We must stop lower ranks to kick us without any reason!!!

ExeuntOmnes

It's actually a nice idea. But of course there is a downside: how about this?

GoPancakes wrote: »

So any lieutenant could just start hacking in the middle of a game where he can't get kicked because no one else is his rank. Or a general or colonel...

Rare or often, quite often in my experience. If the highest rank in the room has issued a kick that got denied, as long as the game is TD you are not allowed to call the kick again. It's easy for you not to get kicked, because as a General, you can't get kicked, since you're the highest rank. But what if you need to kick again an actual hacker? Z8 would need to change the entire kick system for that to happen. And changing it probably requires real money or some sort of investment. If at least 50% of the players would buy ZP, they might think of it. But most of you/us don't pay for this game, so the budget is significantly reduced to support players who actually have good ideas like you.

UtdNationsTm

nice.. but we all can hope for a change, but in order to make a change, suggestions should be out there:)

Chimpzz

It is one good solution to the problem.

There needs to be a huge reduction in the ability of noobs to create havoc and annoy legit players.

GhostArch

I think the easiest way to solve this problem is to insist players who start a vote (and succeed) to submit a hacker report when they choose hacker/illegal program. Otherwise count it as one abuse of the kick system.

And another solution, which is also simple, is to remove all the scores made by the one being kicked. In another word, if you score 40, kick you will reduced the team score by 40. So that kick a player at the last moment might throw away a win.

However, when you dig into this problem, I would say it is complicated.

1. I don't think a low rank player would kick you. Someone with 1:43 kdr is normally struggle to go through the learning curve. They don't even care hackers. So the kick is normally started by some experience player, who knows exactly how many they will gain after you get kicked.

2. When a kick can be easily passed, it normally means lots of players don't want you in the room. It is not a single players problem now. So it is very likely someone else would start that vote.

3. Why they want to kick a legit player? a. There is no punishment for this; b. Some one get really frustrated and can not accept defeated; c. When you get kicked, the team might get more share (xp, gp) from the game; d. someone might think you were cheating, even you were not. --- don't call them noobs, after experience the outbreak of hackers, players might have a habit to judge a player by score -- you have to admit it is more likely a hacker would gain very high score in this game.

So the solution, I think, is to record players usage of kick. A simple way is, abuse of it can be reported and the number of abuse is recorded. This number can be used to evaluate the players' personality by others, and even used to weight the vote.

Weighed vote will decrease the influence of the players who keep abusing the vote system, when combined with other factors (reports counts and percentage of correctness, and the wrong vote -- not starter -- count) would be a perfect index to make players more serious about vote kick, and the experienced and serious player would dominate the vote. So that a wrong kick is less likely to happen and a hacker is more likely to be kicked right away.

And an important concept, only those who consistently correctly report hackers and seldom wrongly vote can gain a higher score (let's call it responsibility points). This means 2 things: those who has a high responsibility score is less likely to abuse it because it is hard to accumulate it, and when he start to abuse it, he will lose it much faster than accumulating it, which means once he start to abuse, his vote will soon weight normal.