via statistical analysis, then even a small group of people consistently and deliberately slapping demerits on everything that moves will push that threshold above the point of usefulness, and broaden the standard deviation so much, that even chronic AFKers would look normal.
In real life, statistical analysis works when the behaviors it covers are things that people can't muck about with in a way that isn't detrimental to themselves. In a video game, there is no such limit - and as I said, there is no shortage of players who will push the envelope just because they can.
logicalspock, I really feel like I am missing something critical in your proposal. Some pseudo-code or other description of the algorithm you'd use could really be handy right about now...
The key would be to spend months gathering the data before the ban system was turned on, so there is a sufficient amount of test data from which to draw conclusions.
Once again, the point as has already been raised in the post above this one is your water-tight statistical theory is a little leaky when it comes to application and there is indeed a question over whether it is entirely useful as an application in this instance.
But ignoring all that this final line of yours is what is really important, Cryptic simply wont bother to waste that amount of time and effort to get the system working right. so your solution as it is would never be considered.
Furthermore the problem is without the system actually running you will never be able to collect data on the frequency with which players were abusing the system, nor would testing it on Tribble help considering the playerbase sample size there and the demographic make-up which leans towards a lack of trolls/griefers/abusers
Why not just track the contributions of each team member, then reward the ones who contribute over a certain threshold?
Track how much each player kills/damages/heals in the team. I don't think AFKers who are using keyboard macros would reach that threshold by fire autofiring a few potshots at enemies and AFKers who sit there doing nothing get no reward at all, but a reprimand from the issuing NPC for doing nothing and a cooldown on joining any PUG mission of that type.
But maybe that would be a headache for programmers to implement...
*sings* "I like Gammera! He's so neat!!! He is full of turtle meat!!!"
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
Why not just track the contributions of each team member, then reward the ones who contribute over a certain threshold?
Track how much each player kills/damages/heals in the team. I don't think AFKers who are using keyboard macros would reach that threshold by fire autofiring a few potshots at enemies and AFKers who sit there doing nothing get no reward at all, but a reprimand from the issuing NPC for doing nothing and a cooldown on joining any PUG mission of that type.
But maybe that would be a headache for programmers to implement...
This would be a better solution but you'd have to be careful how you implemented it.
Any sort of 'vote to kick' feature is a bad idea IMHO. Playing devil's advocate; I can totally understand the frustration AFK'ers or leavers can cause and leading to a desire to have something done about it. But this sort of system is bound to be abused by the same sort of people you are rallying against or by supremely elitist jerks who want to set the standard by which others play the game.
I'm about to make some posters here angry, but such is life: we already have all the tools we need in place to properly avoid this sort of thing. If you want to be 100% assured a group only with people that will not practice leeching or griefing, or who's DPS is up to your approval; that is what friends lists, fleets and EliteSTF channels are for. And the uber leets who desire a group with others that share their mentality and get their super speed runs in without sweating and ******** when a science ship shows up in 'their' match can have their way by making a private one. I doubt the majority of folks who play this game are having their first MMO experience here and if you PUG, you know that you are rolling the dice as to the type of person you will get in your match. Plain and simple. The cons of this proposed solution far outweigh the pros to me. It's really just not needed.
TLDR: Don't want to take a chance on getting in a group of leeches, griefers, or those who lack DPS for really fast runs? Don't PUG. You can make a private match very easily.
P.S. I have been playing for well over a year now and have not ONCE seen an AFK'er using the same practices I suggest.
I will NEVER want a leader to allow people to be kicked or for the team's mind to kick people. I however WILL be fine with timed kick. With people's mind kick, it can just because they dont like each other. Therefor, i will reccomend we dont try to make teams kick but jsut a time kick.
And for AFK, make it more AFK.... Because if you are away, you dont wanan get killed. Just make it so that you cant get attacked in AFK BUT you cant do anything while in AFK and if you move 1 you get out 2 nothing happens. All depends.. with how you make the Empire ill laugh when we can use AFK even when walking (not sayiing it will but still with the past.. I see that)
Problem with an AFK timer is that you could just set yourself to auto attack and right click follow.
You know Cryptic has Jumped the Proverbial Shark when they introduced Tractor Pulling to Star Trek Online!
Tancredi IV? hehe a suitably Norman name for a suitably Norman solution
But once again this just invites grief on a goonswarm scale.
Well of course my suggestion would promote goonswarm reaction. That was my point. Didn't you notice how extreme the suggestion was?
My point is there is no way to prevent poor player behavior short of having a referee there in every instance 24/7, no potty or smoke breaks. Griefers and leaches are going to no matter what. There is no kick system or any other software system that will fix broken people or broken minds. There will always be that 1 guy who is going to send his Feklir frigates and open up on the generator just to be a moron and make people mad.
Every game reporting solution is going to have its abuses and abusers. It is only people who are honest who weren't a problem in the first place who won't abuse the system.
(Tancredi IV is a BattleTech reference)
Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER
Once again, the point as has already been raised in the post above this one is your water-tight statistical theory is a little leaky when it comes to application and there is indeed a question over whether it is entirely useful as an application in this instance.
But ignoring all that this final line of yours is what is really important, Cryptic simply wont bother to waste that amount of time and effort to get the system working right. so your solution as it is would never be considered.
Furthermore the problem is without the system actually running you will never be able to collect data on the frequency with which players were abusing the system, nor would testing it on Tribble help considering the playerbase sample size there and the demographic make-up which leans towards a lack of trolls/griefers/abusers
That simply is not true. You simply run the system for a significant amount of time to gather data. Then, once you have the data, you turn on the auto-ban system.
As for Cryptic would take the time to get it to work correctly if they chose to go that route, that amounts to speculation.
That simply is not true. You simply run the system for a significant amount of time to gather data. Then, once you have the data, you turn on the auto-ban system.
And as soon as it goes online, it becomes susceptible to manipulation.
This is what you don't seem to understand. No system based strictly on statistical analysis is robust enough to withstand deliberate human tampering. You can cite all the theorems you want, but if there is no significant, reliable penalty to gaming the system, the system will be gamed.
At my job, I often tell people to "think like a thief" to prevent petty theft. Gonna throw that at you and ask you to "think like a goon." Try to think of ways to hack your own proposal.
Well of course my suggestion would promote goonswarm reaction. That was my point. Didn't you notice how extreme the suggestion was?
My point is there is no way to prevent poor player behavior short of having a referee there in every instance 24/7, no potty or smoke breaks. Griefers and leaches are going to no matter what. There is no kick system or any other software system that will fix broken people or broken minds. There will always be that 1 guy who is going to send his Feklir frigates and open up on the generator just to be a moron and make people mad.
Every game reporting solution is going to have its abuses and abusers. It is only people who are honest who weren't a problem in the first place who won't abuse the system.
(Tancredi IV is a BattleTech reference)
Heheh Tancred is an Germanic name favored heavily by Norman families during the high medieval period that's where they got it from initially
Heheh Tancred is an Germanic name favored heavily by Norman families during the high medieval period that's where they got it from initially
and I agree btw :P
Tancredi IV in Battle Tech lore was a planet in Davion space where Minoru Karita violate rule of warfare and decimated the planet in a massive atrocity.
Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER
I take it that if a kick ability is added, people would also want the abiltiy to inspect his teammate's equipment as well?
*sings* "I like Gammera! He's so neat!!! He is full of turtle meat!!!"
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
Time after Time I see the same TRIBBLE going on.....Enter an STF and their is someone that has 20 injuries and could care less ,or their is someone that is in there just to TRIBBLE the optional up on others and why does it happen...because they know that we are a captured team with no choice but to take it on the chin or get a leaver penalty. This is B.S.
Yeah we can hold out 15 minutes then leave but why should we be the ones to have to leave. I say give us the Vote kick or remove the leaver penalty.Yes we could avoid it all and just make private matches but this is not always the option, Now PWE states that abusing the exploits in game is a no no but isn't what i just said people are doing in a way an exploit after all they know we can't do anything except report them ( like that ever gets anywhere) .I say let us revolt against these individuals and when you go into a map demand they heal themselves or just stand there for 15 minutes then leave ,if enough people start doing this maybe they will listen. More likely i will get repremand for this post and nothing will happen.
Time after Time I see the same TRIBBLE going on.....Enter an STF and their is someone that has 20 injuries and could care less ,or their is someone that is in there just to TRIBBLE the optional up on others and why does it happen...because they know that we are a captured team with no choice but to take it on the chin or get a leaver penalty. This is B.S.
Yeah we can hold out 15 minutes then leave but why should we be the ones to have to leave. I say give us the Vote kick or remove the leaver penalty.Yes we could avoid it all and just make private matches but this is not always the option, Now PWE states that abusing the exploits in game is a no no but isn't what i just said people are doing in a way an exploit after all they know we can't do anything except report them ( like that ever gets anywhere) .I say let us revolt against these individuals and when you go into a map demand they heal themselves or just stand there for 15 minutes then leave ,if enough people start doing this maybe they will listen. More likely i will get repremand for this post and nothing will happen.
I understand your frustration as do everyone else on the forums - they have all experienced it to.
Too be honest I don't think it is a MAJOR problem - it happens to me maybe 1 out of every 10+ pugs - so that is either not too bad or I am just lucky.
I think that is why Cryptic does not do anything about it - on a pure numbers bases the % of time it happens is really low - It's just that people really remember the #$%#ed up ones and don't remember all the other ones that went fine and they went on their way.
We need a vote to kick option. Sure some groups may abuse this to remove a poor player who is trying, but this would not happen nearly as often the TRIBBLE people are currently pulling. Tired of going into an STF to see one or two and in one case three of the other members fly off to the far side of the map and just sit there.
We need a vote to kick option. Sure some groups may abuse this to remove a poor player who is trying, but this would not happen nearly as often the TRIBBLE people are currently pulling. Tired of going into an STF to see one or two and in one case three of the other members fly off to the far side of the map and just sit there.
I am with you on this.
I don't care to much about 1 afker - especially in ISE as it is so easy - 4 players can faceroll that stf.
what i hate is the guy who come in - flys right over and blows up one of the gens - spawning nanites - just to fail the optional and *&%&^ the other players.
There should be an acceptable sequence built into the mission so that any player not following it automatically becomes targetable to the other players.
The only way to stop exploiters is to spoil their fun.
I don't care to much about 1 afker - especially in ISE as it is so easy - 4 players can faceroll that stf.
what i hate is the guy who come in - flys right over and blows up one of the gens - spawning nanites - just to fail the optional and *&%&^ the other players.
The point is that we should not have to deal with even 1 player being a douche bag! This is why we should either get the vote to kick feature or to just remove the penalty completely and personally i think that the vote to kick would be best after all if the ban is in place and you kick a player they should get the 1 hour ban. If you think about it most will think twice about TRIBBLE with the team if they can get voted out and receive a ban at the sane time.
I'd love to kick some people too, but usually it's the little despots that think they know more than anyone else running an STF, or playing this game for that matter. Anyone can have a bad run, and I'm certain people like *that* would abuse their little author-i-tie to kick the poor schmo who just got derped because they'd THINK they didn't know what they were doing or had a weak build, or whatever excuse they could come up with to just to push the shiny red "kick" button. IMO, if you want to avoid issues in pugs, just run with people you know & can trust in a private group. One of them may have a bad run, but if they mess around on purpose or don't pull theiir weight, then that's easy to solve. Don't give them another invite. But adding a kick option is just aking for more problems of a different nature.
If you people scream and throw fits and tantrums, nerd raging at the top of your lungs for weeks on end at the "general consensus 24 hr chat ban" that can happen if enough ppl get sick of hearing your fleet spam.... I can ONLY IMAGINE what you would do if you got your wish with this "vote to kick from STF" option. Lol this idea makes me laugh out loud every time I hear it.
I'd like to see vote kick, but only if it's unanimous, obviously with the person who's up for a kick being unable to vote on him/herself. That makes it very, very hard to abuse.
When it comes to STFs and Admiral-Level Events, it should not allow people in when they:
1) Have any Damage or Injuries
2) They are in a Shuttlecraft (unless it's a Shuttle Event)
3) It won't allow anyone with a ship below Tier 5. (So you don't have people flying around in Freighters, Miranda's, or Consitutions).
And yes, a vote to kick needs to be implemented. Cryptic worries about people abusing it, but I could imagine GMs having access to kick logs to see if they are being abused or not. Compared to moochers who can't get in trouble since they can claim AFK.
VOTE to kick- NO this will cause too much trouble. . . As how can anyone judge who is kick worthy and if this is put into place it MUST require a 4 to 5 vote and God help anyone who uses this when they want to kick anyone while I'm in a map as I won't kick people this option is totally immature for the fact it will be abused regardless of what people say.
Leaver penalty removal YES as this is the only fair was to stop people playing god with a kick option
Comments
It is not that you are "not reading this right". It is that your belief is disproved by the central limit theorem. If it really can be, "broken to the point of uselessness," please point out how. Similar systems have proven incredibly reliable in other applications.
I've had exactly the opposite experience with such systems, so I guess both our opinions are equally valid or invalid and therefore do not really further the discussion.
Considering the difficulty Cryptic has with introducing most new things into the game can you really guarantee it will "work as intended" first off and if it will be a perfect systems even after patching?
as it stands I couldn't make that claim on behalf of Cryptic.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
You know CLT is not perfect right and does not always return accurate normal distributions.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
The central limit theorem is proved true. I think you mean to say that real distributions involving a finite number of data points will not always conform to normal distributions.
I would be interested in you actually pointing out specific weaknesses in the idea. However, making vague and unsubstantiated claims is not useful.
For example, you claim people have multiple accounts and alts, but you fail to point out how that is relevant. Of the millions of STFs that have been played, do you really think that such a large number of the players are part of some grand conspiracy to alter game mechanics? It would be a rather easy theory to test.
And it would also be a rather easy problem to solve. Just like the developers would have to pick and monitor a reasonable critical point to ban players from STFs for receiving too many reports, they would have to pick and monitor a critical point to ignore a players who report others too often.
It would be trivial to build in safeguards, such as using a hypothesis test to determine if a certain day's data is too skewed to be a coincidence.
The key would be to spend months gathering the data before the ban system was turned on, so there is a sufficient amount of test data from which to draw conclusions.
If the system is designed to figure out a "reasonable" amount of demerits (or whatever) to trigger a queue ban via statistical analysis, then even a small group of people consistently and deliberately slapping demerits on everything that moves will push that threshold above the point of usefulness, and broaden the standard deviation so much, that even chronic AFKers would look normal.
In real life, statistical analysis works when the behaviors it covers are things that people can't muck about with in a way that isn't detrimental to themselves. In a video game, there is no such limit - and as I said, there is no shortage of players who will push the envelope just because they can.
logicalspock, I really feel like I am missing something critical in your proposal. Some pseudo-code or other description of the algorithm you'd use could really be handy right about now...
Once again, the point as has already been raised in the post above this one is your water-tight statistical theory is a little leaky when it comes to application and there is indeed a question over whether it is entirely useful as an application in this instance.
But ignoring all that this final line of yours is what is really important, Cryptic simply wont bother to waste that amount of time and effort to get the system working right. so your solution as it is would never be considered.
Furthermore the problem is without the system actually running you will never be able to collect data on the frequency with which players were abusing the system, nor would testing it on Tribble help considering the playerbase sample size there and the demographic make-up which leans towards a lack of trolls/griefers/abusers
#2311#2700#2316#2500
Track how much each player kills/damages/heals in the team. I don't think AFKers who are using keyboard macros would reach that threshold by fire autofiring a few potshots at enemies and AFKers who sit there doing nothing get no reward at all, but a reprimand from the issuing NPC for doing nothing and a cooldown on joining any PUG mission of that type.
But maybe that would be a headache for programmers to implement...
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
This would be a better solution but you'd have to be careful how you implemented it.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
No, mine is definitely more valid.
jk
It's pretty much this hard to keep just one timeline intact. ♪
I'm about to make some posters here angry, but such is life: we already have all the tools we need in place to properly avoid this sort of thing. If you want to be 100% assured a group only with people that will not practice leeching or griefing, or who's DPS is up to your approval; that is what friends lists, fleets and EliteSTF channels are for. And the uber leets who desire a group with others that share their mentality and get their super speed runs in without sweating and ******** when a science ship shows up in 'their' match can have their way by making a private one. I doubt the majority of folks who play this game are having their first MMO experience here and if you PUG, you know that you are rolling the dice as to the type of person you will get in your match. Plain and simple. The cons of this proposed solution far outweigh the pros to me. It's really just not needed.
TLDR: Don't want to take a chance on getting in a group of leeches, griefers, or those who lack DPS for really fast runs? Don't PUG. You can make a private match very easily.
P.S. I have been playing for well over a year now and have not ONCE seen an AFK'er using the same practices I suggest.
Problem with an AFK timer is that you could just set yourself to auto attack and right click follow.
Well of course my suggestion would promote goonswarm reaction. That was my point. Didn't you notice how extreme the suggestion was?
My point is there is no way to prevent poor player behavior short of having a referee there in every instance 24/7, no potty or smoke breaks. Griefers and leaches are going to no matter what. There is no kick system or any other software system that will fix broken people or broken minds. There will always be that 1 guy who is going to send his Feklir frigates and open up on the generator just to be a moron and make people mad.
Every game reporting solution is going to have its abuses and abusers. It is only people who are honest who weren't a problem in the first place who won't abuse the system.
(Tancredi IV is a BattleTech reference)
Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER
Expatriot Might Characters in EXILE
That simply is not true. You simply run the system for a significant amount of time to gather data. Then, once you have the data, you turn on the auto-ban system.
As for Cryptic would take the time to get it to work correctly if they chose to go that route, that amounts to speculation.
This is what you don't seem to understand. No system based strictly on statistical analysis is robust enough to withstand deliberate human tampering. You can cite all the theorems you want, but if there is no significant, reliable penalty to gaming the system, the system will be gamed.
At my job, I often tell people to "think like a thief" to prevent petty theft. Gonna throw that at you and ask you to "think like a goon." Try to think of ways to hack your own proposal.
If some noob is flying around in his own merry way and not toeing the line, then blow him out of the stars!
I am joking of course, but i can imagine some of you might actually find this appealing!
Heheh Tancred is an Germanic name favored heavily by Norman families during the high medieval period
and I agree btw :P
#2311#2700#2316#2500
Tancredi IV in Battle Tech lore was a planet in Davion space where Minoru Karita violate rule of warfare and decimated the planet in a massive atrocity.
Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER
Expatriot Might Characters in EXILE
"Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
Yeah we can hold out 15 minutes then leave but why should we be the ones to have to leave. I say give us the Vote kick or remove the leaver penalty.Yes we could avoid it all and just make private matches but this is not always the option, Now PWE states that abusing the exploits in game is a no no but isn't what i just said people are doing in a way an exploit after all they know we can't do anything except report them ( like that ever gets anywhere) .I say let us revolt against these individuals and when you go into a map demand they heal themselves or just stand there for 15 minutes then leave ,if enough people start doing this maybe they will listen. More likely i will get repremand for this post and nothing will happen.
I understand your frustration as do everyone else on the forums - they have all experienced it to.
Too be honest I don't think it is a MAJOR problem - it happens to me maybe 1 out of every 10+ pugs - so that is either not too bad or I am just lucky.
I think that is why Cryptic does not do anything about it - on a pure numbers bases the % of time it happens is really low - It's just that people really remember the #$%#ed up ones and don't remember all the other ones that went fine and they went on their way.
We need a vote to kick option. Sure some groups may abuse this to remove a poor player who is trying, but this would not happen nearly as often the TRIBBLE people are currently pulling. Tired of going into an STF to see one or two and in one case three of the other members fly off to the far side of the map and just sit there.
I am with you on this.
I don't care to much about 1 afker - especially in ISE as it is so easy - 4 players can faceroll that stf.
what i hate is the guy who come in - flys right over and blows up one of the gens - spawning nanites - just to fail the optional and *&%&^ the other players.
The only way to stop exploiters is to spoil their fun.
The point is that we should not have to deal with even 1 player being a douche bag! This is why we should either get the vote to kick feature or to just remove the penalty completely and personally i think that the vote to kick would be best after all if the ban is in place and you kick a player they should get the 1 hour ban. If you think about it most will think twice about TRIBBLE with the team if they can get voted out and receive a ban at the sane time.
Yeah, that's right.
1) Have any Damage or Injuries
2) They are in a Shuttlecraft (unless it's a Shuttle Event)
3) It won't allow anyone with a ship below Tier 5. (So you don't have people flying around in Freighters, Miranda's, or Consitutions).
And yes, a vote to kick needs to be implemented. Cryptic worries about people abusing it, but I could imagine GMs having access to kick logs to see if they are being abused or not. Compared to moochers who can't get in trouble since they can claim AFK.
Leaver penalty removal YES as this is the only fair was to stop people playing god with a kick option