The Alt+F4 Multiplayer Problem

[WoeIsToWho]

@ReanuKeeves00

Yeah well hacking is a pretty serious misbehaviour. Wanting to find an enjoyable game is not. Completely different problems.

That’s very unlike what you said before, which is

@ReanuKeeves00

Kicking players out is NOT problem resolution.

Which we now agree was a misnomer, yes? Sometimes kicking is the appropriate answer to a problem. The matter is finding an appropriate answer to the problem. My belief is that a timeout for quitting on a map is more than reasonable. You disagree. Fact of the matter is, if you don’t think this is a reasonable answer to the problem, you can’t go any softer than this, so you’d be advocating for not solving the problem. Congratz, we’re back at A because B, and this is an utterly horrific argument. The worst argument on the face of the planet, or any planet for that matter. Just so we’re clear.

@ReanuKeeves00

I get your point, but the manager might also want to replace the game or do something about it, if a character in the game is clearly broken or OP, and hence no one likes to fight against that character.

This is a misdirection. I didn’t say we were talking about 3rd strike. Nobody wants to play against Chun-Li.

Just because someone doesn’t like playing against a character doesn’t make them unfair. Actually, if you’ve played games in general you know complaints tend to happen in tiers regardless of actual unit strength. Really good players complain about the Chinese just like really bad players complain about the Britons or the Goths. This happens with every game. At every tier of play, there will be a character (or characters) that best utilize the tools readily available to, and utilized by, players at that tier, and that character will be considered OP.

@ReanuKeeves00

Why do people skip certain maps?

• map preference and lack of practice/experience on other maps
• speed of requeue compared to game length
• high likelihood of playing a very familiar map

If you’ve come up with any others, let me know.

I’ve chose to target the second one. Either we make the game faster or we make requeues slower. I’m not in favor of making empire wars the standard mode of play, so slower requeues will change the CBA of Alt-F4.

@ReanuKeeves00

Point is: A game’s primary premise is to be fun. If players can’t easily find games that they consider fun, then they won’t play, which is bad for the game overall, as the playerbase will eventually shrink and so on and so forth.

here’s those players who you’re risking “shrinking off” who cared to make their complaints heard in just this thread

@Bourne2Believe

as a player who like a variety of maps i sometimes have to ban arabia not not play arabia every single game. and that leads to people just going alt f4 when they dont like the map we got matched on. so i have to restart my queue and wait for another couple of minutes. this especially is a big issue on team games

@Equalizer938341

I suggest to remove the favorite map choice completely from the game and back to the old map pool. Actually after this choice was introduced in the game, the game became completely boring, it feels like it only have two maps!!!

@WoodsierCorn696

I agree that there need some punishment for early quitters. I would extent the length from getting matched (1 min. countdown) to 5 minutes into the game. All those quitters makes it impossible to get into a game.

The issue is the biggest at team games. You just need one quitter and the game is over (or wont start at all). But it also sometimes happens in 1v1 as well.

@Atafas

its definetly more then 2% and people who are ruining the fun deserve to be punished since they stop game expierence

@StrayDog8037

absoultely agree, just queued 20 mins … alt-F4 almost 7 times now.

@PilgrimHYR

I queued for 1v1 Ranked yesterday, preferring Four Lakes and couldn’t join the match for 3 times in a row. This is nonsense. Seriously people are even dodging Four Lakes? Is there anything “toxic” with it?

For those who only want to play Arabia (or Arena), I think the most viable solution is to display the Unranked ELO in game, and let them go play lobby games, just like on Voobly. Ranked queue needs punishment. That is common sense

and I mean, there’s probably plenty of people who have made their piece heard thus far on other threads who aren’t represented in this snip, and it certainly doesn’t encompass the entirety of players who are being disenfranchised by this behavior if you’re willing to believe that not every person who dislikes something will go through the trouble to complain about it. I’d hope that’s believable enough.

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

Which we now agree was a misnomer, yes? Sometimes kicking is the appropriate answer to a problem. The matter is finding an appropriate answer to the problem. My belief is that a timeout for quitting on a map is more than reasonable. You disagree. Fact of the matter is, if you don’t think this is a reasonable answer to the problem, you can’t go any softer than this, so you’d be advocating for not solving the problem. Congratz, we’re back at A because B, and this is an utterly horrific argument. The worst argument on the face of the planet, or any planet for that matter. Just so we’re clear.

Just to be VERY clear with you on this: Your whole paragraph lacks an argument, or a point. I gave you a lot of suggestions on how the situation can be improved, you chose the ignore/not address them. I am not an advocate of knee-jerk reactions, so of course I will continue to oppose the idea of kicking players out, since that doesn’t actually solve the underlying problems, and also just annoys the playerbase

@WoeIsToWho

If you’ve come up with any others, let me know.

As per my previous points, we’d need an actual feedback system. As I’m not a mind-reader, I do not know why others skip maps. While I know a few people, and their reasons, I don’t think you’re looking for anecdotal evidences here.

@WoeIsToWho

That’s very unlike what you said before, which is

Hmm not sure if this thread is the right place to explain the difference between an incident resolution and a structural fix. (in a nutshell, if a game is hackable, you want to quickly ‘resolve the issue’ by banning the hacker, sure, but as long as the game remains hackable, the problem at large is not solved)

[WoeIsToWho]

@anon45959656

oppose the idea of kicking players out

Again. There is zero kicking. This, like any other penalty, is avoided by players simply playing the game in the way they prefer. This is only a detrimental effect to those who have already decided to leave the game and you can’t kick someone out who’s already out. You are not seeming to be discussing this with good faith by continuously using a poorly ascribed loaded term.

@anon45959656

Just to be VERY clear with you on this: Your whole paragraph lacks an argument

You’re correct, the point of that paragraph was to give you a chance to agree that “kicking doesn’t solve problems” is an incorrect statement in itself and can be used in the extreme cases to solve the most egregious of problem actors. You’ve failed to do so, so we’re back at you claiming that

@anon45959656

Kicking players out is NOT problem resolution

which is wrong as I’ve stated, clearly, already. Unless you’re willing to concede that this was an incorrect statement on it’s face, that paragraph had a meaningful jab, which is

@WoeIsToWho

Sometimes kicking is the appropriate answer to a problem. The matter is finding an appropriate answer to the problem.

and your failure to acknowledge this as an “argument” is simply that. Mind you, none of these suggestions have anything to do with kicking, that’s a loaded term you continue to choose to use, but as you are using it and explaining that it’s bad I’m not just going to say “a tool” is bad, or let you say so for that matter.

@anon45959656

As per my previous points, we’d need an actual feedback system. As I’m not a mind-reader, I do not know why others skip maps

I agree. Feedback is important. Right now, we’ve got the one real source of the forums stating that there’s a problem. When we’ve got feedback spliced into the system itself we’ll have a better indication of what the scope of said problem is, but right now, we know it’s there and I am advocating fixing it and worrying about the data that isn’t being collected is akin to being afraid of the dark in my view.

@anon45959656

Hmm not sure if this thread is the right place to explain the difference between an incident resolution and a structural fix. (in a nutshell, if a game is hackable, you want to quickly ‘resolve the issue’ by banning the hacker, sure, but as long as the game remains hackable, the problem at large is not solved)

So what if someone plays teamgames just to get into pocket position, fast castle into mangonels, and kill allied units? What if they think that’s fun? Will you not kick them?

Structures create structural problems. You can place band-aids on said structural issues, but really fixing the problem requires changing the structure entirely. That creates new structural problems, by default, because all structures have structural issues. There is no perfect structure.

Sometimes the best answer to a structural problem is to make it known that the problem is there and is not to be abused and to remove those who would abuse these systems against your wishes.

as an aside.

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

You’re correct, the point of that paragraph was to give you a chance to agree that “kicking doesn’t solve problems” is an incorrect statement in itself and can be used in the extreme cases to solve the most egregious of problem actors. You’ve failed to do so, so we’re back at you claiming that

@WoeIsToWho

Sometimes kicking is the appropriate answer to a problem. The matter is finding an appropriate answer to the problem.

You fail to understand the difference between an incident resolution, and a structural/general resolution. Kicking out players will ‘solve’ the issue at that moment in time. The problem is that the reason why people skip maps is not being addressed. This means a big problem still exists, but it’s solved by a knee-jerk, band-aid type of reaction, instead of looking into the bigger picture. Usually it’s not a good idea to rely on these king of band-aid solutions.

@WoeIsToWho

I agree. Feedback is important. Right now, we’ve got the one real source of the forums stating that there’s a problem. When we’ve got feedback spliced into the system itself we’ll have a better indication of what the scope of said problem is, but right now, we know it’s there and I am advocating fixing it and worrying about the data that isn’t being collected is akin to being afraid of the dark in my view.

Hurr durr kick players out I don’t like reeee =/= feedback system. (btw, Making sure that the requirements are clear, and all the necessary data is there is the first step on resolving a problem in a structured way.)

@WoeIsToWho

So what if someone plays teamgames just to get into pocket position, fast castle into mangonels, and kill allied units? What if they think that’s fun? Will you not kick them?

This is a very good question actually. Because this does occasionally happen. I think this one might be an issue to resolve in the way of ‘setting some etiquette’.

@WoeIsToWho

That creates new structural problems, by default, because all structures have structural issues. There is no perfect structure.

The other option is to give up and do nothing about it, your call.

[WoeIsToWho]

@anon45959656

You fail to understand the difference between an incident resolution, and a structural/general resolution.

You didn’t read the rest of my post?

Expecting a failure of comprehension as a reason for argumentation is a bad way to have a discussion be meaningful.

@anon45959656

Hurr durr kick players out I don’t like reeee =/= feedback system.

You keep saying “kick.” I’m literally only going to say this one more time. Kick is not the proper term. There are zero kicks happening as a result of any timeout system happening. I will simply ignore any further use of the word because it’s utterly irrelevant to the subject.

@anon45959656

Because this does occasionally happen. I think this one might be an issue to resolve in the way of ‘setting some etiquette’.

So what if they ignore the Etiquette? What if all your “good player manners” blurbs don’t work? What will you do?

@anon45959656

The other option is to give up and do nothing about it, your call.

False Dilemma. You can address a problem without changing the structure by acknowledging the problem within the structure and doing your best to address the issue within the system. You don’'t have to give up or tear the structure down. Just do the best with what you have.

the DE team is not currently doing anything and that’s moreso the problem.

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

You didn’t read the rest of my post?

Expecting a failure of comprehension as a reason for argumentation is a bad way to have a discussion be meaningful.

I read the entirety of your posts. I just do not want to rephrase the same thing the in multitudes of different ways. If you wanted to understand what arguments I presented, you would have. Repeating it again will not help.

@WoeIsToWho

So what if they ignore the Etiquette? What if all your “good player manners” blurbs don’t work? What will you do?

one week ban from making mangonels they’ll know better than to grief allies… jokes aside, the game does already have a report player functionality. I think something like mangoneling an ally to ruin his game for no good reason is report worthy.

@WoeIsToWho

the DE team is not currently doing anything and that’s moreso the problem.

Still better than kicking players out. Maybe they are working on some system behind the scenes.

[WoeIsToWho]

@anon45959656

I read the entirety of your posts. I just do not want to rephrase the same thing the in multitudes of different ways. If you wanted to understand what arguments I presented, you would have. Repeating it again will not help.

I’ve understood what you’ve had to say on the matter. I’ve disagreed with it. I’ve made my reasons for disagreeing with it obvious by stating them. There is no lack of understanding. You saying:

@anon45959656

You fail to understand the difference between an incident resolution, and a structural/general resolution.

Is literally saying that the reason I disagree with you is a failure to understand. I don’t disagree with you because I fail to understand you. I disagree with you because I believe you are wrong. If you believe you aren’t convincing someone in a discussion because they fail to understand you, you’ve failed your part in the discussion.

@anon45959656

one week ban from making mangonels they’ll know better than to grief allies… jokes aside, the game does already have a report player functionality. I think something like mangoneling an ally to ruin his game for no good reason is report worthy.

Yes, so you report them, and they sit on the no-no bench for a while until they learn their lesson. So, what if they come back on a different account and do the same thing? Or come back after the ban and do the same thing? When does

@anon45959656

Kicking players out

become

@anon45959656

problem resolution

?

@anon45959656

Still better than ASUSHSDUFGSDUHFGSDUFHGSDHFG… Maybe they are working on some system behind the scenes.

If they are, that’s fine, but this “feedback” here is not to be ignored.

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

Yes, so you report them, and they sit on the no-no bench for a while until they learn their lesson. So, what if they come back on a different account and do the same thing? Or come back after the ban and do the same thing? When does

Well, if it becomes that prominent of a problem, we circle back to needing a structural resolution, e.g. maybe attack ground not damaging allied units, (but regular attack damaging them) or something, idea was just made on the fly, I’m sure MS would come up with something better obviously.

@WoeIsToWho

I’ve understood what you’ve had to say on the matter. I’ve disagreed with it. I’ve made my reasons for disagreeing with it obvious by stating them. There is no lack of understanding. You saying:
Is literally saying that the reason I disagree with you is a failure to understand. I don’t disagree with you because I fail to understand you. I disagree with you because I believe you are wrong. If you believe you aren’t convincing someone in a discussion because they fail to understand you, you’ve failed your part in the discussion.

You merely stated that you want to kick players out, but not stated how that solves the underlying issue that causes people to opt out of certain maps. I think it’s fair to say that we will not come to any kind of agreement as one of us considers how to resolve the incidents individually, and the other one of us is trying to look into how to figure out the solution in the general sense.

[WoeIsToWho]

@anon45959656

Well, if it becomes that prominent of a problem, we circle back to needing a structural resolution

One guy doing a no-no is enough to require a structural change?

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

One guy doing a no-no is enough to require a structural change?

Please note the following part of the statement:

@anon45959656

if it becomes that prominent of a problem,

[WoeIsToWho]

So what do you do with the one guy though.

You’ve said kicking isn’t a solution, so do you just let him terrorize games until someone else gets fed up and joins him?

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

So what do you do with the one guy though.

I will refer you to an earlier stage of our discussion:

@anon45959656

the game does already have a report player functionality.

[WoeIsToWho]

so what if they wait out the ban, or circumvent it with another account and keep doing it?

[ReanuKeeves00]

I’m not sure, but I’m fairly certain that the admins responsible for the game would know what to do/find some solution. I’ve not yet encountered or heard of anyone doing this, so I don’t have any proposed solution to the hypothetical problem.

[WoeIsToWho]

@anon45959656

find some solution.

but not kicking because

@anon45959656

Kicking players out is NOT problem resolution.

right?

[ReanuKeeves00]

If they keep making new accounts, that wouldn’t help anyway, as you’ve stated above, the hypothetical griefer can just make new accounts to evade it.

[WoeIsToWho]

@ReanuKeeves00

If they keep making new accounts, that wouldn’t help anyway, as you’ve stated above, the hypothetical griefer can just make new accounts to evade it.

I will refer you to an earlier stage of our discussion:

@WoeIsToWho

I guess having a timeout set to an IP is impossible, since technology hard and smurfing easy.

[ReanuKeeves00]

@WoeIsToWho

I will refer you to an earlier stage of our discussion:

So you’re agreeing with me on kicking not being a solution, glad that you finally got it.

[WoeIsToWho]

No, I’m stating that there are technological solutions to the problem that technology creates, and that you can have punishment stick to a person across different accounts.

@anon45959656

You fail to understand the difference

between me agreeing and disagreeing with you.

[ReanuKeeves00]

Getting a new IP address is soooo hard, no one’s ever done that before /s