|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
168
   |
Posted - 2013.12.08 22:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
I agree that AFKers need punishing for doing so. Being kicked for inactivity is fine, since sometimes the game simply freezes on you or something happens suddenly in real life that requires immediate attention, but those players who have performed zero actions that could be even vaguely construed as aiming to complete the contract.
If a merc fails to deploy for a certain amount of time, they get verbal warnings that they have accepted a contract to fight. Similarly, mercs should get warnings before removal from the battle if they have not performed things like: attacking enemy assets (mercs, installations, vehicles, etc); hacking enemy assets; destroying enemy equipment. It's obvious that CCP already tracks some of these statistics, so why is this not a thing? Even the most useless players attempt to do these things, even if they consistently fail to achieve anything. |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
168
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 22:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
He did mention "near the beginning." |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
168
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 04:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Talos Vagheitan wrote:I'd sooner have a vote option to boot AFK people. I'd hate to see someone banned for a day over a glitch, as well players who are simply that bad...
CCP does already track damage dealt. It's unlikely that even the worst player will miss every single shot ever or fail to even begin a hack. Even dying shows at least a modicum of participation beyond AFKing. It'd likely need more checks than just 0/0 0WP from near beginning, but it's better than if you don't move and haven't got a rubber band handy... |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
168
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 05:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Faunher wrote:If you do not contribute any to a match and you just sit around, last I checked, you do not receive any ISK or SP. That is punishment enough. As well, many people spend time in their team's redzone trying to learn things, such as flying dropships. Banning somebody for trying to learn in a semi-safe environment seems counter-intuitive.
Completely false.
Players get SP for two things in a match: passively, for time spent in the battle; actively, for their WP contribution. Passive battle SP makes up the vast majority of the SP gained from any battle, unless you are some kind of Dust wizard and win in a couple of minutes with several OB's to your name.
ISK, I'm not 100% certain about, but I'm fairly sure that even AFKers get awarded some, even if it is minimal.
It's true what you're saying about learning, that's something that puts a crimp in the plan, but couldn't something be implemented to register whether players were inputting button presses? That would at least indicate an active presence: if an AFK farmer (ie, someone who rubber bands) were forced to press buttons an unknown amount of times to be considered to be contributing, they would be much less capable of farming, since the primary allure of AFK farming (as I understand it anyway) is to gain as much SP/ISK as possible with as little personal input as possible, thus giving them the opportunity to focus on other things.
Meh, I dunno. |
|
|
| |
|