Forged Alliance Forever

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T18:48:13+02:00

FtXCommando.

I'm not going to diminish the meaning of your opinion. With interest and pleasure I read every detailed answer. I'm trying to put together a picture.
And I believe that everyone has the right to have an opinion and be heard. I heard that you do not need such a system.
Thank you!

I can not find a single replay in the vault by your nickname. Why is that? Am I looking for right?
FtXCommando

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 26 Jan 2018, 18:48

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T17:41:45+02:00

MikZZ wrote:
Yes, I see that you are trying to troll me. This is a good part of communication, but then again to "a certain degre"

Ooooooh you're one of those guys!

yOu DiSAgrEE wiTh Me sO yOU HaVe tO be TroLliNg

speaking about a nice way to make yourself lose all credibilty.

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 26 Jan 2018, 17:41

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T17:26:31+02:00

MikZZ wrote:
And while you tell me, about how you humiliate friends, scoff and think it is permissible. It is sad.
Abuse? Yes, they can be.

You can degrade my opinion by calling it trolling. I don't mind. Just realize your opinion is also quite frankly worthless because I don't really care what some random Russian dude thinks of the way I play with people I know. I'm just trying to stop your virtue signal system from degrading the game.

I was 1100 for like 700 games on FAF. Never did I feel like I needed a reputation system. Community is ridiculously tiny even at the "average" rating level and you can easily see who is toxic. There are no benefits to this system. There are only risks which will come from assblasted players giving huge negative "ranking" to players because they're mad.

Add a report button next to a player's name when you go into your replay vault. That's all that needs to exist.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 26 Jan 2018, 17:26

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T17:15:07+02:00

Another point that came to my mind.

We can make a page on the site, which anyone can open and see the statistics of reputation changes for the last week, for example. This will make the system more transparent.

So you can see who, for example, Dislike you and for what reason. Submit an appeal. To pay attention to the administration (moderators).

Anyone will be able to track cheating, abuse.
Moderators for such abuses can also punish a decrease in reputation for any period.

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 26 Jan 2018, 17:15

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T16:51:49+02:00

FtXCommando,

I will repeat my early message:

So by the numbers.

For example, if the player has -3 (ie he received 3 warnings - one in three different games), what does this mean?
This means that the server can automatically send a message to the moderator, indicating the player's name and the number of replays of games with violations. In this way, you can create an automated system for preventing negative behavior.
Received 3 penalties - receive a warning from the moderator. In the game lobby, get -3 and watchful attitude of other players.

If a player receives 5 penalty points, then what?
Then again the server sends a message to the moderator about the number of violations and the number of replays of games.
In this case, the moderator may decide to limit the player's playing activity, for example, for a week.

And

1. You should understand that behind each tool for users is something more.
Let's stop at this moment. What does spam mean? Is it 10, 20, 30 on the day of Dislikes? If this is really spam, then simply put a filter to capture such persons. Put on the day of 5-10 marks, got under the sights of the moderator - sent an automatic message with the username - this player abuses.
The second option, in one day, you can make 3-5-7 negative assessments.
How do you like this option?

The next moment.
I read all the time that:
"I can allow myself to straddle, humiliate, a person whom I have known for a long time.
I can make it disgusting, to the person I know."

Do you understand that we are not talking about a narrow circle of people with whom you constantly play? There are in fact other players, and other games.

Why do you guys at point-blank view do not see that in addition to your narrow circle of friends in games there are also simply randomly assembled players. And there are many such games. And there you can give such an opportunity - to evaluate the behavior.

And while you tell me, about how you humiliate friends, scoff and think it is permissible. It is sad.
Abuse? Yes, they can be.
Then let's think better how to reduce this probability and what can be improved. Instead of trolling me.

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 26 Jan 2018, 16:51

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T16:19:50+02:00

I'm going to """humiliate""" people that I often play with. The virtue-signalling robot 1500s are going to get upset FOR the people that I'm """insulting.""" Any sort of communal policing like this is generally ass because it forces the individual to submit to the communal thought of what is right. And quite frankly, just because it's popular doesn't make it right. If the person I'm messing around with doesn't mind the way I'm addressing them, there is no reason that some random dude that plays 1 game with me every 500 games should have the right to be insulted for that person.

Again, this system is going to be total trash and just result in tons of people trying to aim for the most negative rating possible for the memes. Who is going to plan on respecting some random number that can be influenced by a bunch of angry brazilian/burger/russian 700s in your game?

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 26 Jan 2018, 16:19

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T16:08:55+02:00

Farmsletje wrote:
You call this problems. I call this acceptable behaviour (to a certain degree). So which one of us is right?

I highlighted the main part in your message.

Please tell me to what extent do you think it is permissible and how is this determined by your "a certain degre"?
Do you consider humiliation of a person acceptable, if so, to what extent?
Do you think you can make nasty things to the allies permissible, if so, in what degree?

Yes, I see that you are trying to troll me. This is a good part of communication, but then again to "a certain degre"

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 26 Jan 2018, 16:08

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T15:15:36+02:00

MikZZ wrote:
In my statement everything is clear and understandable. The following problems are indicated:
1. Insults, humiliations, negative assessments destroying the person in the chat. Spam in the chat or ping, markers. Which interfere with the play.

2. Destruction of one's own troops or base (buildings) in Ful Share mode. If the player is so cool, then you do not need a Full Score. This is ochevdno.

3. Selfish behavior, lack of response to the requests of the Allies. Blocking of Allied resources, or the destruction of Allied troops or structures. That is an uncommissioned game.

You call this problems. I call this acceptable behaviour (to a certain degree). So which one of us is right?

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 26 Jan 2018, 15:15

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-26T13:23:45+02:00

Yolo-, i have some words for you, same as for all those who read our debate.

I get the impression that you read my messages selectively. And you answer too.

To begin with, you are afraid that everyone will begin to shave a reputation for each other. But after all, I proposed a system of automatic reputation recovery - here is the link:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15720&start=10#p159271

Your next statement is that I am developing a total punishment system. Again, it's not true. I have both positive and negative ratings. And I really liked the idea of a balance between them, and the approximate names:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15720&start=20#p159772

No, I am right of course. I don't know anyone else than you who keeps a list of players to not play with.

You write that you do not know the players who have a "black" list. Do not you have a list of players that you do not play with? Do I have no such list, or do not you know me?

Mikzz, we already talked about this in a game lobby once, and you came to the conclusion that we didn't want to play with you, so you left.

And then there comes a message that we discussed with you, and I (MikZZ) realized that you (here you use WE) do not want to play with me. This is an obvious contradiction. It turns out you also have such a list. And you're wrong.

That is, in fact, I did not see from you the reasoned justification why the system is bad. Also it is not necessary in general.

In my statement everything is clear and understandable. The following problems are indicated:
1. Insults, humiliations, negative assessments destroying the person in the chat. Spam in the chat or ping, markers. Which interfere with the play.

2. Destruction of one's own troops or base (buildings) in Ful Share mode. If the player is so cool, then you do not need a Full Score. This is ochevdno.

3. Selfish behavior, lack of response to the requests of the Allies. Blocking of Allied resources, or the destruction of Allied troops or structures. That is an uncommissioned game.

... and some more

And the most important thing!
All these assessments are the product of a collective decision. In game 3 on 3, let at least two votes. In the game 4 to 4 - it's three votes, etc. It's just a technical implementation and nuances.

Again, I remind you that reputational wars (abuses) are very easy to track.

In your messages, I see you so far only one real argument:

here can't be objective judgement that would make a reputation system fair. I don't trust you, or mikzz or pretty much anyone else to have a proper judgement on some situation, just as you/ others wouldn't trust my judgement on you.

That is, you do not trust anyone. And you do not believe in the existence of self-regulation within the community, the society. But you are now writing here. Say why? This is the manifestation of the mechanism of self-regulation. You're trying to say that you're against it. That's your opinion.

So why can not we introduce a self-regulation tool into the game. This will help to point out unworthy behavior. Or, on the contrary, someone to send a signal "you are an excellent player"?
This is a real incentive. It can be both positive and negative.

I have an idea on how to show the results of such a reputation.

This should be shown in the lobby. For example, next to the ping-kpu field. In the form of a red or green number. So already in the lobby we can see the attitude towards the player.
Red shows a negative number. Green - positive. Zero to white.
In this case, when hovering over a number, you can show a pop-up window in which to show the reasons and the number of violations or positive feedback.

For example:

+1 Helped the team
+1 Good personal performance
-1 Insult, humiliation ...

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 26 Jan 2018, 13:23

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-25T20:13:37+02:00

Voodoo wrote:
We used a side named "playertracker" in the good old gpgnet days:
/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=3031

Maybe someone can bring it back.

I'm willing to dev it if someone has the source code and can give it to me.

Statistics: Posted by tatsu — 25 Jan 2018, 20:13

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-25T21:03:13+02:00

Hello Mikzz,

I know there are other players, sometimes i watch some noob 1000-1600 games or even all welcome games.

I understand that it is frustrating to you and others that there are some players that just ctrlk early in a game for no apparent reason. But you have to understand other mentalities too. For example there are some tryhard players, like me, that expect that everyone else is playing to win with their best possible performance and get their fun from that. You and others just play for fun, so to say. In your eyes it is disrespectful when the tryhard or toxic players ctrlk everything, in their eyes it might be disrespectful when "just-for-fun" players play weird in their eyes and not to your full potential, wasting their time so to say. Mikzz, we already talked about this in a game lobby once, and you came to the conclusion that we didn't want to play with you, so you left. I understand that ctrlking is selfish in your eyes, but you have to acknowledge that your playstyle might seem selfish to others too.

Unfortunately you are right about bad players copying seemingly bad habits from good players like ctrlking everything or flaming. I noticed it long time ago, and so did others. There is nothing really you can do about it, except trying to talk with those ctrlk players or not play with them at all. You want those others to change, it is your selfish belief that they need to change. You can't really accuse them of being selfish, everyone plays for their own fun after all.

If you really focussed on issues of ethics and morality, you wouldn't have suggested something like a reputation system. I already explained why it is unfair and wrong.

Also this forum doesn't have a reputation system and I am baffled how you could interpret this like system as such. You can merely interpret someones "like" on a post as that this person agrees with you. Else it has 0 value. And the counter of how many likes you got or how much you liked has also 0 value. Furthermore a reputation system in a forum would make 0 sense, since you are supposed to discuss stuff, find solutions or whatever. Someone's reputation based on likes wouldn't affect the objective value or veracity of the post in any way.

Whether you have something personally against me or not, doesn't affect the matter of this discussion at all.

What i call toxic behavior is toxic behavior, stop being so presumptuous to decide for me, that I would be referring to low skill.

So in the end you neither gave arguments for this problem that would conclude the necessity of a reputation system, nor did you disprove any of my points against a reputation system.

Statistics: Posted by Yolo- — 25 Jan 2018, 19:22

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-25T06:34:15+02:00

Yolo-, hello.

You know that in addition to the 50 players you constantly play, there are other players. You have a rating of about 2000 - it's a lot, and you like a god sit on the Olympus and say that there are no such problems.
I think that you see a very limited version of communication and games. But imagine there are other players with a rating not higher than 1000-1200. These players do not spend time in the sandbox from morning to night, in order to play the highest class of skills in one or two games. But they are fun to play, they try, they like the spirit of the team game.

And then suddenly a star appears, which suddenly makes a mistake on the 5th minute or 10. And immediately leaves the game, everything explodes and goes out. Not even a word. Or write - let's play a new game, I screwed up here.

You understand that this is called selfishness, narcissism. Or there are games when the player begins to abuse the coarse words, filling the chat and pings.

Is this acceptable behavior?

You're talking about the fact that players need to grow. Yes, but how to do it?
For example, I watch a cool player's replays. What I see?
Pouring mud on the team, exploding own troops and base. But such a person is an example for imitation. His behavior in games in addition to construction is copied too. Arrogance, aggressiveness, humiliation, etc.

Or should somebody choose one out of hundreds of games where highranked player was good like genlemen and pray for it as an example to follow?

I focus on issues of ethics and morality. I'm not going to read lectures on these subjects. But I do not want to endure disgusting players either.

If you notice, then this forum also has a reputation system. What I like and who like my messages. But for some reason you do not protest against such a form of expressing emotions, why?
Why do we still have no social signals? This will help to moderate channels and stimulate socially acceptable behavior from players.

And yes, I have nothing personally against you. We are considering the theoretical side of the question. At the same time, do not forget the practical side.

By the way, what you call toxic behavior is nothing more than a poor personal performance - low skill. But we are all people, not robots. Sitting to play, do not forget about this and demand excellent mastery.

Statistics: Posted by MikZZ — 25 Jan 2018, 06:34

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-24T21:26:46+02:00

We used a side named "playertracker" in the good old gpgnet days:
/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=3031

Maybe someone can bring it back.

Statistics: Posted by Voodoo — 24 Jan 2018, 21:26

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-24T21:15:42+02:00

A modest and careful system might not bad. A little fog in the system may prevent abuse...

Statistics: Posted by Franck83 — 24 Jan 2018, 21:15

Re: FAF Client system proposal /NOT full of naked FAF ladies

2018-01-24T20:38:14+02:00

Franck83 wrote:
It is not necessary the reputation value to be visible by other players. It may only have the function to trigger moderators attention.

Then it isn't a reputation system. It's a new report button.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 24 Jan 2018, 20:38