Custom Player Ban List
Comments
-
Con: the host might be the hacker
If he would host a game, and someone else would join, he could hack on his own server, if others want to join is another problem.
You can never forbid those who start a room to do something weird.
And it is not hard to know he is hacking, you just need to add the id to your ban list. -
I did not miss the /unban feature, I'm certain I added it in the OP, and yeah, that could happen(and will), but that's what the /unban feature is for!
From the OP
"Don't worry though, if you make a mistake with who you banned you can easily /unban alanim for example."
oh, guess i missed it tho :P -
If he would host a game, and someone else would join, he could hack on his own server, if others want to join is another problem.
You can never forbid those who start a room to do something weird.
And it is not hard to know he is hacking, you just need to add the id to your ban list.
well thats what i meant by it maybe a pro because you either ban him or he bans you so win/win -
+10
And i would like more if we could do the same to clans that are know for have a lot
of hackers.
if there is legit players on the clan they should leave or if he is a Lt he should kick the hacker
froms his clan.
I'm a bit on the edge for "clan bans", but that might work on the same principle, /cban alanims_clan anyone? -
I'm a bit on the edge for "clan bans", but that might work on the same principle, /cban alanims_clan anyone?
i almost never find the same hacker its usually another one, thats
why i suggested the clan bans. anyway i almost never host a room
.
but i could start to if we get that implemented. -
i almost never find the same hacker its usually another one, thats
why i suggested the clan bans. anyway i almost never host a room.
but i could start to if we get that implemented.
I'd host ALL my games if this got implemented, and I know what you mean by the hack clans. They're annoying as hell. -
Also, if the room host has kicked you before, would you "really" want to play with them again? You have to take into account by giving power to room hosts(which CANNOT be abused) you open a gate-way to make dedicated room hosts, who are trust-worthy and judge fairly. If you get banned from a ton of random-no-names who kick for no-reason/being idiots, you benefit from it in the long run.
I understand the logic behind this, and I think that it's an OK idea that should be implemented in some way or another. But having been kicked by a lot of raging noobs in the past, I'd rather not be banned from a game if it's the only one of a certain type in the channel. I don't mind playing with idiots, especially ones who flame, because they spend more time typing than aiming :P
The biggest drawback, I think, is when I'm in a server with a friend who is the host, then he leaves to the lobby. Game host is then changed to someone random in the room, who has added me to his list because I kicked his ass in the previous game.
If you're a good host, you should be able to kick people that you don't like at the end of a game. The problem is that most hosts are too noob to even do this, so why on earth would they take the time to create a list of people they don't want to play with? As someone who joins 90% of games after they've started, I think that this idea has the potential to be abused by noobs more than the potential to be used effectively by pros.
If you really wanted to make the kick option more effective, during gameplay you would allow the host to type in specific names of players to be kicked after the end of the match. This way, you don't have to chase around hack3rs after the game to see who can exit the fastest. I don't think you really NEED a permanent list, and I don't think you run into the same hack3rs as often as you're implying. -
Worst suggestion Ive seen so far in several years of crossfire.After some games of hero mode, where hackers are abundant I came up with a idea on how to fix the problem, by giving the room hosts the power, but not in a way that permits abuse.
THE CUSTOM BAN LIST!
Adding a player to the list will keep the person from EVER joining any room you host, and ONLY ROOMS that YOU HOST. Putting someone on your ban list either through a right click in the lobby or a simple command like /ban alanim, won't instantly boot the player from your game, that'll still require a kick, or for them to exit your lobby but once they're on that list, they'll be unable to join any game you host ever again.
Don't worry though, if you make a mistake with who you banned you can easily /unban alanim for example.
PROS
Allows permanent banning of hackers, glitchers, spammers, and laggers from your rooms.
Gives party room hosts more powers, while being free of abuse.
Promotes hosting of rooms.
Could possibly be a deterrent to hackers over the long run.
Puts less strain on z8games/xtrap, while still pleasing the community.
CONS
None that I can think of.
If anyone can think of a way this could be abused, please tell me, but so far I think this is a really good idea.
Maybe you want to define that a player who got kicked ingame is never able to join this server again?
Well, your suggestion and this fictional suggestion would lead to the same since 80% of all hackusations (in these days 40%) are wrong. Furthermore most hacking accounts stop existing after a short period of time - legit players keep playing. -
I know what he or you want to say. But do you understand what we are trying to say?
That is equavilent to ban players from a room based on 1 players judgement. If you have experience being kicked by vote kick, you might complain, but think of being banned by someone in a monopoly way. And we know host can be normal players, can make wrong judgement, I was kicked a lot by room host, more than by vote kick. So that is why I think the idea is dangerous.
The suggestion is not bad if it can improved a little. Maybe we should be able to issue a warning to watch after the game for a player, the players in other rooms will get the warning and watch him, and if enough people think he hacks, a report can be created. Or maybe we should have an organization of anti-hack, who share same set of list and update it based on vote base. That will greatly reduce the personal bias on one problem.
But, I think record players' best record in different game type, and don't allow people with kill rate greater than 15/minute would be enough to block some hacker.
If you can't join the room because the host got you on his no enter list than who cares?
Srsly.. would you wanna play with him? when you join that room and play all you will hear is hackustations and you probably get kicked..right?
Just move on to the next room or make your own room...Worst suggestion Ive seen so far in several years of crossfire.
Maybe you want to define that a player who got kicked ingame is never able to join this server again?
Well, your suggestion and this fictional suggestion would lead to the same since 80% of all hackusations (in these days 40%) are wrong. Furthermore most hacking accounts stop existing after a short period of time - legit players keep playing.
Learn to read.. it's for your self.. a room you made your the host and can chose not let other people in you don't want in!
Could you care? no you just move onto the next room and play there why would you wanna play with someone that doesn't wanna play with you? -
-
NoobExplode wrote: »I understand the logic behind this, and I think that it's an OK idea that should be implemented in some way or another. But having been kicked by a lot of raging noobs in the past, I'd rather not be banned from a game if it's the only one of a certain type in the channel. I don't mind playing with idiots, especially ones who flame, because they spend more time typing than aiming :P
The biggest drawback, I think, is when I'm in a server with a friend who is the host, then he leaves to the lobby. Game host is then changed to someone random in the room, who has added me to his list because I kicked his ass in the previous game.
If you're a good host, you should be able to kick people that you don't like at the end of a game. The problem is that most hosts are too noob to even do this, so why on earth would they take the time to create a list of people they don't want to play with? As someone who joins 90% of games after they've started, I think that this idea has the potential to be abused by noobs more than the potential to be used effectively by pros.
If you really wanted to make the kick option more effective, during gameplay you would allow the host to type in specific names of players to be kicked after the end of the match. This way, you don't have to chase around hack3rs after the game to see who can exit the fastest. I don't think you really NEED a permanent list, and I don't think you run into the same hack3rs as often as you're implying.
This allows for typing in the ban command(and they do not have to be present for it to take effect). Also, I did admit that it is probably a better idea to only allow the ORIGINAL room hosts ban list(even if he exits the game) until the game is over.
Also, giving the room host the ability to kick players any anytime in the game(if that's what you mean) is a power that CAN and WILL be abused.Worst suggestion Ive seen so far in several years of crossfire.
Maybe you want to define that a player who got kicked ingame is never able to join this server again?
Well, your suggestion and this fictional suggestion would lead to the same since 80% of all hackusations (in these days 40%) are wrong. Furthermore most hacking accounts stop existing after a short period of time - legit players keep playing.
Fact of the matter, hackers can stay around for awhile, kicking just isn't a strong enough power to deal with them, and honestly, as a pro, would you really like to play with people who are unable to discern the difference between a hacker and a pro? Honestly, I wouldn't because I'd end up getting kicked before the game is over, which isn't fun and just a waste of time. Also, this helps with getting rid of bug abusers, hackers. spammers and hackusators.
This suggestion would give way to a new kind of host, who'd be more responsible and could actually promise and clean and legit game, which are much more fun.
Like I said getting banned is basically the same thing as getting kicked, just while that person is host(once the game is started, it uses the current party leaders ban list) you're unable to join, which shouldn't be called a downside.
Honestly, I don't see even the most hackusated at pro getting banned from more then 20% of rooms, and those rooms? well guess what? He'd be kicked out of anyway and is probably better off for.
Currently, playing with the same host multiple times is less then 10%(roughly), and that's because hosting gives no benefit what so ever besides picking the map and game type, and kicking in the lobby(which isn't very useful). -
And I could not join the other room and from the next room and from the next room...
haha the chance of that happening is really low even if your on a block list of 100 people
and if it happened some how than you just make your own room lmao... -
SamuraiMoMo wrote: »haha the chance of that happening is really low even if your on a block list of 100 people
and if it happened some how than you just make your own room lmao...
Exactly, thanks for clarifying that(I have a habit of losing my train of thought and making long winded posts). -
I agree with ghosts arch on this one, I get kicked alot from games becuase im a half decent player on GR side in GM... i get called a hack by soo many people in that mode that i would be blocked from most people who make gm rooms..... so that would be fun for me, a legit player, not being able to join most rooms simply bacuse they decided they wanted to ban me because i can kill them by listening........................
and to be honest i do not know how this could be changed so that it would work
Maybe you could add people to a list and when you join a rooms looby if anyone from that list is in that room you get a message pop up letting you know, you can also put a little writing when you add them to this list so if you meet them again it will be shown in this message and you then will know wether to leave the room or not, if you added someonee to this list simply for harrassment then you can still join the room knowing at least it is not a hack. -
Gh0st_Slay3r wrote: »I agree with ghosts arch on this one, I get kicked alot from games becuase im a half decent player on GR side in GM... i get called a hack by soo many people in that mode that i would be blocked from most people who make gm rooms..... so that would be fun for me, a legit player, not being able to join most rooms simply bacuse they decided they wanted to ban me because i can kill them by listening........................
and to be honest i do not know how this could be changed so that it would work
Maybe you could add people to a list and when you join a rooms looby if anyone from that list is in that room you get a message pop up letting you know, you can also put a little writing when you add them to this list so if you meet them again it will be shown in this message and you then will know wether to leave the room or not, if you added someonee to this list simply for harrassment then you can still join the room knowing at least it is not a hack.
Even if you are not a hacker a room host should still have the ability to restrict your entry into the room if they wish. It's kind of lame in my opinion to stop people from playing with you just because they are good but it should be their choice. There are plenty of rooms to choose from and if one is not forthcoming just host your own. There are plenty of non hackers that I would not like to see playing in my room simply because they are annoying. Not a long list mind you but it would certainly make things more pleasant in general if this were an option. -
The feasibility of the idea totally depends on how many hackers are there in a game. When there will be 3 hackers in each game, it will be a simple decision for the host to kick and ban the player they think hacking, because more than 50% of the time, to ban an ace player with some very good score is correct. At that moment, the host ban list might create a big problem.
Anyway, when someone really host a game, they can choose who are allowed to player, what we are not happy with is being called a hacker when we never hack.
I notice that you can find who is host by watch the ping, the host normally have an incredible low ping, like 5-7. If more than one has low ping, there might be some lan player. They might just want an internal game without any pros or hackers, because in most of time, it is hard to say who is hacking, who is pro.
But overall it is a good idea. Host should have the right to ban players. And I suppose when a host want to host a game, he must be a serious player. -
This allows for typing in the ban command(and they do not have to be present for it to take effect). Also, I did admit that it is probably a better idea to only allow the ORIGINAL room hosts ban list(even if he exits the game) until the game is over.
Also, giving the room host the ability to kick players any anytime in the game(if that's what you mean) is a power that CAN and WILL be abused.
No, I meant like regular kick that registers after the game has ended. Hackers always leave the game first, so the host doesn't always have time to put a block on him and he can just re-enter later on. -
After some games of hero mode, where hackers are abundant I came up with a idea on how to fix the problem, by giving the room hosts the power, but not in a way that permits abuse.
THE CUSTOM BAN LIST!
Adding a player to the list will keep the person from EVER joining any room you host, and ONLY ROOMS that YOU HOST. Putting someone on your ban list either through a right click in the lobby or a simple command like /ban alanim, won't instantly boot the player from your game, that'll still require a kick, or for them to exit your lobby but once they're on that list, they'll be unable to join any game you host ever again.
Don't worry though, if you make a mistake with who you banned you can easily /unban alanim for example.
PROS
Allows permanent banning of hackers, glitchers, spammers, and laggers from your rooms.
Gives party room hosts more powers, while being free of abuse.
Promotes hosting of rooms.
Could possibly be a deterrent to hackers over the long run.
Puts less strain on z8games/xtrap, while still pleasing the community.
CONS
None that I can think of.
If anyone can think of a way this could be abused, please tell me, but so far I think this is a really good idea.
heheheheheheehehe -
NoobExplode wrote: »No, I meant like regular kick that registers after the game has ended. Hackers always leave the game first, so the host doesn't always have time to put a block on him and he can just re-enter later on.
What he means is like this:
The host can maintain a list of banned players from his room. On creating the room, the host can load the room with the ban list.
Once the host has found a hacker, he can review the replay, report it, and add the hacker to his ban list. Then once he host a game, that player can not enter his room. Even the hacker leave first, he can still be caught.
And normal randomly selected host by system (when real host left the game), they can only kick, vote kick but can not add anything to the ban list. So what they did is temporarily.
On the other hand, once someone want to host a room, he should have the privilege. Even though he might wrongly ban someone, he can correct it by review it, or he might not like him. Remember he might start a room with password, that is similar to not allowing a pro to enter.
I would rather believe a host are serious players. And if so, they will create an efficient barrier towards hackers.
Roughly, there is no risk -- only concern is a host might have a wrong decision, and he might propagate it by someway, so that some pro might can not play in many room. But once I was so good to be banned by most of the host, I would consider to join a WOGL clan and stop play pub. I am not sure about others. -
What he means is like this:
The host can maintain a list of banned players from his room. On creating the room, the host can load the room with the ban list.
Once the host has found a hacker, he can review the replay, report it, and add the hacker to his ban list. Then once he host a game, that player can not enter his room. Even the hacker leave first, he can still be caught.
And normal randomly selected host by system (when real host left the game), they can only kick, vote kick but can not add anything to the ban list. So what they did is temporarily.
On the other hand, once someone want to host a room, he should have the privilege. Even though he might wrongly ban someone, he can correct it by review it, or he might not like him. Remember he might start a room with password, that is similar to not allowing a pro to enter.
I would rather believe a host are serious players. And if so, they will create an efficient barrier towards hackers.
Roughly, there is no risk -- only concern is a host might have a wrong decision, and he might propagate it by someway, so that some pro might can not play in many room. But once I was so good to be banned by most of the host, I would consider to join a WOGL clan and stop play pub. I am not sure about others.
Ok, you obviously didn't read my previous post. The point was that I think that a ban list would be abused. You guys seem to think that it is IMPOSSIBLE to abuse this system, but in reality dozens of people can add me to their ban lists simply because I am a good player. Sure, I might not notice at first, but what happens if I play regularly and suddenly I'm banned from 10% of the games? What if I have a friend playing in a game but I can't join because some idiot blocked me? Regardless of what you believe to be true, room hosts are usually idiots who don't even bother to kick the blatant hackers at the end of the game, even after QQing. And if there IS a host who's pro, he's usually playing with friends who can make sure that the vote kick system works properly.
Ultimately what you're saying is that you'd like to give more kicking power to hosts, who are the SAME PEOPLE who fail to manage their rooms, fail to kick hackers on their own team, and who often have no idea who is actually hacking in the first place. There's no way in hell I can advocate a system like this. It's a good idea, but it can definitely be exploited. That's why I said we should enable a /ban command for the host that will autokick the specified players at the end of the game, because there isn't always an opportunity to kick players after the game ends. This should be a dynamic list that resets every time you create a new room, because permanent banning is too severe.
If you REALLY want to implement the static list system, make it a seven day block for a particular person on all rooms you create. If it's indefinite, people will just get needlessly banned once for doing well, and no one will maintain their lists on a regular basis. If you REALLY think someone is hacking, you should be willing to put forth the effort every week to keep people on your list. This also puts less stress on the server for storing ban lists for each user, if the lists are resetting on a regular basis. -
Well, it seems like almost nobody understood my simile. Ill explain the cons in an other way then:
First of all, I agree with NoobExplode. Here are some cons:- Most hack accounts only exist for a short period of time. They will be recreated and have to be added on your personal banlist again and again.
- You have to finish the game with the hacker before he has to leave. You rarely see the same hacker again (although you play Egypt or similar things) so the banlist does not really make a difference.
- Since I meet 200 - 300 people who hackusate me in a week I think at least 20% of them would put me on that banlist. That is enough to except me from the most rooms (especially GM) in a few months.
I even know an example from another game, where I belong to the top 50 of the ladders. I have to admit that this game game is totally different and owns a smaller community. But I have to spend 3 hours there to find a game because of personal banlists - that is why I play Crossfire now.
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2K CrossFire
- 595 CrossFire Announcements
- 592 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 161 Community
- 12 Modes
- 282 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 38 CF Competitive Forum
- CFCL
- 14 Looking for a Team?
- 544 CrossFire Support
- 64 Suggestion
- 12 CrossFire Guides
- 33 CrossFire Off Topic