Suggested changes to the kick system
I. Introduction
I'll start of with the facts:
1) The current kick system is flawed. (or the community is too idiotic to use it properly)
2) Completely removing the kick vote is a very bad idea, thanks to hackers
3) Giving only kick powers to the host is like putting an "ABUSE" button in his menu.
So if there has to be a change, what should it look like? I did some thinking and ended up with the following. If you find any flaws or possibilities for abuse in it, post them here and I/we can look for a solution for them. I'll first list the changes, followed by why I would want to see it that way. At the end I'll already name a few problems that could show up.
II. Changes to the system
I want to adress 2 changes, one being a minor change, the other a complete overhaul of the kick vote system.
The first one would be to remove the kick penalty. This is not a big change, but I believe that many people would be happy to see this implemented.
The best way to describe the overhaul is by summing up the characteristics of the system I was thinking of, so here it goes:
- Each player possesses 1 vote, which they can assign to ANY player in the room. (excluding himself)
- Your vote can only be assigned to 1 player at any time. You may however switch your vote to a different player during the game.
- Each vote from a team member counts as 2 points, each vote from an enemy counts as 1. This means that there is a maximum of 24 (16+8) vote points in any game. (in FFA/MM/HM each vote counts as 1)
- To get kicked you need at least 50% of the maximum amount of vote points (rounded up). This equals a bit more than 50% of the maximum vote points you can get.
- Votes will NOT be shown. Only you can see on which player your vote is (in the kick menu).
III. Reasoning
For the small change: for most people the worst part about being kicked is losing the xp, gp and kills, basicly resulting in what some would call "lost time". Removing this would let the legit people keep their kills and the rest. True, it also lets hackers keep those, but they should be banned anyway, so letting them keep the kdr until then doesn't really matter.
Counterargument: the kdr of hackers wouldn't reflect their level of skill!
Answer: Now the kick vote lowers the kdr of all the rest, thus not reflecting the kdr of legit people correctly. On another note, the kdr of farmers also doesn't reflect their level of skill, so with the current system noones kdr is displayed correctly.
Big changes need more reasoning, so this one is also going to be chopped up into smaller bits: first of all, it could stop some of the flaws of the current system:
- People of a certain clan (or sometimes nationality) on different sides will kick their teammates only because the other team asks so. A lot of people just f11 for no reason, resulting in kick. With the change, it would become a lot harder for clan members to kick random people. (unless the clan has a majority, in which case you'd be kicked in both systems)
- Getting kicked for being Ace will happen less.
- Because vote kicks will not be shown, there will be less useless revenge/counter-kicks.
- Random kicks are less likely to happen. (unless everyone decides to put a random vote on you)
- Hackers won't be able to stop getting kicked by launching their own kicks, which sometimes happens at the end of the game now.
- Your enemies are usually hackusating different people, so their votes will be scattered, making it less likely that you get kicked. Now they will all f11 if a vote against you comes up (which means you already have 9 out of 10 needed votes)
So why did I choose for this method to try fighting these problems? I have two main reasons:
- With 50% of the maximum vote points needed, the enemy team will not be capable of kicking you all by themselves (they can only give 8 out of 12 needed vote points). Your own team sees and hears the same as you, so their opinion might be more reliable than that of the enemy. This gets reflected in the fact that they can kick you without any votes from the enemy. There's only one problem with this, but I'll adress that later.
- Because the vote doesn't get shown, the votes won't get focused. Now someone starts a vote and a lot of people will f11 without knowing why.
IV. Problem?
The biggest problem with this system is that I'm not completly sure that hackers will get kicked. Mainly because the players on the hacker's team are often reluctant to kick the hacker.
Another problem occurs in 1v2 rooms: because there is a maximum of 4 points, only 2 points are needed for a kick, so the 2 players can kick the 1 on the other team.
A final problem might be that the spam "X hacks, kick X." may worsen. I don't know if it will though.
Like I said: if you see any problems or possible improvements, let me know.
I'll start of with the facts:
1) The current kick system is flawed. (or the community is too idiotic to use it properly)
2) Completely removing the kick vote is a very bad idea, thanks to hackers
3) Giving only kick powers to the host is like putting an "ABUSE" button in his menu.
So if there has to be a change, what should it look like? I did some thinking and ended up with the following. If you find any flaws or possibilities for abuse in it, post them here and I/we can look for a solution for them. I'll first list the changes, followed by why I would want to see it that way. At the end I'll already name a few problems that could show up.
II. Changes to the system
I want to adress 2 changes, one being a minor change, the other a complete overhaul of the kick vote system.
The first one would be to remove the kick penalty. This is not a big change, but I believe that many people would be happy to see this implemented.
The best way to describe the overhaul is by summing up the characteristics of the system I was thinking of, so here it goes:
- Each player possesses 1 vote, which they can assign to ANY player in the room. (excluding himself)
- Your vote can only be assigned to 1 player at any time. You may however switch your vote to a different player during the game.
- Each vote from a team member counts as 2 points, each vote from an enemy counts as 1. This means that there is a maximum of 24 (16+8) vote points in any game. (in FFA/MM/HM each vote counts as 1)
- To get kicked you need at least 50% of the maximum amount of vote points (rounded up). This equals a bit more than 50% of the maximum vote points you can get.
- Votes will NOT be shown. Only you can see on which player your vote is (in the kick menu).
III. Reasoning
For the small change: for most people the worst part about being kicked is losing the xp, gp and kills, basicly resulting in what some would call "lost time". Removing this would let the legit people keep their kills and the rest. True, it also lets hackers keep those, but they should be banned anyway, so letting them keep the kdr until then doesn't really matter.
Counterargument: the kdr of hackers wouldn't reflect their level of skill!
Answer: Now the kick vote lowers the kdr of all the rest, thus not reflecting the kdr of legit people correctly. On another note, the kdr of farmers also doesn't reflect their level of skill, so with the current system noones kdr is displayed correctly.
Big changes need more reasoning, so this one is also going to be chopped up into smaller bits: first of all, it could stop some of the flaws of the current system:
- People of a certain clan (or sometimes nationality) on different sides will kick their teammates only because the other team asks so. A lot of people just f11 for no reason, resulting in kick. With the change, it would become a lot harder for clan members to kick random people. (unless the clan has a majority, in which case you'd be kicked in both systems)
- Getting kicked for being Ace will happen less.
- Because vote kicks will not be shown, there will be less useless revenge/counter-kicks.
- Random kicks are less likely to happen. (unless everyone decides to put a random vote on you)
- Hackers won't be able to stop getting kicked by launching their own kicks, which sometimes happens at the end of the game now.
- Your enemies are usually hackusating different people, so their votes will be scattered, making it less likely that you get kicked. Now they will all f11 if a vote against you comes up (which means you already have 9 out of 10 needed votes)
So why did I choose for this method to try fighting these problems? I have two main reasons:
- With 50% of the maximum vote points needed, the enemy team will not be capable of kicking you all by themselves (they can only give 8 out of 12 needed vote points). Your own team sees and hears the same as you, so their opinion might be more reliable than that of the enemy. This gets reflected in the fact that they can kick you without any votes from the enemy. There's only one problem with this, but I'll adress that later.
- Because the vote doesn't get shown, the votes won't get focused. Now someone starts a vote and a lot of people will f11 without knowing why.
IV. Problem?
The biggest problem with this system is that I'm not completly sure that hackers will get kicked. Mainly because the players on the hacker's team are often reluctant to kick the hacker.
Another problem occurs in 1v2 rooms: because there is a maximum of 4 points, only 2 points are needed for a kick, so the 2 players can kick the 1 on the other team.
A final problem might be that the spam "X hacks, kick X." may worsen. I don't know if it will though.
Like I said: if you see any problems or possible improvements, let me know.
Comments
-
Great post, but I doubt CF is going to even look at it, because that's how they are. I have seen countless threads being posted about this flawed kicking system yet CF has not done anything at all to fix it. I am afraid your post is just another great idea gone to waste.
-
In a full room of 16 people, 10 votes are needed to kick someone. That said, if everyone on the other team "f11's", 2 votes from your team are needed to get you kicked.
This would remain identical in your set up, so I don't really see that as an improvement...
Looking at the darker side of it, with your set up it can take as little as 6 votes in a full room to get you booted.
Also, in your 1v2 example: If you happen to be on the 2 player team, a single vote from your team mate would effectively remove you.
Your idea is really good, but I don't see the need to boost same team votes to 2 points. Keeping the "point" system as it is but implementing you execution would be the best "win-win" situation.
The only other thing I would change/add: Limit the amount of times a vote can be re-assigned. Someone could theoretically join a game, assign their vote to someone they don't like and once they're kicked move to someone else...
Other than that, this is the best idea I've seen in a while O_O
That's a mighty good thinktank you have there, Bear-chan... -
Actually, you need only 1 more from your team, the vote starter already counts as 1. But yea, counts as 2 depending on how you look at it.Green_Ranger wrote: »In a full room of 16 people, 10 votes are needed to kick someone. That said, if everyone on the other team "f11's", 2 votes from your team are needed to get you kicked.
I tried to keep the balance close to the current balance, because I suppose Z8/the devs have a reason for choosing this balance.Green_Ranger wrote: »This would remain identical in your set up, so I don't really see that as an improvement...
Ofcourse it is always open for a change if it is needed.
True, but look at the most common reasons for someone on your team to start a vote:Green_Ranger wrote: »Looking at the darker side of it, with your set up it can take as little as 6 votes in a full room to get you booted.
- Afk: enemy team f12s for free kills.
- Doing something stupid/bottomfragging: usually only a few players on your team want to see you gone.
- Apparent hacking: also only a few want you out.
- Real hacking: about half of your team wants you out (together with the entire enemy team)
- Ace: only the one below you votes for you.
- Clan wants you gone: only the clan members will vote for you.
So to get almost your entire team against you, you have to be quite the idiot/hacker. Getting the complete enemy team against you is way easier...
I know, must have forgotten to mention it. Thanks for pointing outGreen_Ranger wrote: »Also, in your 1v2 example: If you happen to be on the 2 player team, a single vote from your team mate would effectively remove you.
1v2 is the only setup where this problem occurs though. But yea, a problem is a problem....
Also a possibility, should be kept in mind as well by Z8/devs.Green_Ranger wrote: »Your idea is really good, but I don't see the need to boost same team votes to 2 points. Keeping the "point" system as it is but implementing you execution would be the best "win-win" situation.
I wasn't exactly sure about setting a number on this or not, but a limit is most likely the best option. Or at least limit the option to change your vote to once for each X rounds/minutes.Green_Ranger wrote: »The only other thing I would change/add: Limit the amount of times a vote can be re-assigned. Someone could theoretically join a game, assign their vote to someone they don't like and once they're kicked move to someone else...Green_Ranger wrote: »Other than that, this is the best idea I've seen in a while O_O
That's a mighty good thinktank you have there, Bear-chan...
Thanks a lot. *bows*a new zp weapon or new female character would be better
I'd prefer your opinion over your sarcasm on this one, sfarc. -
Phillybear wrote: »Actually, you need only 1 more from your team, the vote starter already counts as 1. But yea, counts as 2 depending on how you look at it.
True, but look at the most common reasons for someone on your team to start a vote:
- Afk: enemy team f12s for free kills.
- Doing something stupid/bottomfragging: usually only a few players on your team want to see you gone.
- Apparent hacking: also only a few want you out.
- Real hacking: about half of your team wants you out (together with the entire enemy team)
- Ace: only the one below you votes for you.
- Clan wants you gone: only the clan members will vote for you.
So to get almost your entire team against you, you have to be quite the idiot/hacker. Getting the complete enemy team against you is way easier...
@ Green: Yea, that's what I meant >.>
2 over all, in both situations.
@ Red: The way you've set it up, you basically need to **** less people off on your team for a kick to be successful. If there are 3 people on your team that don't like you, then as long as 6 people on the other team agree, you're gone. May seem like a long shot, but it basically means 1 less vote/person to get you kicked.
The only benefit I see to a weighted selection would be in a hack scenario if and only if the culprit's team is righteous enough to vote for the hacker. then again, if 6 people on the hackers team were to agree to get him kicked, chances are he would have been kicked with the current system as well (6+ at least 4 on other team).
@ person being afk: never a reason to kick someone, as the system will auto kick them eventually (not to mention it's pretty mean). I just yell out "afk, free kill at base", which is fairly effective. -
Just remove the automatic "no" vote for people who do not vote. That would fix a lot in my opinion. So many people don't vote because, they are afk, in the middle of battle or just don't care. If you remove the automatic "no" from these people and base the kick vote off the people who actually vote it will fix the system in general.
ex: 8v8 l33thak is put up for vote. 6 people vote , 5 yes 1 no or even 4 yes 2 no, both cases he gets kicked. The people who don't vote, simply don't count. -
my thinking is this u should make 60% for a kick because,sometimes a player below ace would vote for ace to become ace....(just an example)...next not every1 should have the privelege (im bad at speling becuse im not english)to vote...low ranks below a certain level,but i dont know what level it should be....
-
True, but for most of the stated reasons, the opposite team won't be interested in kicking you.Green_Ranger wrote: »@ Red: The way you've set it up, you basically need to **** less people off on your team for a kick to be successful. If there are 3 people on your team that don't like you, then as long as 6 people on the other team agree, you're gone. May seem like a long shot, but it basically means 1 less vote/person to get you kicked.Green_Ranger wrote: »The only benefit I see to a weighted selection would be in a hack scenario if and only if the culprit's team is righteous enough to vote for the hacker. then again, if 6 people on the hackers team were to agree to get him kicked, chances are he would have been kicked with the current system as well (6+ at least 4 on other team).
@ person being afk: never a reason to kick someone, as the system will auto kick them eventually (not to mention it's pretty mean). I just yell out "afk, free kill at base", which is fairly effective.
The balance is in the fact that you can only vote against one person: enemies are more likely to vote against the topfraggers, your team against bottomfraggers. Hackers usually get votes from both sides.... Limiting their amounts of vote change might pose a problem here though. (considering the idiocy of some people)
(^I think I might have misunderstood you there, please correct me in that case.)
The main point was to keep those people that randomly press f11, their own team or not, from kicking people without a single reason.
Afk persons won't get kicked if they die fast enough each round (TD not included ofc)...
PS: I just noticed I didn't mention the possibility of having a kick vote in FFA, MM and HM in my first post.
PS2: Gone for the night, I will reply to later posts tomorrow -
The majority of the reasons you stated (afk, clan, bottom fragging) aren't kick worthy, and I would deem them an abuse of the system. In your setup, for every 1 person on your team that agrees, 2 less from the other are necessary. As long as the majority of the people on your team dislike you, you have high chances of being kicked. to put it in perspective: a vote of 6:9 can mean you're gone.Phillybear wrote: »True, but for most of the stated reasons, the opposite team won't be interested in kicking you.Phillybear wrote: »The balance is in the fact that you can only vote against one person: enemies are more likely to vote against the topfraggers, your team against bottomfraggers. Hackers usually get votes from both sides.... Limiting their amounts of vote change might pose a problem here though. (considering the idiocy of some people)
(^I think I might have misunderstood you there, please correct me in that case.)
The main point was to keep those people that randomly press f11, their own team or not, from kicking people without a single reason.
Afk persons won't get kicked if they die fast enough each round (TD not included ofc)...
If I understood correctly: at any time during the game you can assign your vote to a certain person. This being said, people can just assign their vote early in the game and wait until they pile up (which would bring a lot of other problems). It would be reasonable to limit the frequency/time between vote assignments for obvious reasons. If it isn't controlled, it basically means the entire game is just one long vote session waiting to rack up enough points...
Other than that, we agree on everything else
-
The exact % is probably something the devs would decide on if any changes were ever to be made, but you have to keep in mind that only the one directly below the Ace votes for him for that reason.my thinking is this u should make 60% for a kick because,sometimes a player below ace would vote for ace to become ace....(just an example)...next not every1 should have the privelege (im bad at speling becuse im not english)to vote...low ranks below a certain level,but i dont know what level it should be....
And I've seen low ranks showing a LOT more common sense than high ranks....Green_Ranger wrote: »The majority of the reasons you stated (afk, clan, bottom fragging) aren't kick worthy, and I would deem them an abuse of the system. In your setup, for every 1 person on your team that agrees, 2 less from the other are necessary. As long as the majority of the people on your team dislike you, you have high chances of being kicked. to put it in perspective: a vote of 6:9 can mean you're gone.
If I understood correctly: at any time during the game you can assign your vote to a certain person. This being said, people can just assign their vote early in the game and wait until they pile up (which would bring a lot of other problems). It would be reasonable to limit the frequency/time between vote assignments for obvious reasons. If it isn't controlled, it basically means the entire game is just one long vote session waiting to rack up enough points...
Other than that, we agree on everything else
@Red:They aren't kick-worthy indeed, but are quite common in the game.
If you would ask all players of CF which player they want to see gone from their room, a majority will give you the name of someone on the opposing team. That is the reason why I wanted to give your own team a more powerful vote. (and the reason why I'm not sure if people will get kicked by this)
I wanted to make it easier to kick hackers (by needing less votes total if part of his team has working brains) but harder to kick legit players. (by making the votes not show, so not everyone deliberatly tries to get him out of the game)
@Green: I saw a problem with both limited and unlimited switching: with unlimited because a lot of people will just switch their vote around based on who killed them last round. With limited (in frequency) because people would be unable to change their vote to a hacker when they need to, because they already tossed it around so much before. So I guess limited in time/rounds is the best solution then.
In your scenario, wouldn't there just be some votes scattered around on random people, waiting to rack up, but never doing so?
@ White: I like the white
-
Your idea is the most awesome idea I've ever seen, and I'm not saying that because I basically had the same idea more than a year ago. :rolleyes:
I hope yours (which is better constructed) will have more impact though.
Like I stated in my thread, the problems with the actual vote kick are :
- too much power is given to one player, the vote starter ; basically, he put a giant window with your name in it and people have 10 seconds to decide what to do
- in 10 seconds no one can say for sure whether you hack or not, so most will rely on how good you are (either by looking at the scoreboard "OMG 9-0 hack !" = F11 ; or depending on how you played "OMFG a multi-kill, hack !" = F11) or F11 you if you are on the other team ;
This system on the other hand is an active system. It requires more thinking from the players. If someone thinks you hack and start spamming, he may be ignored by most of the players, especially the good players. One or two idiots in your team may still put a vote on you, but unless all the members of the opposite team also vote against you, you will stay.
A few days ago, I was in a GM, first of my team. In the last seconds of a round, I run out of ammo and rather than reloading I pick up my team mate AK47 (the regular one) and manage to kill a ghost (but the bomb exploded T_T').
A few seconds later, I'm kicked.
A few whispers later, I know who kicked me, and most importantly I know why :
Because I tried to win by using a dead team mate's AK47, not a fancy one, the REGULAR, he started a vote kick against me, and since I was doing good, I got kicked.
Kick vote abuse in its purest form and perfect example of how I wouldn't have been kicked with Phillybear's system (or at least not for a so stupid reason).
I SUPPORT THIS IDEA ! Karma + 1 -
Phillybear wrote: »I. Introduction
I'll start of with the facts:
1) The current kick system is flawed. (or the community is too idiotic to use it properly)
2) Completely removing the kick vote is a very bad idea, thanks to hackers
3) Giving only kick powers to the host is like putting an "ABUSE" button in his menu.
So if there has to be a change, what should it look like? I did some thinking and ended up with the following. If you find any flaws or possibilities for abuse in it, post them here and I/we can look for a solution for them. I'll first list the changes, followed by why I would want to see it that way. At the end I'll already name a few problems that could show up.
II. Changes to the system
I want to adress 2 changes, one being a minor change, the other a complete overhaul of the kick vote system.
The first one would be to remove the kick penalty. This is not a big change, but I believe that many people would be happy to see this implemented.
The best way to describe the overhaul is by summing up the characteristics of the system I was thinking of, so here it goes:
- Each player possesses 1 vote, which they can assign to ANY player in the room. (excluding himself)
- Your vote can only be assigned to 1 player at any time. You may however switch your vote to a different player during the game.
- Each vote from a team member counts as 2 points, each vote from an enemy counts as 1. This means that there is a maximum of 24 (16+8) vote points in any game. (in FFA/MM/HM each vote counts as 1)
- To get kicked you need at least 50% of the maximum amount of vote points (rounded up). This equals a bit more than 50% of the maximum vote points you can get.
- Votes will NOT be shown. Only you can see on which player your vote is (in the kick menu).
III. Reasoning
For the small change: for most people the worst part about being kicked is losing the xp, gp and kills, basicly resulting in what some would call "lost time". Removing this would let the legit people keep their kills and the rest. True, it also lets hackers keep those, but they should be banned anyway, so letting them keep the kdr until then doesn't really matter.
Counterargument: the kdr of hackers wouldn't reflect their level of skill!
Answer: Now the kick vote lowers the kdr of all the rest, thus not reflecting the kdr of legit people correctly. On another note, the kdr of farmers also doesn't reflect their level of skill, so with the current system noones kdr is displayed correctly.
Big changes need more reasoning, so this one is also going to be chopped up into smaller bits: first of all, it could stop some of the flaws of the current system:
- People of a certain clan (or sometimes nationality) on different sides will kick their teammates only because the other team asks so. A lot of people just f11 for no reason, resulting in kick. With the change, it would become a lot harder for clan members to kick random people. (unless the clan has a majority, in which case you'd be kicked in both systems)
- Getting kicked for being Ace will happen less.
- Because vote kicks will not be shown, there will be less useless revenge/counter-kicks.
- Random kicks are less likely to happen. (unless everyone decides to put a random vote on you)
- Hackers won't be able to stop getting kicked by launching their own kicks, which sometimes happens at the end of the game now.
- Your enemies are usually hackusating different people, so their votes will be scattered, making it less likely that you get kicked. Now they will all f11 if a vote against you comes up (which means you already have 9 out of 10 needed votes)
So why did I choose for this method to try fighting these problems? I have two main reasons:
- With 50% of the maximum vote points needed, the enemy team will not be capable of kicking you all by themselves (they can only give 8 out of 12 needed vote points). Your own team sees and hears the same as you, so their opinion might be more reliable than that of the enemy. This gets reflected in the fact that they can kick you without any votes from the enemy. There's only one problem with this, but I'll adress that later.
- Because the vote doesn't get shown, the votes won't get focused. Now someone starts a vote and a lot of people will f11 without knowing why.
IV. Problem?
The biggest problem with this system is that I'm not completly sure that hackers will get kicked. Mainly because the players on the hacker's team are often reluctant to kick the hacker.
Another problem occurs in 1v2 rooms: because there is a maximum of 4 points, only 2 points are needed for a kick, so the 2 players can kick the 1 on the other team.
A final problem might be that the spam "X hacks, kick X." may worsen. I don't know if it will though.
Like I said: if you see any problems or possible improvements, let me know.
i like the idea but i have a question:
what about the people who will RQ just so they can have there vote back, many of the CF babies like to RQ and come back with there votes so they can vote again.Just remove the automatic "no" vote for people who do not vote. That would fix a lot in my opinion. So many people don't vote because, they are afk, in the middle of battle or just don't care. If you remove the automatic "no" from these people and base the kick vote off the people who actually vote it will fix the system in general.
ex: 8v8 l33thak is put up for vote. 6 people vote , 5 yes 1 no or even 4 yes 2 no, both cases he gets kicked. The people who don't vote, simply don't count.
the automatic No has saved so many people including myself from being voted out of the room, to remove that would be madness. nobody would be able to play a full game -
i like the idea but i have a question:
what about the people who will RQ just so they can have there vote back, many of the CF babies like to RQ and come back with there votes so they can vote again.
In case of an unlimited possibility of vote changing, RQ wouldn't change anything at all.
In case of a limited amount of vote changing:
- For a static number: They would indeed dodge the limit, but like Hells_Judge said, the system gives less power to each individual. You can RQ as much as you want, but it will have a way smaller effect than with the current kick system.
- Limited to once during X rounds/minutes. Kind of a combination of the 2 others: it has less effect on the amount of changes you get, and has a smaller effect than with the current system.
So in any case, RQing to get your votes back would have less effect. -
to much (philly)osophy ... just to get k/d exp after kick would be nice. there will always be for no reason kicks. like clanmates ask to kick "this b4st4rd" for owning e.t.c ... just to get k/d(positive/negative)and exp would solve this abusing system.
P.S lol yeah cheaters should get those k/d exp ... till they get banned ... finally they will. -
at most points i agree with you but 1 point is the most important:Phillybear wrote: »I. Introduction
I'll start of with the facts:
1) The current kick system is flawed. (or the community is too idiotic to use it properly)
2) Completely removing the kick vote is a very bad idea, thanks to hackers
3) Giving only kick powers to the host is like putting an "ABUSE" button in his menu.
So if there has to be a change, what should it look like? I did some thinking and ended up with the following. If you find any flaws or possibilities for abuse in it, post them here and I/we can look for a solution for them. I'll first list the changes, followed by why I would want to see it that way. At the end I'll already name a few problems that could show up.
II. Changes to the system
I want to adress 2 changes, one being a minor change, the other a complete overhaul of the kick vote system.
The first one would be to remove the kick penalty. This is not a big change, but I believe that many people would be happy to see this implemented.
The best way to describe the overhaul is by summing up the characteristics of the system I was thinking of, so here it goes:
- Each player possesses 1 vote, which they can assign to ANY player in the room. (excluding himself)
- Your vote can only be assigned to 1 player at any time. You may however switch your vote to a different player during the game.
- Each vote from a team member counts as 2 points, each vote from an enemy counts as 1. This means that there is a maximum of 24 (16+8) vote points in any game. (in FFA/MM/HM each vote counts as 1)
- To get kicked you need at least 50% of the maximum amount of vote points (rounded up). This equals a bit more than 50% of the maximum vote points you can get.
- Votes will NOT be shown. Only you can see on which player your vote is (in the kick menu).
III. Reasoning
For the small change: for most people the worst part about being kicked is losing the xp, gp and kills, basicly resulting in what some would call "lost time". Removing this would let the legit people keep their kills and the rest. True, it also lets hackers keep those, but they should be banned anyway, so letting them keep the kdr until then doesn't really matter.
Counterargument: the kdr of hackers wouldn't reflect their level of skill!
Answer: Now the kick vote lowers the kdr of all the rest, thus not reflecting the kdr of legit people correctly. On another note, the kdr of farmers also doesn't reflect their level of skill, so with the current system noones kdr is displayed correctly.
Big changes need more reasoning, so this one is also going to be chopped up into smaller bits: first of all, it could stop some of the flaws of the current system:
- People of a certain clan (or sometimes nationality) on different sides will kick their teammates only because the other team asks so. A lot of people just f11 for no reason, resulting in kick. With the change, it would become a lot harder for clan members to kick random people. (unless the clan has a majority, in which case you'd be kicked in both systems)
- Getting kicked for being Ace will happen less.
- Because vote kicks will not be shown, there will be less useless revenge/counter-kicks.
- Random kicks are less likely to happen. (unless everyone decides to put a random vote on you)
- Hackers won't be able to stop getting kicked by launching their own kicks, which sometimes happens at the end of the game now.
- Your enemies are usually hackusating different people, so their votes will be scattered, making it less likely that you get kicked. Now they will all f11 if a vote against you comes up (which means you already have 9 out of 10 needed votes)
So why did I choose for this method to try fighting these problems? I have two main reasons:
- With 50% of the maximum vote points needed, the enemy team will not be capable of kicking you all by themselves (they can only give 8 out of 12 needed vote points). Your own team sees and hears the same as you, so their opinion might be more reliable than that of the enemy. This gets reflected in the fact that they can kick you without any votes from the enemy. There's only one problem with this, but I'll adress that later.
- Because the vote doesn't get shown, the votes won't get focused. Now someone starts a vote and a lot of people will f11 without knowing why.
IV. Problem?
The biggest problem with this system is that I'm not completly sure that hackers will get kicked. Mainly because the players on the hacker's team are often reluctant to kick the hacker.
Another problem occurs in 1v2 rooms: because there is a maximum of 4 points, only 2 points are needed for a kick, so the 2 players can kick the 1 on the other team.
A final problem might be that the spam "X hacks, kick X." may worsen. I don't know if it will though.
Like I said: if you see any problems or possible improvements, let me know.
if you are lower rank than the gamer that you want to kick you cant kick him.
many lower ranked players kick good players because they think that they hack but they dont so every 2nd game they get kicked without a reason.
another point of this is that if a higher ranked player than you hacks just report him and you will never ever see him so just improve it with the "high rank priority kick"
if a lower ranked player than you hack you may kick him and this is the onlyest improvment that i wish -
urkmancroo wrote: »at most points i agree with you but 1 point is the most important:
if you are lower rank than the gamer that you want to kick you cant kick him.
many lower ranked players kick good players because they think that they hack but they dont so every 2nd game they get kicked without a reason.
another point of this is that if a higher ranked player than you hacks just report him and you will never ever see him so just improve it with the "high rank priority kick"
if a lower ranked player than you hack you may kick him and this is the onlyest improvment that i wish
There are a few problems with that suggestion:
- Quite some high ranks hack.
- The higher your rank is, the less likely it would be for you to get kicked.
- Alt accounts of people that know a hack when they see one won't be able to kick.i love it how a hacker spends soo much time in tdm.. (in my team) and i will like.. kick him when its 10 kills to last kill.. they will always cry ^^ and im smiling
You're just one of those guys that keeps a hacker to win and then tell themselves they're doing it to **** them off. Not cool.... -
Phillybear wrote: »I. Introduction
II. Changes to the system
The best way to describe the overhaul is by summing up the characteristics of the system I was thinking of, so here it goes:
- Each player possesses 1 vote, which they can assign to ANY player in the room. (excluding himself)
- Your vote can only be assigned to 1 player at any time. You may however switch your vote to a different player during the game.
- Each vote from a team member counts as 2 points, each vote from an enemy counts as 1. This means that there is a maximum of 24 (16+8) vote points in any game. (in FFA/MM/HM each vote counts as 1)
- To get kicked you need at least 50% of the maximum amount of vote points (rounded up). This equals a bit more than 50% of the maximum vote points you can get.
- Votes will NOT be shown. Only you can see on which player your vote is (in the kick menu).
If players on hacker side need the help of hacker to finish their task of the day, a hacker would never get kicked ---- the kick system totally lose it meaning.
If a player is really good and legit, his team might want to kick him to get ace. That is another fail.
So flaws of the old kick system -- hacker can not get kicked, and good player get kicked -- are still there.
Like many others said, any system has flaw, but the main problem is not with the system, it is with the players. We need a way to encourage player to kick hacks, and disencourage them from abusing the vote.
A credit system might create such effect. To encourage a correct report by increase the credit by 1, by punish a wrong report by decrease the credit by 2, to encourage a right vote and punish a wrong vote if someone send a replay concern about improper kick.
Also grouping the player by their best score might be a good idea, a host can choose the range of the player group they accept. If some pros are really good to make them looks like hackers, they have a chance to fight the hack, our normal players might only have the best score like 54:9, and for the really good player, to play with us is a waste of time. -
i didnt read all of this..... but... the one thing they should do.. is add a kickvote to mutation/hero mode as you can almost always count on some 1 hack'n in them rooms cuz they cant be kicked.... or get some more mods who can kick/ban ingame ..who actually play....and...if there is an actual hacker... most of the time they dont get kicked cuz ppl think they are just cryin as ...u will almost always see some1 cryin "omg hacker!!" ...i usually get called one when i crush a bunch a noobs....i got a macro for it -_-
-
urkmancroo wrote: »at most points i agree with you but 1 point is the most important:
if you are lower rank than the gamer that you want to kick you cant kick him.
many lower ranked players kick good players because they think that they hack but they dont so every 2nd game they get kicked without a reason.
another point of this is that if a higher ranked player than you hacks just report him and you will never ever see him so just improve it with the "high rank priority kick"
if a lower ranked player than you hack you may kick him and this is the onlyest improvment that i wish
rank means nothing in this game, high ranks cry and kick just as much as low ranks do -
If players on hacker side need the help of hacker to finish their task of the day, a hacker would never get kicked ---- the kick system totally lose it meaning.
If a player is really good and legit, his team might want to kick him to get ace. That is another fail.
So flaws of the old kick system -- hacker can not get kicked, and good player get kicked -- are still there.
Let's see how those 2 situations can work out with the suggested kick vote system.
A Hacker in a team that want its mission done :
- there's always two or three players that want that hacker out and will try to kick him.
- the whole opposite team will want to kick him if he's obvious enough
Result in a 8v8 room : 2 votes from the hacker's team + 8 votes from the other team = 2x2 + 8x1 = 12. He is kicked.
A legit player that have the Ace :
- the 2nd to ace if he is in his team will put a vote on him, maybe another player of his team too if he's oblivious to legit skills
- some players in the opposite team will do it too (not all, some will probably have their votes on the guy that just killed them and chances are, the Ace didn't kill everyone or they will not bother voting against someone in particular)
Result in a 8v8 room : 2 votes from the legit Ace's team + 6 votes from the other team = 2x2 + 6x1 = 10. He isn't kicked.
Of course, there will be situations where the Ace will be kicked and the hacker not kicked, but this system greatly reduces the chance it happens. -
If every one voted as we expect, thing already solved. But most of time, a vote kick will not end up with 7:9. It is something like 1:10, 2:8...... And later on when the other side realize what it is, there is no one who can and wish to start a vote kick again.Hells_Judge wrote: »A Hacker in a team that want its mission done :
- there's always two or three players that want that hacker out and will try to kick him.
- the whole opposite team will want to kick him if he's obvious enough
Result in a 8v8 room : 2 votes from the hacker's team + 8 votes from the other team = 2x2 + 8x1 = 12. He is kicked.
Suppose you start a vote, but no one on your team says yes, and all the other side vote kick, then for a 8vs8 game you will end up with 2 + 8 : 2 * 7, I guess hacker will not be gone. Even we have one more, 4 + 8 : 2 * 6, it is tie. And remember currently we can not kick even with 9:6.Hells_Judge wrote: »A legit player that have the Ace :
- the 2nd to ace if he is in his team will put a vote on him, maybe another player of his team too if he's oblivious to legit skills
- some players in the opposite team will do it too (not all, some will probably have their votes on the guy that just killed them and chances are, the Ace didn't kill everyone or they will not bother voting against someone in particular)
Result in a 8v8 room : 2 votes from the legit Ace's team + 6 votes from the other team = 2x2 + 6x1 = 10. He isn't kicked.
Of course, there will be situations where the Ace will be kicked and the hacker not kicked, but this system greatly reduces the chance it happens.
If things goes as we expected, the ace legit player should never be kicked. But most of time, someone think or claim that the ace hacks, and kicked him as a hacker.
So I totally believe the real flaw in the system is with players. And the source is from the ambiguity of the z8games attitude towards players. z8 never encourage people to talking about hacker, never encourage people to report hacker, and lots of MoD claims that get rid of hacker is x-trap's responsibility. This will direct some part of the community into a wrong direction. Remember, if the player is not properly directed, any system can be abused. -
Well, I actually never post on this forum, but it's about god damn time to do it. I'm always getting furious when I get kicked because of some QQing moron, who can't stand getting killed by a decent player, FPS Doug rage is nothing compared to mine- once I got good k/d ratio, I'm pretty much always kicked, if such thing happens few times in a row, I'm really mad. Well, I'm kidding, my coputer devices are still alive, but this system is really wrong and people who are playing this game should be interested in getting better kicking system than anything else.
First of all- FFS, let kicked players keep their kills/deaths, maybe even let them keep exp and gp that they should get, it's really annoying to force good players to leave game by themselves if they want to keep k/d ratio realistic. Hackers don't care about K/D, so what's the point of this solution?
Second of all- democracy sucks, there are enough proofs that majority is usually wrong, same rule applies to every community, even computer games players. I know, everyone is indoctrinated that democracy is the best system, that gives people power to decide what's good and what's wrong. It's rubbish- in reality (CF), 10 random morons have better knowledge what are you using and what you see on your screen than you have. Not going totally offtopic- CF should keep kick voting system like it's now, but Host player should have a choice to either set up old system or new one, where people can't vote at all- every kick is based on host decision. TBH I would rather trust a guy, that belongs to decent clan than bunch of randoms who have no idea what's hacking and what's legitimate, but good gameplay.
What if someone is abusing such system? Well, we can do nothing about it except joining rooms that are maintained by well known guys, who won't kick you for no reason, you can always join rooms with old system- I bet there will be more rooms like that, than new ones. I believe nobody will care that much, to be responsible for kicking unless he is really unsatisfied with current piece of nonsense system. -
If a player is really good and legit, his team might want to kick him to get ace. That is another fail.
So flaws of the old kick system -- hacker can not get kicked, and good player get kicked -- are still there.
Like many others said, any system has flaw, but the main problem is not with the system, it is with the players. We need a way to encourage player to kick hacks, and disencourage them from abusing the vote.
For hacks: first of all, the players get more than a lousy 10 seconds to decide whether they want to see person A gone. Secondly, because the team of the hacker has stronger votes, you will sometimes need LESS players to kick the hacker, even a vote that now results in 6-9 could be enough for a kick.
Ace: The problem with being ACE is that your team will F11 for no reason when the vote box with your name pops up. I've seen rooms with 0 QQ in which the legit ACE (not even a very good score) got kicked 12-4. By making the vote hidden and stretched out over the entire game, he'll get less unfounded votes.If every one voted as we expect, thing already solved. But most of time, a vote kick will not end up with 7:9. It is something like 1:10, 2:8...... And later on when the other side realize what it is, there is no one who can and wish to start a vote kick again.
Suppose you start a vote, but no one on your team says yes, and all the other side vote kick, then for a 8vs8 game you will end up with 2 + 8 : 2 * 7, I guess hacker will not be gone. Even we have one more, 4 + 8 : 2 * 6, it is tie. And remember currently we can not kick even with 9:6.
Everyone pretty much votes as I expect, because (like I pointed out) a lot of these players are lacking any common sense. I kept this in mind when thinking about a new system. Once again: votes will be hidden so it takes away the peer pressure of judging about someone in 10 secs (coupled with f11/f12/noobs spam) and it stops the focus fire of votes in the current system.
Read my first post again for your kick vote example: the amount of votes not on you don't matter, only the amount of votes on you. 2+8 would indeed not be a kick, because it is less than 50% of 24. 4+8 would result in a kick though. It's funny that you complain about this part when defending the old kick vote as this is the EXACT same balance as the old one: 9-7/10-6.
Now look at the part of voting which you just skipped: what happens when more people on the hackers team vote for him? Right: less enemies needed, making it possible to kick with 8+4 (against 8/8 in the current system)If things goes as we expected, the ace legit player should never be kicked. But most of time, someone think or claim that the ace hacks, and kicked him as a hacker.
So I totally believe the real flaw in the system is with players. And the source is from the ambiguity of the z8games attitude towards players. z8 never encourage people to talking about hacker, never encourage people to report hacker, and lots of MoD claims that get rid of hacker is x-trap's responsibility. This will direct some part of the community into a wrong direction. Remember, if the player is not properly directed, any system can be abused.
For my expectations and kicking of the ACE: look above.
The flaw in the current system is a double one:
1) The players
2) The big box telling everyone to judge you in 10...9....8...7
You're wrong about the source though. The current kick vote would work in an environment with people that think straight. Z8s attitude doesn't matter to all those people that never use the forums, right now it IS X-traps responsability to stop hackers. (why else would Z8 pay for an anti-cheat program) The problem is that the players see hackers everywhere. (preferably the one that just shot them) You don't have to be directed to use this vote system, you just need some common sense...
Anyhow, the point is not to find out WHY the current vote doesn't work, the point is that it just doesn't work. -
If every one voted as we expect, thing already solved. But most of time, a vote kick will not end up with 7:9. It is something like 1:10, 2:8...... And later on when the other side realize what it is, there is no one who can and wish to start a vote kick again.
Suppose you start a vote, but no one on your team says yes, and all the other side vote kick, then for a 8vs8 game you will end up with 2 + 8 : 2 * 7, I guess hacker will not be gone. Even we have one more, 4 + 8 : 2 * 6, it is tie. And remember currently we can not kick even with 9:6.
If things goes as we expected, the ace legit player should never be kicked. But most of time, someone think or claim that the ace hacks, and kicked him as a hacker.
So I totally believe the real flaw in the system is with players. And the source is from the ambiguity of the z8games attitude towards players. z8 never encourage people to talking about hacker, never encourage people to report hacker, and lots of MoD claims that get rid of hacker is x-trap's responsibility. This will direct some part of the community into a wrong direction. Remember, if the player is not properly directed, any system can be abused.
I read your answer and it seems to me you don't understand how the suggested vote kick works :Suppose you start a vote [...]
You don't start a vote in Phyllibear's suggestion.
To put it simply, each player has voice he can put against any other player. If, at any time during the game, a player has enough voices against him (50% of the maximum) then he is kicked.
It means that, for a player to get kicked, he needs to have attracted a lot of people's attention at the same time.
That's what a hacker do. Fair play player on his team and probably all the opposite team will want him out. Imagine this vote kick in HM or MM : a one shot hacker start its rampage and you can be sure that at least 10 out of 16 players will want him out after a few rounds.
As for Aces ? First, the ace changes, so depending on who is ace, by how much and when, the number of people wanting him out will greatly vary. At the same time, some people that just died will QQ against their killer and vote against him rather than the ace. All of that amounts to greatly reduced chance of seeing legit aces out (the same applies to good players too).
Of course there are possible abuses for this system, but they are more limited and harder to exploit than those the current system allows.
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2K CrossFire
- 590 CrossFire Announcements
- 592 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 160 Community
- 12 Modes
- 280 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 38 CF Competitive Forum
- CFCL
- 14 Looking for a Team?
- 542 CrossFire Support
- 64 Suggestion
- 12 CrossFire Guides
- 33 CrossFire Off Topic