Ratings Disputes and Offence Reporting (Discussion)

[Jofursloft]

4 hours ago, thankforpie said:

it would be good if leaver lost automatically (same about afkers)

And if the player is only a poor man that lost connection for real? It would be unfair

[Thorrky]

A disconnect should be a loss in my opinion - there would be the occasional misfire of justice but it would be better than the current situation. I've had the majority of my wins disconnected now and it sucks.

I'm not overly hurt about losing a few internet points personally, but this has happened so much I don't feel that my score represents my ability and I've had people accuse me of tanking my points to look newer than I am

[thankforpie]

1 hour ago, Jofursloft said:

And if the player is only a poor man that lost connection for real? It would be unfair

In league of legends if you lose connection you get 5min waiting penalty.

 

If it happens more you get up to even 1h waiting penalty before you can start a game.

[Jofursloft]

1 hour ago, Thorrky said:

A disconnect should be a loss in my opinion - there would be the occasional misfire of justice but it would be better than the current situation. I've had the majority of my wins disconnected now and it sucks.

 I'm not overly hurt about losing a few internet points personally, but this has happened so much I don't feel that my score represents my ability and I've had people accuse me of tanking my points to look newer than I am

This unfortunately was the same problem I met when I was a 1300 to 1600 player. Like 30% of the rated 1v1 games I played are not in my rating cause of some leavers. The only one thing to do in these cases is to report them so the moderators will ban them. Anyway, remember that we are talking about a low ranked band of people. When you will start playing against 1500+ players there will be less problems about it. 

 

6 minutes ago, thankforpie said:

In league of legends if you lose connection you get 5min waiting penalty.

 If it happens more you get up to even 1h waiting penalty before you can start a game.

I personally don't like it. It happens me many times to lose connection during the match, and it wouldn't be fair to ban me from lobby 5 mins for this reason. It would be more fair to give the victory (and the points) to one of the two player after a certain amount of time. In rated chess, for example, if you lose connection you have two minutes to rejoin, then you lose the game and the points

[Guest]

Unlike League of Legends, 0AD doesn't have dedicated servers yet.

[Thorrky]

1 minute ago, Jofursloft said:

In rated chess, for example, if you lose connection you have two minutes to rejoin, then you lose the game and the points

2 minutes is a reasonable grace period to give honest disconnecters a chance. Disconnecting in the first minute or so shouldn't result in a loss either as that's can't be a rage quit.

 

3 minutes ago, Jofursloft said:

When you will start playing against 1500+ players there will be less problems about it. 

Yes definitely, for now I'll just have to content myself with cleaning up the mean streets of 1100-1200  ;D

[Altrine]

if we report to him  What will he do ban them?

[thankforpie]

do you rush them early with camels?

[Imperator Ferrum Princeps I]

Maybe have an AI take over when a player leaves and let him re-establish control when he logs back in.

 

Though to prevent exploitation (eg. letting the AI win for you to get score) make it a somewhat dumb AI.

[Jofursloft]

15 hours ago, Imperator Ferrum Princeps I said:

Maybe have an AI take over when a player leaves and let him re-establish control when he logs back in.

This wouldn't be great: current Al just suicides against garrisoned buildings, has a terrible attack strategy and manages eco really bad. A player can easily destroy the Al with just 20 cavarly men, destroying eco. For me Very difficult Al has is around the same level of a 1200-1300 player

Edited October 10, 2018 by Jofursloft

[Imperator Ferrum Princeps I]

I know it would make the player loose, but it is better and smoother then an insta win, and if the player leginimately had bad connection they can come back before poop hits the fan. If they just left for bad cheaty reasons like listed above in the OP then they will loose.

 

The whole point is that it would make the quitter inevitably loose if he does not relog.

Edited October 10, 2018 by Imperator Ferrum Princeps I

[Altrine]

Cielo you could have just have just reported that name of the player and banned him to @user1 in the game itself and not wasting time and posting it in forum ( sorry if rude) but reporting in instance is the best and some people quit if losing.

 

[cielo]

Hi Altrine, when the dude quitted, I immediately writed to @Hannibal_Barca in the game and he gave.me the instruction that I followed. That s whay I wrote in the forum. Have a nice day

[Altrine]

I suppose you should wait until user1 replies to your questions. Hope you get a good and satisfactory answer.

[Servo]

Replacing with the hardest aggressive AI is much better than nothing if the player is irreplaceable by human player. This would at least save the game if it’s team game and should be fine if done between the earliest to middle phase. 

[Altrine]

I suppose 1v1 quittters will never stop lol

[Guest]

I guess not before WFG hosts or run each rated game on their own servers.

[Altrine]

those types of updates will come in Alpha 24?

[Jofursloft]

21 hours ago, (-_-) said:

I guess not before WFG hosts 

Pls say to WFG to be less shy: we all know that he would like to partecipate in the fun but he is too loyal to work

[Altrine]

At we could make a new thing @(-_-) like giving 5 to 10 minutes time for disconnected players to reconnect or just let the remaining player as winner

[Guest]

TLDR; All these ideas about making the disconnected player lose will never work and are worse than the current system.

With no WFG insight into rated games, the main challenge is to make sure that the system cannot be fooled. The current model operates on the basis that two separate players would not lie. And both are telling the truth. After each game a report is sent by the two participants to the ratings bot who only accepts it if both match. If its decided that individual players can be trusted to always be telling the truth, there is no safety against players who would lie. A player can forge several reports of games that he didnt play and gain points while at the same time an innocent player would lose points. This is what will happen if the host is given the power to decide the winner of the match when someone else loses connection.

The challenge is to make sure that WFG can determine the authenticity of game reports. The most reliable way being to monitor the whole game ofcourse.

I could be wrong about that stuff, but I hope that clears up the question of “how come they haven’t fixed something so trivial by now?”.

[Altrine]

Yeah your right as these banning don't work much. 

[Yani]

:thinking:

[Altrine]

@Yani tell @user1 about it I think he would ban him for some time. 

[Boudica]

@user1