Feedback talk:User/Rose Of Kali/Scaling Dishonorable duration

You should state "last 7 days" instead of "last week", which could also mean the time from Monday to Sunday. --Silver Edge 06:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I also said the times are subject to tweaking. This is to convey the basic idea and let the developers pick the numbers they find most appropriate. :) But I will change the wording as you suggested. Rose Of Kali 14:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Time spent in Dishonourable due to reporting players and only for reporting players does not count when deciding on time for next dishonourable hex plz, kthx. A F K When Needed 20:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

If possible. However, I suggested to make the scaling exponential. This means that occasional dishonor would not have much effect on scaling, and only the more you get hexed, the stronger the scaling becomes. If you get dishonor often just because you report and others don't, maybe you're doing something wrong... Rose Of Kali 21:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

What, giving a fuck? A F K When Needed 14:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

To whom?.. I usually refrain from being the first to report until the "bla bla has been declared a leecher" message pops up, and also tell others to report when I see a leecher. If you're the only one to report, it doesn't help anyone anyway, so why hurt yourself to prove a point when nobody is listening? Rose Of Kali 18:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Ummm.

Someone does have to do it first, and in PuGs, you don't know what'll happen anyway. A F K When Needed 21:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I let someone else do it, because then there are "guaranteed" two votes, as I will vote after them. And it's not always that I wait, but I always bring it up in chat and ping the offender on the compass while other players are in range to actually see and verify it. And most of the time I don't PvP for that long, so I'm not as worried about dishonor, I'd just go back to PvE. That said, I only remember getting it once in Costume Brawl a while ago, I think I rage quit from a 2-leaver team. And I do a fair share of reporting. For some reason, I don't seem to get into situations that other players complain about, having noone else report the offenders while they do and get dishonor. Rose Of Kali 02:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

It's neve very rare that I get Dishonour after a single game (imperfect memory is leading me to avoid making claims I can't know for 100%)

Generally I just stick with it, from one game to the next.

Now that all that's out of the way, cookie and milk, or chocolate? A F K When Needed 15:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

This would work if dishonorable would work as it was intended (ie punishing griefers). Koda Kumi 15:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

"Cookies 'n' Cream" white chocolate. XD Now you just gave me a craving I can't satisfy. :( /pout Rose Of Kali 16:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

*hides* A F K When Needed 20:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any problems with this suggestion or are you just QQing? Dark Morphon 17:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you add a vote boxes to this feedback? When is it going to happen? What is needed to make this happen?

A poll on the wiki can never accurately represent the preference of the playerbase as a whole, and would be worthless. As far as it happening, only the developers decide if/when/how this happens. They don't have to say anything on this page. Rose Of Kali 03:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

They should just make it hardcore: Get Dishonor Hex more than 3 times in your ENTIRE gaming experience and face a PERMABAN. No more said. Case closed. End of discussion. Just PBAN any and all offendorks and get rid of GW1 players until there's nobody left to play/compete with except SF ele botters and the Qqing scrubs crying to Anet to get them to make shit worse in this lousy PoS game. I say be brutal and just PBAN everyone that's awarded the Dishonorable hex three times total. --Ulterion 01:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

^i rofl'd @ obvious trollpost. :> --Briar 01:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the suggestion's fine, but they need to do two more things:

A)Increase leech dishonor to 4 but keep reporting without support at 2. Problem is, reporting leeching has gone to the point nowadays where it is NEVER supported by team mates becuase they know it doesn't do crap. So basically, it has become a sort of report whoever you like for leeching since you're always getting dishonor for it. That needs changing.

B)Allow leaving a match after 3 minutes to not incur dishonor. Really now, staying in a battle with 2+ healers and no damage vs 2+ healers and no damage is just stupid. Greep 07:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I like A, but I think B is more to do with stalemate resolution rather than the reporting system itself. For example, if too few points have been scored after a period of time, go into a "sudden death" or VoD type scenario (not exactly, but that kind of thing). If your team doesn't want to resign in a "hopeless" or stale match, then you shouldn't be allowed to just leave them without consequences. Rose Of Kali 11:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Add:

• "You may leave a match three minutes after resigning without penalty, as long as at least one other person on the team has resigned."
• "You may leave a match after you have been dead for 30 seconds without penalty."
• "You may leave a match in which the number of remaining players on each team is unequal without penalty."

Further:

• Allow players at least ten seconds after the defeated party has been kicked in which to leave. It happens frequently enough that someone intends to leave, but does it to late, leaving the team a man down in their next match. is for Raine, etc. 11:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

This isn't a page to fix the dishonor system as a whole, just about a small part of the system, namely scaling the duration rather than one-zise-fits-all, just see the page title. Not to say that I don't like your suggestion, you have some good points there, but it's your suggestion and doesn't quite go with this title, so you could make a separate page for that. Could even make a section on these suggestions with cross links to "Other Dishonor System suggestions." Rose Of Kali 09:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

If you want to "Fix" the dishonorable system, you need to fix the players. People leave in RA because their team is bad. There's no reason to stay on a bad team if you aren't going to win. It sounds elitist, but people in RA are bad. It isn't worth my time to carry a team to 5 wins because I'm so afraid of getting dishonorable 2x in one day. In HA and GvG and even Codex to an extent, you know what your teammates are capable of, and don't want to leave. In RA it's RANDOM, if you want to decrease the amount of leavers after a match, you have to improve the players, or give the griefers back TA. With the fusion of the INT and AMER districts, there has become a real split in the quality of players in RA. Some are fresh, and have yet to learn, and some have been doing this for 4.5 years.

As a griefer, the reason we leave is because our team is bad. RA shouldn't be the cornhole of PvP where the noobs go. RA is where you are stuck on a team with only 3 other people, who could be, in all respects, terrible players. You can't escape like you can in FA and JQ (due to team size), but there's no reason that those of us who appreciate 4v4 should have to get stuck with all the scrubs. If you're going to whine about your "good players leaving" then become a good player, and they won't.

I'm all for reworking Dishonorable for the competitive missions due to botting and leeching, but leave RA dishonorable the way it is.128.208.115.71 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

So I heard leaving after matches ends is perfectly legit. Okay, you don't feel like grinding out 5 wins with a bad team? Play one round and leave. There's no punishment for that. DCS only punishes people who leave DURING a match, and that, imo, is acceptable - forcing 3 other people to play a bullshit match that they may/may not've been able to win (face it - the other team could very well be just as bad) isn't anything like fair.

tl;dr no one cares if you leave after matches. is for Raine, etc. 20:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to repeat myself: *points at the page title*

THIS ISN'T INTENDED TO FIX OR REWORK THE DISHONOR SYSTEM AS A WHOLE.

Does that make sense? Any way I can explain that more clearly? Take your WoTs about RA and whatnot elsewhere. If you have anything to say about scaling up the duration of dishonorable hex under some circumstances, I'm listening. Rose Of Kali 22:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

They should make leavers become insta-perma-banned. That way GW1 can die faster, leaving the whiney newbie scrubs to play in there litlle sandbox of fail. --65.33.198.229 04:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

their*. Fail. is for Raine, etc. 05:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree completely with the original post

I don't agree with some of the follow-on suggestions, but the main point is excellent.

I would add one more thing: All dishonor points earned are "remembered" by the system until a whole week goes by without additional dishonor. This is a little different than the original post's wording, but I think would be a worthy addition.

The reason is that bots will figure out the timing the other way. With this change, you get exponentially scaled dishonor that lasts until you've been a good boy for a whole week.

NOTE: I would not, for this purpose, count dishonor gained because you reported someone that nobody else reported.

I'll agree with the opening poster that the numbers can be tweaked. But I can guarantee that if dishonor lasted until a week passed without dishonor, almost all leeching and leaving would stop. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Daddicus (talk). 19:04, November 6, 2010

I do mention in my suggestion to keep the dishonor history for 7-14 days, so it would still apply to the scaling if you get it again in that time frame, and the scaling would be even higher based on the history of the last 24 hours. But any item in the history will "fall off" once it's older than 7 days.

Are you suggesting to never wipe any item in the history, no matter how old, unless a full week goes by without infractions? This would mean that if you get hexed at least once a week, your history stays and stacks until your next infraction causes a dishonor hex that lasts more than 7 days, and forces you to reset by not letting you into PvP for a whole 7 days. This I think is unnecessary and requires a more complicated history system, along with being plain overkill. Rose Of Kali 20:07, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Support

I like this idea. I also like the suggestion above that suggests a way to encumber bots. The details are probably overkill (as Rose notes), but I think the idea is sound. Some possible mechanisms:

• Two types of dishonor: dishonorable reporting and dishonorable behavior.
  • Reporting points do not scale nor are they remembered. That does mean that it's easier to grief repeatedly, but as far as I can tell, that doesn't seem to be a significant issue.
  • Behavior points scale, along the lines suggested.
• There could be three stages of remembered dishonor:
  • Today (last 24 hours): earn exponentially; forget linearly.
  • Recent (last 72 hours): earn geometrically, forget geometrically.
  • Pattern (last 7-14 days): earn a few at a time; forget exponentially.

Or, in simpler terms: the longer time that has past, the quicker points are forgotten; the less time that has past, the more quickly points are earned.

Using different scaling mechanisms has a similar effect to giving a 24-hour cool down period: players who behave well generally will see the effects gradually dissipate; bots who behave poorly will have their points increase too fast for them to easily lose them all. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)