Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gator303

Ratings Disputes and Offence Reporting (Discussion)

Recommended Posts

Right now we can only talk to the guy and ask him to insta resign a game to give points to the offended that presented the proof.

He can refuse and its hard to get all parties at the same time.

We could ban but he'll just create a new account and repeat.

If we could  ask the ratings bot to register a result on demand, we could implement a system like ouGaming suggests. Wishful thinking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 2/9/2018 at 5:58 AM, HMS-Surprise said:

-Also, it would be nice to find a report button on player's profile.

That sounds very easy to abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you ask for replay and a proper explanation in that "report abuse" page it could be easier to share. There is no exact way to report this kind of situation. People tell their problem in the lobby. Most of the time mods didn't ask for replay just trust the reputation of players. This is also easy to abuse. However, if you ask the replay and a short description of the issue it could be easier. 

 

Sometimes I play ordinary players and they quit without resigning. It's boring but the player already had 996 points or so it's not worth to report it. It's just not worth it. We're talking about sending an e-mail with an attachment here. So the current system is already open to abuse. It could be great if there would be a solution for it. Have a great day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any way to establish a second "rating" for Players who leave without resigning? It could say for example player left 50% of his games without defeat, resigning or winning (like not ended games)? Than players can choose if they want to play against someone or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nobbi said:

Is there any way to establish a second "rating" for Players who leave without resigning? It could say for example player left 50% of his games without defeat, resigning or winning (like not ended games)? Than players can choose if they want to play against someone or not.

@Hannibal_Barca just got an idea and forgot to mention you.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2018 at 1:58 AM, HMS-Surprise said:

-I think there should be a few moderator just for this situation.

We got a shortage of possible candidates

 

5 hours ago, HMS-Surprise said:

Most of the time mods didn't ask for replay just trust the reputation of players are afk.

 

 

5 hours ago, HMS-Surprise said:

We're talking about sending an e-mail with an attachment here.

 

Actually it's posting on forums and mentioning us. Because I don't think @elexis would be thrilled to look over replays in his tiny free time.

 

But it might be useful to have a subforum we can check everyday.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I say this is alpha ? You know because I can :P

Sorry you had such a bad experience with your first rated game. But since you got involved in dev you know there is room for improvement and better than that you can do something about it. You could make the game prettier so at least if your enemy is playing dirty it will look awesome :P

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually after the freezes are lifted I intend to look into fixing up multiplayer in a lot of ways, to reduce the lag and the load from spectators and whatever else. Saying it's alpha is totally an excuse. :P It's been alpha since 2001.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, aeonios said:

Eventually after the freezes are lifted I intend to look into fixing up multiplayer in a lot of ways, to reduce the lag and the load from spectators and whatever else. Saying it's alpha is totally an excuse. :P It's been alpha since 2001.

No, the alpha starting late... before das pre alpha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no standard pop cap, no standard map size, no standard starting resources amount that define rated games.

Indeed having a standard to follow could help the direction of the balance based on 1v1 matches.

Actually when you select rated game, settings are at player's indiscretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't you see the settings before you join a game? (I don't know, I've neither the time nor the ambition to try out multiplayer.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Settings would be visible and players are supposed to click ready after agreeing to them.

I guess everyone assumes it would be a standard game and just trust the host.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well usually people don't do screwy things with the settings. I've played a bunch of games since then and never had that happen again, at least for rated games. However sometimes people do screwy things when testing or playing nonstandard games and accidentally forget to fix the settings afterwards, and there are also a rare few bottom feeders who try to score free elons by abusing the settings to their advantage. Checking the settings for every game would be a pain, and lots of new players just don't know that this sort of thing can happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I don't get it. Surely the match was even? Your opponent didn't start with more resources or anything, right? :)

No, but if you're expecting to have 300 resources and then dump all 100 of your wood on a farmstead the game tends not to go in your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, aeonios said:

No, but if you're expecting to have 300 resources and then dump all 100 of your wood on a farmstead the game tends not to go in your favor.

Right. I was just making sure you weren't saying they cheated or something. 

If there's a standard match settings for rated games, then I hope its moddable (default pop and resources in DE is 500), or the settings just choose the "default" settings so that it carries over to mods. I know rated games don't include mods, but it could be cool in the future to do so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Right. I was just making sure you weren't saying they cheated or something. 

If there's a standard match settings for rated games, then I hope its moddable (default pop and resources in DE is 500), or the settings just choose the "default" settings so that it carries over to mods. I know rated games don't include mods, but it could be cool in the future to do so.

at this point would be nice to have a dedicated leaderboard aswell. Not sure if it would be mantained and even doable since mods can stack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Right. I was just making sure you weren't saying they cheated or something. 

If there's a standard match settings for rated games, then I hope its moddable (default pop and resources in DE is 500), or the settings just choose the "default" settings so that it carries over to mods. I know rated games don't include mods, but it could be cool in the future to do so.

That's a fair point. It really needs to be verified server side, so there will need to be a way for mod devs to declare the rated settings for their mod on the server even if it's defined in the mod's files. Mod.io is still rather new and I don't think infra really supports much of anything as is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it seems that you are mostly irritated by having lost the game, and the points you mention have little to do with that. These are the reasons of your defeat:

  • The opponent collected seven valuable treasures before you scouted the map. A single one of them was worth 600 food, which allowed for a faster start, and then a metal treasure allowed phasing up to the City Phase earlier.
  • Even though you had more units when you were first attacked, you took a fight with a smaller group of soldiers. While it's true that the opponent also had more techs researched, this wasn't the main reason of him winning the battle. His other advantages were better army composition (using the hero as a tank, while your tank units were chasing rams), having captured a temple that kept healing his units while fighting and, last but not least, making use of the hero bonus for skirmishers.
  • You had no ram counter prepared, so that your main base got destroyed and most of the economy stopped.

I don't think that the match setting screen is to blame. The recent alpha made it rather easy to check the few important options, and I wouldn't consider it useful to restrict players from playing a rated match with the settings they want. While setting an official standard for rated duels (and highlighting the differences in the match setup screen) might be a good suggestion, I wouldn't hurry calling the current system stupid.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ping me if YilmazGNG is online, so we will ask him to resign. If he is reported again he can be banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...