Forums » Suggestions
Basically, the idea is, if a person kills you more than 3 times in 8 hours, you can submit an "abuse warning". This tells the griefer that if they kill you two more times in the next 24 hours, you can submit them for a "grief vote". If the vote succeeds with 30 people (?). Then the player is banned for 24 hours, and a message is sent to the administrative staff.
[edited-RR]
[edited-RR]
hmmmmm.
i'll assume your second sentence is supposed to read
"this tells the griefer that if they kill you two more times in the next 24 hours you can....."
otherwise its just logically inconsistant.
The main problem i can see with it is that, as with any popularity controlled function, its obviously open to abuse.
I'm not sure i have a better suggestion however. tho i'm sure i'll post again when i think of some since i'm bored off my behind here at work today. :P
i'll assume your second sentence is supposed to read
"this tells the griefer that if they kill you two more times in the next 24 hours you can....."
otherwise its just logically inconsistant.
The main problem i can see with it is that, as with any popularity controlled function, its obviously open to abuse.
I'm not sure i have a better suggestion however. tho i'm sure i'll post again when i think of some since i'm bored off my behind here at work today. :P
you don't have to kill people to annoy them enough to leave, just nick them down a few percent and make them dock and heal, since most people won't fly off too far if they're damaged. if the pilot does decided to leave even with the damage, well, keep at it.
yes, this is based on personal experience. the stuff that got to me was *not* getting killed, it was the constant nicking and running, making me unfit for PVP or any other activity really.
yes, this is based on personal experience. the stuff that got to me was *not* getting killed, it was the constant nicking and running, making me unfit for PVP or any other activity really.
Sounds like a reasonable / sensible idea, if your being greifed it should work fine.
If i keep getting killed by people in ctc situations, its just a matter of common sense to not to start submitting abuse warnings. You should expext to be shot at in certain situations.
If i keep getting killed by people in ctc situations, its just a matter of common sense to not to start submitting abuse warnings. You should expext to be shot at in certain situations.
yea terjekv, the best solution for that is andreas's post here (the most recent of many)
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11198
I remember when sector jumps were first added and there was a 15 second wait... but that was just annoyingly long.. 3 to 5 seconds would be enough to make running when damaged harder, without being a total drag on travel.
Griefing isnt always about killing. In some cases its just using the holes in the game that exist because content isn't here yet to be annoying as all *ahem*
I don't think the griefing vote would hurt pirates.. as most of them tend to spread out thier kills anyway, but what happens if a player submits the warning and then fires on the person they warned, what choice does that leave the person who recieved the warning?
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11198
I remember when sector jumps were first added and there was a 15 second wait... but that was just annoyingly long.. 3 to 5 seconds would be enough to make running when damaged harder, without being a total drag on travel.
Griefing isnt always about killing. In some cases its just using the holes in the game that exist because content isn't here yet to be annoying as all *ahem*
I don't think the griefing vote would hurt pirates.. as most of them tend to spread out thier kills anyway, but what happens if a player submits the warning and then fires on the person they warned, what choice does that leave the person who recieved the warning?
I think some sort of mechanism for reporting or punishing abuse is a great idea.
I think the threshold should be lowered, though. As I read it, the greifer would need to kill 30 people 5 times each, and they would all have to vote. That seems way too high. Perhaps simply being damaged repeatedly by the same player (divide the episodes by when the victim heals) and require less people to be damaged.
Also, whether it's this or the /vote system, it seems that it should be based on the PLAYER, not the CHARACTER. That is, PLAYERS should only be able vote once for whomever they are voting against, and penalties should affect a PLAYER, not just one of their characters.
FYI, I posted an alternate idea here: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/7/11197.
I think the threshold should be lowered, though. As I read it, the greifer would need to kill 30 people 5 times each, and they would all have to vote. That seems way too high. Perhaps simply being damaged repeatedly by the same player (divide the episodes by when the victim heals) and require less people to be damaged.
Also, whether it's this or the /vote system, it seems that it should be based on the PLAYER, not the CHARACTER. That is, PLAYERS should only be able vote once for whomever they are voting against, and penalties should affect a PLAYER, not just one of their characters.
FYI, I posted an alternate idea here: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/7/11197.
no screwball, actually he would only need to kill 1 person 5 times. the rest of the vote is based on the griefers activity and reputation with the rest of the community.
I see a much different problem with any set limit of kills. all you have to do is kill people 4 times each, and you can annoy as many people as you want because you never hit the 5 kill limit on any of them.
I see a much different problem with any set limit of kills. all you have to do is kill people 4 times each, and you can annoy as many people as you want because you never hit the 5 kill limit on any of them.
Sure, you could kill someone 4 times, but if you stop after that is it still greifing? I mean, after that, the victim would know they're safe for a while.
that is an important question
Its a step in the right direction at least.
[edit]Though with 30 ppl that's 150 pks of griefing.... Could take a year.[/edit]
[edit]Though with 30 ppl that's 150 pks of griefing.... Could take a year.[/edit]
I like the idea....it may not be perfect but it is a start and can be refined, if needed, at a later date.
I don't like that the per-person kill threshold is so low, or that the total threshold is so high. Let's try it like this:
8 kills within 24 hours for warning, 2 after that for complaint filing.
4 players must file complaints for the ban. That means that the griefer would have to make 40 griefing kills, 10 per player for a 24 hour ban. The important part is to keep everyone notified.
-Notify that your warning has been issued.
-Notify that your complaint has been filed
-Notify when another player files a complaint against that player
-Notify when the ban takes place
-Do not notify when it comes off.
8 kills within 24 hours for warning, 2 after that for complaint filing.
4 players must file complaints for the ban. That means that the griefer would have to make 40 griefing kills, 10 per player for a 24 hour ban. The important part is to keep everyone notified.
-Notify that your warning has been issued.
-Notify that your complaint has been filed
-Notify when another player files a complaint against that player
-Notify when the ban takes place
-Do not notify when it comes off.
I'm not so sure that would work either ctish. that means that a griefer could effectively harass 3 players indefinitely as long as he never killed a 4th.
Maybe...
9 kills in 24 hours against a player to be elegible for a warning. an additional 3 kills brings you up for a ban vote
the ban vote is handled by a server message to all players online letting them know who is up for banning and who filed the complaint. everyone then has 15 minutes (gives people time to get out of fights if need be) to log thier vote by private message to some AI banbot that is run by the server. people who dont vote are counted as NO votes. only people who were online when the vote was activated can vote (prevents people from switching accounts to add votes)
X number of players must vote yes to activate the ban.
on a more general note:
the major problem with any player driven enforcement such as this is that it only works in a small community where everyone kind of knows everyone else.
2 things happen in a larger game where you have hundreds of players online at a time:
1 a low threshold allows large guilds to exploit it.
2 Making it a percentage of the total population or a higher threshold will pratically ensure that you never get enough YES votes to activate it because the griefer wont have harassed enough people so that sufficient yes votes will occur. most players will just ignore the vote and go about thier gameplay.
Maybe...
9 kills in 24 hours against a player to be elegible for a warning. an additional 3 kills brings you up for a ban vote
the ban vote is handled by a server message to all players online letting them know who is up for banning and who filed the complaint. everyone then has 15 minutes (gives people time to get out of fights if need be) to log thier vote by private message to some AI banbot that is run by the server. people who dont vote are counted as NO votes. only people who were online when the vote was activated can vote (prevents people from switching accounts to add votes)
X number of players must vote yes to activate the ban.
on a more general note:
the major problem with any player driven enforcement such as this is that it only works in a small community where everyone kind of knows everyone else.
2 things happen in a larger game where you have hundreds of players online at a time:
1 a low threshold allows large guilds to exploit it.
2 Making it a percentage of the total population or a higher threshold will pratically ensure that you never get enough YES votes to activate it because the griefer wont have harassed enough people so that sufficient yes votes will occur. most players will just ignore the vote and go about thier gameplay.
Sadly any type of instant-action voting system is exploitable. If a player attempts to repeatedly attack you or try to provoke you but dies a multiple number of times (intentionally speaking), they can just as easily initiate a vote once they've reached the magical number. With instances of self defense this can be a severe problem.
I also think that this experience has taught us that a system like this will run the risk of promoting hate mobs against unpopular players. Someone who is hated by everyone (regardless of how legitimate their right to play the game in a certain style) can easily be ganged up on by a guild or group of players. It doesn't take much to hate monger when you target popular players. You can have everyone's support in no time.
What I suggest should be done instead is have a voting system that will flag the player in question. Not something that will give players direct powers. But something that will notify the devs or guides about a player which should be investigated. Once the flag has been tripped, the official server logs will highlight every in-game chat and player interaction of said player. And upon a thorough investigation, involved players will then be contacted by a dev or guide and they will receive notification of the results.
One of the most frustrating things about situations like these is to find proof of those actions. I'm not the type of person who likes to cry wolf everytime the slightest hint of harassment comes up. But considering the gravity of the situation, of being the unpopular one, I felt it was necessary to save some logs to help defend my point. And I can't even imagine how much time is wasted going through the official logs of the game.
I UNDERSTAND that it's a tedious process for you devs. But it's crucial to offer a quick and easy system that refers back to those logs. Because that's the only place you'll find the truth. Not through cross-examination and to reward the player with the best story, even though that should still be part of the process.
As discouraging as it may seem that all of this is behind closed doors and how there may be a delayed notification, I think it's the best approach to handling such disputes fairly. Because it's apparent that when these systems are abused, it does nothing but waste everyone's time and builds up a lot of stress in the process. Time which could've been spent on making the game better.
I also think that this experience has taught us that a system like this will run the risk of promoting hate mobs against unpopular players. Someone who is hated by everyone (regardless of how legitimate their right to play the game in a certain style) can easily be ganged up on by a guild or group of players. It doesn't take much to hate monger when you target popular players. You can have everyone's support in no time.
What I suggest should be done instead is have a voting system that will flag the player in question. Not something that will give players direct powers. But something that will notify the devs or guides about a player which should be investigated. Once the flag has been tripped, the official server logs will highlight every in-game chat and player interaction of said player. And upon a thorough investigation, involved players will then be contacted by a dev or guide and they will receive notification of the results.
One of the most frustrating things about situations like these is to find proof of those actions. I'm not the type of person who likes to cry wolf everytime the slightest hint of harassment comes up. But considering the gravity of the situation, of being the unpopular one, I felt it was necessary to save some logs to help defend my point. And I can't even imagine how much time is wasted going through the official logs of the game.
I UNDERSTAND that it's a tedious process for you devs. But it's crucial to offer a quick and easy system that refers back to those logs. Because that's the only place you'll find the truth. Not through cross-examination and to reward the player with the best story, even though that should still be part of the process.
As discouraging as it may seem that all of this is behind closed doors and how there may be a delayed notification, I think it's the best approach to handling such disputes fairly. Because it's apparent that when these systems are abused, it does nothing but waste everyone's time and builds up a lot of stress in the process. Time which could've been spent on making the game better.
Hmm. You're right about the 'harass 3 people forever' bit.
Problem is, how high to make the individual ban threshold? 10 kills in 12 hours? 15?
I also assume that duels would not count towards this.
Arolte: That mob thing is true, but this system would require that each voting player have been killed by the griefer at least 8 times. Guilds couldn't gang up unless that guild had been severely targeted by the player in question.
Problem is, how high to make the individual ban threshold? 10 kills in 12 hours? 15?
I also assume that duels would not count towards this.
Arolte: That mob thing is true, but this system would require that each voting player have been killed by the griefer at least 8 times. Guilds couldn't gang up unless that guild had been severely targeted by the player in question.
I agree completely but I think it should be less than 8 hours. More like 4 or 5. In eight hours of fighting at B8, odds are I'll kill the same person 3 or 4 times.
Which is just fine, so long as you don't kill them 10 times.
Am I the only person that's not in the least bit bothered by "griefing"? It would be a welcome change from what I'm used to, namely, "ignoring".
There are some issues with ctishman's that I see, or maybe I'm just missing something:
I think that all griefing warnings should be player driven. Players must submit a griefing complaint for any action to be even considered, so people who aren't bothered by attempted griefing can just go on with their business, and people who are, can complain, although they would need to supply further information that I'll talk about in a bit. I know that I've been killed by Shape more than 8 times in a 24 hour period, and I'm almost sure that I asked him to fight those 8 times.
Perhaps if a separate kill/killed log were kept (separate from errors.log) so players could just pop in, and see definitely how many times they'd been killed by so-and-so (without having to search through hours and hours of chatlogs), and where they were killed, and then would be able to simple copy and paste that information into the griefing complaint. It would also give devs definite times and places for your deaths that they could compare with their records and things, and enforcement would have no doubt in any party's minds as to whether a player was griefing or not. If a player complains of griefing, but all of the deaths were in Sedina B-8, then the devs can essentially ignore the complaint, and tell the player that he should pick a safer place to type. Or if a player fakes the number of deaths, then the devs can check back through their logs to see if that player really died at that time (if they have that ability). Players that lie about being griefed will naturally not be as readily trusted the next time they submit a complaint.
And then, punishments increase per the number of (valid) complaints within a certain (maybe a week?) period. 1-3 requests results in a warning that informs a player that a complaint was filed. 4 requests results in a 1 day suspension where a player cannot log into vendetta, etc. 8 requests results in a week's suspension. 12 requests results in a player's account being banned, or whatever.
I think that all griefing warnings should be player driven. Players must submit a griefing complaint for any action to be even considered, so people who aren't bothered by attempted griefing can just go on with their business, and people who are, can complain, although they would need to supply further information that I'll talk about in a bit. I know that I've been killed by Shape more than 8 times in a 24 hour period, and I'm almost sure that I asked him to fight those 8 times.
Perhaps if a separate kill/killed log were kept (separate from errors.log) so players could just pop in, and see definitely how many times they'd been killed by so-and-so (without having to search through hours and hours of chatlogs), and where they were killed, and then would be able to simple copy and paste that information into the griefing complaint. It would also give devs definite times and places for your deaths that they could compare with their records and things, and enforcement would have no doubt in any party's minds as to whether a player was griefing or not. If a player complains of griefing, but all of the deaths were in Sedina B-8, then the devs can essentially ignore the complaint, and tell the player that he should pick a safer place to type. Or if a player fakes the number of deaths, then the devs can check back through their logs to see if that player really died at that time (if they have that ability). Players that lie about being griefed will naturally not be as readily trusted the next time they submit a complaint.
And then, punishments increase per the number of (valid) complaints within a certain (maybe a week?) period. 1-3 requests results in a warning that informs a player that a complaint was filed. 4 requests results in a 1 day suspension where a player cannot log into vendetta, etc. 8 requests results in a week's suspension. 12 requests results in a player's account being banned, or whatever.
I'd agree with CP on this one.
And as for Andreas' suggestion... that's great, but not quite a direct way to "combat" griefers.
Yeah... bulleted lists are easier to understand... I think...
-Kill/Killed By log needs to be created, it can be used for more than just this
-A report system would work best, seeing as reports can be verified... and it's not really open to abuse because of that fact.
-The only issue is that the report system will require direct attention from a dev/admin... which will be troublesome once this game gets a larger playerbase.
-Zoras Ock
And as for Andreas' suggestion... that's great, but not quite a direct way to "combat" griefers.
Yeah... bulleted lists are easier to understand... I think...
-Kill/Killed By log needs to be created, it can be used for more than just this
-A report system would work best, seeing as reports can be verified... and it's not really open to abuse because of that fact.
-The only issue is that the report system will require direct attention from a dev/admin... which will be troublesome once this game gets a larger playerbase.
-Zoras Ock