Kick Vote Majority

OneTrueMitch

I have a small idea with the kick votes.

I've always wondered why, when the majority of kick votes say yes (say 9/7), has the kick vote been denied when clearly a majority of the room believes the person should be kicked. Is it some sort of bug? Or is the threshold, like, 80% of the room says yes before its allowed?

I think that, when kick votes are the majority, the kick should go through.
Example, if there are 16 players in a room, the moment the agreed becomes a 9, the kick should be instantly approved. The same would go for rooms with less. When at least more than half of the room say yes, it should go through.

It feels especially bad now when you have all these hackers that are staying in the room due to the kick vote system allowing them to stay.
There have been too many instances lately where the hacker got to stay in a room because the kick vote allowed it despite the majority approving of the kick.
Sure there is the possibility of this being abused, but honestly I've never seen that happen, so I'd be willing to take my chances.

macarona008

+1 but I think they let them a chance or something :')

Mastermann

I feel that currently it should be that way, but as soon as the hackers die down, I'll be getting kicked left right and centre just for being better than the people in the room.

Pyrex00

master_mann wrote: »

I feel that currently it should be that way, but as soon as the hackers die down, I'll be getting kicked left right and centre just for being better than the people in the room.

yes ^^

tbh I never thought these fly, fast knife, all current hacks would make a return after being like 2 or 3 years steady free from these things (to my knowledge)(except aimbot/wallhack). This is why I wanted KVS removed. I thought there was close to no means for it anymore. I want KVS back now. Un-ashamed. Seeing hacks from years ago come back in 2017 is a shame to whoever is dealing with the cheats. Hacks like seeing enemies through walls, or a little less common aimbot is something that wouldn't surprise anyone hearing it still exists in a FPS game but the moment you hear fly hacks and speed knife in 2017 is absurd, atleast to me and if someone told me something about an FPS still dealing with these types of cheats I wouldn't go near it. /end rant

p.s not really mad but thought I would share what I had in mind

NinjaTeabag

I wouldn't want KVS back. It's pretty broken.

A majority of this community is pretty rotten, since most of the players in HMX often times ignore the option to kick.
If they don't ignore it, it fails to kick the cheater ~90% of the time.
But for some strange reasons, anyone legitimately doing better because of experience or better equipment gets the kick so easily.

If KVS comes back, it will certainly have some impact on cheaters, but it also enables players to start fear mongering and harassing players with better weapons.

I would prefer they fix up the KVS first before letting it back out there as in making so that the community doesn't abuse it again.
Right now the cheaters are already bold from cheating.
The last thing this game needs is to have noob accounts getting bold and threatening to kick someone else for X reason.

winnnetou

This idea would be fine to help us kik hakers, cause its very hard to kik them, it happends a lot
that they get 9-7 or 8-6 or 9-6 votes and we need kik them many times and maybe even than
we dont succed.On the other hand it would be also a bad thing because i get kiks from rooms
prrety often even with the actual system, only because players that cant even read dont know
rules of ghost mode and accuse me a lot of hak just for playing sound.U should just see how
even high ranks as colonel or even 1 or 2 stars say "how u know where i am ? i didnt move. u hak
i will report u", and than all nobs cry "kik the haker"" and thats it , u have being kiked.

seafrog

To answer OP's question, I think the reasoning behind it was that it makes it harder for someone to invite their friends to the other side just to kick you. In other words, if someone/your side is trying to kick you, this helps against someone on your side having his mates come on and help make the vote pass.

Anyways, +1

Mastermann

A while ago I had an idea which I posted in suggestions which was pretty much this:
The older your account is, the more impact you have when it comes to kick votes (Within reason).

<1 year = 10
1 year = 12
2 years = 14
3 years = 16
4 years = 18
5 years = 20
(Should probably have it capped here, but then accounts older than 5 years would most likely act more responsible anyway, so I'm not sure if the cap even matters)

The kick gets accepted if 50% or more (Or 60%, or whatever is more balanced) of the total number is reached.

4 trainees + me = 60 points total. Needs 4 trainees to kick me (40/60), but I only need me and 1 or 2 (30 or 40/60) other(s) to kick a trainee who is most likely to be the one hacking.

This seems more balanced to me than a simple 6-4 accepted/9-6 denied, since (Hopefully) the older players don't kick legitimate players as much, though I know some still do.

The lowest possible amount of players needed to kick a hacker in a 16 player room would be reduced to 6, meaning it could be 6-10 and be accepted simply because the veteran players know there's a hacker on the team. (10 x 1 year =100 < 6 x 5 year =120)

slurpyy

ban hackers

1secoseco1

%50+1 vote accept.good idea

winnnetou

master_mann wrote: »

A while ago I had an idea which I posted in suggestions which was pretty much this:
The older your account is, the more impact you have when it comes to kick votes (Within reason).

<1 year = 10
1 year = 12
2 years = 14
3 years = 16
4 years = 18
5 years = 20
(Should probably have it capped here, but then accounts older than 5 years would most likely act more responsible anyway, so I'm not sure if the cap even matters)

The kick gets accepted if 50% or more (Or 60%, or whatever is more balanced) of the total number is reached.

4 trainees + me = 60 points total. Needs 4 trainees to kick me (40/60), but I only need me and 1 or 2 (30 or 40/60) other(s) to kick a trainee who is most likely to be the one hacking.

This seems more balanced to me than a simple 6-4 accepted/9-6 denied, since (Hopefully) the older players don't kick legitimate players as much, though I know some still do.

The lowest possible amount of players needed to kick a hacker in a 16 player room would be reduced to 6, meaning it could be 6-10 and be accepted simply because the veteran players know there's a hacker on the team. (10 x 1 year =100 < 6 x 5 year =120)

This would be probably best option, hope it get implemented.

rambojeff007

Indeed. I’m wondering the same.
+1 if the voting rate is 9, the player should be kicked from the room.

And PS. Kicking a hacker won’t solve the prob.
They should put an anti-cheat program to the cf server asap!

thesuper850

master_mann wrote: »

A while ago I had an idea which I posted in suggestions which was pretty much this:
The older your account is, the more impact you have when it comes to kick votes (Within reason).

<1 year = 10
1 year = 12
2 years = 14
3 years = 16
4 years = 18
5 years = 20
(Should probably have it capped here, but then accounts older than 5 years would most likely act more responsible anyway, so I'm not sure if the cap even matters)

The kick gets accepted if 50% or more (Or 60%, or whatever is more balanced) of the total number is reached.

4 trainees + me = 60 points total. Needs 4 trainees to kick me (40/60), but I only need me and 1 or 2 (30 or 40/60) other(s) to kick a trainee who is most likely to be the one hacking.

This seems more balanced to me than a simple 6-4 accepted/9-6 denied, since (Hopefully) the older players don't kick legitimate players as much, though I know some still do.

The lowest possible amount of players needed to kick a hacker in a 16 player room would be reduced to 6, meaning it could be 6-10 and be accepted simply because the veteran players know there's a hacker on the team. (10 x 1 year =100 < 6 x 5 year =120)

some people with old accounts will use it unfairly like to kick people because they simply don't like them but till now it is of the best I read as a suggestion from the kicking system.

OneTrueMitch

rambojeff007 wrote: »

Indeed. I’m wondering the same.
+1 if the voting rate is 9, the player should be kicked from the room.

And PS. Kicking a hacker won’t solve the prob.
They should put an anti-cheat program to the cf server asap!

At this point we could wish for a new anti-cheat. I mostly suggested this because it seems like its up to us to try to do something about these hackers, because the higher ups (past the GM Team, I support their efforts) don't (seem to) care at all.

Seems like too much work for the CF devs though :^)
The way its been lately, I'm starting to think they like seeing the game under their command suffer the way it is.