Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
[Veteran_MUDMASTEI2]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 21:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
Kushmir wrote:if thats the case (he's getting a pay-off from another corp) what spy would be the least bit concerned about being deserter ribbons or a rejoin penalty? we're talking about the people who are quitting out because the game is going badly or they didn't achieve the KDR they wanted so badly.
you simply can't allow them to quit without any consequence whatsoever.
This is exactly what I'm getting at, but people just don't get it. It's sort of sad, and amusing at the same time. |
[Veteran_Noc Tempre]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 21:43:00 -
[32] - Quote
Information is valuable. Being able to tell who is a spy and who is not is half the fun. You want have the game name and shame. Save that for the meta-game. NO FREE INTEL.
This also goes for who is reliable and not aka the deserters you wish to punish. They lose ISK and gain nothing. Anything more could only potentially exist for high sec contracts. Perhaps a deposit like some EVE missions. Never should this be publicly view-able. |
[Veteran_Dargondarkfire darkfire]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 21:48:00 -
[33] - Quote
Boss Dirge wrote:So I guess what I am saying is the punishment should be eventually working for NPC's all the time.
you realize this could end up happening to most people, if it ends up being like what i saw corporations or single players trying to pay people to do.
pay very little for a large amount of work. like the player delivery missions, get 1000 isk for delivering 100k isk of veldspar.
and the 0.0 pirates scare me as i worry they are going to hire you have you claim a planet for them and then orbital strike you and not pay you. |
[Veteran_Tyrion Dunstein]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 21:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
MUDMASTEI2 wrote:Sintel Jenner wrote:You realize people are CRASHING not quitting right? You're getting your panties in a wad over something that isn't actually happening. Nobody is crashing when they get into a game that they're attacking in and not defending. Stop with the excuses.
I wonder how you could possibly know this. Oh, wait, you can't. There were some days when I was getting 3-4 disconnects every HOUR. So stop with the presumptions already, would you? |
[Veteran_Forgotten Hammer]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 23:14:00 -
[35] - Quote
At present, I'd say punishment is fine. Like many others have said, you lose your gear and get no SP and isk. Further, there is the entire side of things where, when the game launches, there is the corp element.
What we have yet to really experience is the team work part of this game. That will factor in significantly, I'd imagine that someone that leave battles will not last long in a corp and would not have access to higher end contracts when the game launches. I think that would be punishment enough. If you leave a lot, you're stuck in the bottom feeder position in the larger scale of things.
I'd say we should try to let the sand box deal with this problem. If it is still meaningfully harming game play, then try to address it. But we won't be able tell until the Corp feature is implemented. |
[Veteran_Kristof Atruin]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 23:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
If there are any additional consequences than we already have it should be at the corp level, if at all. The whole idea is that mercenary corps will be hired to attack or defend a region. So do it like courier contracts in Eve...make it possible for the alliance / corp hiring the mercs to specify an amount of collateral to be put in escrow. If corp fighting on that side of the battle drops out of the game and doesn't finish the fight then you fail the contract and don't get your isk back. If individual mercs keep dropping out of matches that's an issue for corporate discipline. The CEO can fine the guy or kick him out of the corp. Wouldn't be hard for a corp to notice someone doing this either...you're playing a scheduled match and a disconnected alert comes on on the screen. This also still allows the backstabbing element of the game...the other side just has to pay more than the guys who hired you. How very...mercenary. |
[Veteran_Alpha SnakeBlood]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 23:45:00 -
[37] - Quote
OK thing that happen seem to be you lose what ever gear you lost and there is no pay out what so ever sp or isk
Unfortuantly MUD i donno how your not having same issues as rest of mabye your internet conection is particularly good or something but there are serious hard freezes happening during battle to the extent that it happens 1 evey 3 matches on average.
As it stands i do agree the quiters as you call them or as i would call them deserters should be penilized in the military deserting/being awol is a serious offence and can lead to being court mashaled.
In Dust at very least there should be a mark against you for all the times you deserted mabye a desersion count which would meen eve players would not trust theem to well and neiter would other Dust mercs making them less trust worthy to team with.
As for a actual loss of equipment to me at this moment in time of the build of the game it would not make sence but heres me using sence again. Now on the other hand if at the begining of a battle you must choose what recorses to commit to the fight not only would this add more depth to the game and a extra tactical depth it would also meen if you desert the guy you just screwed has your gear to do what with donno but he has it and there is a loss one that must be considered.
Now with all that said it should not be implemented till the hard freezes are fixed as alot of people will get absolutly screwed so when the game runs properly i do agree this should be implemented. |
[Veteran_MUDMASTEI2]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 23:59:00 -
[38] - Quote
Alpha SnakeBlood wrote:OK thing that happen seem to be you lose what ever gear you lost and there is no pay out what so ever sp or isk
Unfortuantly MUD i donno how your not having same issues as rest of mabye your internet conection is particularly good or something but there are serious hard freezes happening during battle to the extent that it happens 1 evey 3 matches on average.
As it stands i do agree the quiters as you call them or as i would call them deserters should be penilized in the military deserting/being awol is a serious offence and can lead to being court mashaled.
In Dust at very least there should be a mark against you for all the times you deserted mabye a desersion count which would meen eve players would not trust theem to well and neiter would other Dust mercs making them less trust worthy to team with.
As for a actual loss of equipment to me at this moment in time of the build of the game it would not make sence but heres me using sence again. Now on the other hand if at the begining of a battle you must choose what recorses to commit to the fight not only would this add more depth to the game and a extra tactical depth it would also meen if you desert the guy you just screwed has your gear to do what with donno but he has it and there is a loss one that must be considered.
Now with all that said it should not be implemented till the hard freezes are fixed as alot of people will get absolutly screwed so when the game runs properly i do agree this should be implemented.
Far from it.
I don't really know why people are saying they don't want it because of freezing, it's like they think the freezing is never going to be addressed, or this would be implemented BEFORE freezing is addressed. |
[Veteran_MUDMASTEI2]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 00:01:00 -
[39] - Quote
Tyrion Dunstein wrote:MUDMASTEI2 wrote:Sintel Jenner wrote:You realize people are CRASHING not quitting right? You're getting your panties in a wad over something that isn't actually happening. Nobody is crashing when they get into a game that they're attacking in and not defending. Stop with the excuses. I wonder how you could possibly know this. Oh, wait, you can't. There were some days when I was getting 3-4 disconnects every HOUR. So stop with the presumptions already, would you?
I'll say the same to you, just because they left doesn't mean they froze. News flash, people do in fact leave because things aren't going their way. They should be punished for that, why one would otherwise is honestly astonishing. |
[Veteran_IR Scifi]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 02:17:00 -
[40] - Quote
Delta-121 wrote:MUDMASTEI2 wrote:Sintel Jenner wrote:You realize people are CRASHING not quitting right? You're getting your panties in a wad over something that isn't actually happening. Nobody is crashing when they get into a game that they're attacking in and not defending. Stop with the excuses. says you, I've froze several times and as for excuses I haven't seen anybody make one.
Hell I played a game this morning where I couldn't respawn. Screen said press 'O' to respawn and I was mashing it like a mofo but there was no respawning going on. At one point my shield/armor had regenerated to 100% and I was still dead, no respawning going on. If the match wasn't almost over I'd have had to quit the match to keep playing. The idea of getting punished that would have really ground my gears. |
|
[Veteran_Terram Nenokal]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 04:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
Current penalties seem fine. In corp wars, deserters will get punishment enough from their corp leaders. Pub games will be more casual by design and current penalties will still be sufficient. |
[Veteran_Ren Vex]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 10:46:00 -
[42] - Quote
I have a proposal that both punishes people who quit and saves people who crash.
Simply use a system similar to dota. If you disconnect from a match, you have x amount of time to reconnect. So when you go to the battlefinder, it will have a RECONNECT button there and something like a FORFEIT CONTRACT button. You can't take another contract until you pick one of these buttons. If you do not choose within the time limit, it is counted as a forfeit.
This way, someone crashing can rejoin the game (his slot will be saved for X amount of time) and keep his score. Any suits he lost will still be lost but he will be rewarded for finishing the match.
Someone choosing to FORFEIT CONTRACT to stat pad or whatever reason can then be punished as harshly as CCP wants.
To take it further, Forfeits could also be tracked and once you reach a certain point (like a percentage overall or a flat figure for a certain time frame *eg 3 per day* you will receive an "abandoner/deserter" status for x amount of time (or matches) where you cant accept certain contracts. These would be contracts where a corp has set "no deserters" as a condition (some NPC contracts will be set to this and players will have this option too)
EDIT: expanding on this because of all the talk of backstabbing.
Basically im in the "NO FREE INTEL" camp. Any deserter status would be completely invisible to everyone except the deserter. The system could also be implemented only for NPC contracts. This way people can't just join random games and leave when its not going their way because nothing is at stake. This way people are still free to backstab each other in player contracts as much as they want. |
[Veteran_SILENTSAM 69]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 11:25:00 -
[43] - Quote
Quitters are already punished with the game mechanics. They dont get paid any ISK to compensate their loses. Also once the maps can be taken or held any defensive people quitting would be really stupid.
There is no reason to punish beyond this really. You lose and get nothing back is pretty bad punishment. Anyone stupid enough to rage quit is funny. |
[Veteran_SILENTSAM 69]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 11:28:00 -
[44] - Quote
MUDMASTEI2 wrote:Rivict O'Brien wrote:That's already how it is, you lose whatever you lost in the battle, and you gain nothing in return. And I'm saying you need to lose more. You would probably get booted from your corporation. Its up to them though. I dont ant game mechanics to decide that kind of thing, its for the corps to do.
EVE corps already have the ability to buy and create medals and ribbons and pay ti issue them out. I would care much more about a medal I got from my corp leader than a medal from a game mechanic. |
[Veteran_Martin0 Gallentius]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 14:25:00 -
[45] - Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I
this is EVE, not a casual shooter. You can't punish someone as a game mechanic. Thiefs and betraying are the norm. |
[Veteran_Kushmir]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 14:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
Ren Vex wrote:I have a proposal that both punishes people who quit and saves people who crash.
Simply use a system similar to dota. If you disconnect from a match, you have x amount of time to reconnect. So when you go to the battlefinder, it will have a RECONNECT button there and something like a FORFEIT CONTRACT button. You can't take another contract until you pick one of these buttons. If you do not choose within the time limit, it is counted as a forfeit.
This way, someone crashing can rejoin the game (his slot will be saved for X amount of time) and keep his score. Any suits he lost will still be lost but he will be rewarded for finishing the match.
Someone choosing to FORFEIT CONTRACT to stat pad or whatever reason can then be punished as harshly as CCP wants.
To take it further, Forfeits could also be tracked and once you reach a certain point (like a percentage overall or a flat figure for a certain time frame *eg 3 per day* you will receive an "abandoner/deserter" status for x amount of time (or matches) where you cant accept certain contracts. These would be contracts where a corp has set "no deserters" as a condition (some NPC contracts will be set to this and players will have this option too)
EDIT: expanding on this because of all the talk of backstabbing.
Basically im in the "NO FREE INTEL" camp. Any deserter status would be completely invisible to everyone except the deserter. The system could also be implemented only for NPC contracts. This way people can't just join random games and leave when its not going their way because nothing is at stake. This way people are still free to backstab each other in player contracts as much as they want.
not bad. not bad at all. |
[Veteran_soko99]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 15:00:00 -
[47] - Quote
Until the constant freezing gets fixed.. any punishment to a quitter is not welcome.. |
[Veteran_EnglishSnake]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:08:00 -
[48] - Quote
TBH is mostly everyone against having a severe punishment instead of the standard lose isk and sp gained in 1 match
For me i dont understand why you are but so many ppl quit games to stat pad or avoid a death or a loss these days and it can ruin a game and be ******* annoying to put it bluntly
Take MGO, servers getting shutdown 2moz but to address the quitting for stats issue it implemented a system to at least try and stop it
The system was simple, it added a withdraw stat to everyone and if you kept quitting games eventually you would get a temp ban which could last for 10mins or even 30mins if i recall so in tournys and survival you could check on a random and see if hes a quitter or not
In DUST quitting could mean alot more, a group of spies quitting at a key moment could really shaft you and in pub games would prob mean a defo loss if enough pack it up and losing just a match worth of SP and isk is really a suitable punishment?
To stop stat padding its gotta be ruthless, sure RL gets in the way but so what
Also if you use freezing as your counter argument then your a dumbass tbh because i really dont expect CCP to release the game freezing up every 3 matches and also ther is difference when you purposly leave a match by pressing a series of buttons and hitting the reset button
If anything a punishment system would be put in when the game is alot more stable
Only reason why i think ppl are against this is because they quit a lot themselves |
[Veteran_Kushmir]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:21:00 -
[49] - Quote
"Only reason why i think ppl are against this is because they quit a lot themselves."
i'm glad someone said it. just remember: we HAD an opportunity to potentially address this and DID NOTHING. |
[Veteran_Ryean]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:23:00 -
[50] - Quote
"In DUST quitting could mean alot more, a group of spies quitting at a key moment could really shaft you"
Welcome to Eve. |
|
[Veteran_EnglishSnake]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:30:00 -
[51] - Quote
Ryean wrote:"In DUST quitting could mean alot more, a group of spies quitting at a key moment could really shaft you"
Welcome to Eve.
Herp ******* derp sherlock
Tell me something i dont know |
[Veteran_Ryean]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:32:00 -
[52] - Quote
So what you're saying then is it's something that happens, and is intended to happen within the Eve universe. Dust is Eve. But this happening is...something we need to discourage?
Cognitive dissonance much? |
[Veteran_Rafgas Joe]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:39:00 -
[53] - Quote
Boss Dirge wrote:As this is all going to be tied to Eve and we will eventually be hired by Eve contractors I think some sort of record would a good indicator of a soldiers worth. If Eve players can hire specific mercs for specific contracts, no one will hire the dude who craps out every other match and costs them a buttload of money. Punishment should be something like the standings system with corporations in Eve. Everytime you complete a contract your standing with that corp should go up. If you decide to quit before the contract is completed the corporation in Eve then knows you are untrustworthy and will likely not hire you again.
So I guess what I am saying is the punishment should be eventually working for NPC's all the time.
qft
Just as in Eve, your only value is your reputation and track record. Let there be a record somewhere that shows exactly your w/l ratio, k/d ratio and skillpoints. I imagine that there will be some restriction on mercenary contracts, like a caution and some w/l ratio or skillpoints needed before you can accept a pvp contract for a real 0.0 mission.
So ye, quitters will be punished by their bad stats. If the punishments are higher for leavers, they'll just AFK the match and be even more damaging to the team than leaving. |
[Veteran_EnglishSnake]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:26:00 -
[54] - Quote
Ryean wrote:So what you're saying then is it's something that happens, and is intended to happen within the Eve universe. Dust is Eve. But this happening is...something we need to discourage?
Cognitive dissonance much?
Dont really read a thread so you?
This can be spies/stat padders/quitters in general
When you quit a game in DUST the team loses a player from then which can lose the match which may effect something later on down the line
Its not like EVE when you log on you play and you dont really quit as such, ther is no organized battles with a timer |
[Veteran_Rafgas Joe]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:30:00 -
[55] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:Ryean wrote:So what you're saying then is it's something that happens, and is intended to happen within the Eve universe. Dust is Eve. But this happening is...something we need to discourage?
Cognitive dissonance much? Dont really read a thread so you? This can be spies/stat padders/quitters in general When you quit a game in DUST the team loses a player from then which can lose the match which may effect something later on down the line Its not like EVE when you log on you play and you dont really quit as such, ther is no organized battles with a timer
the problem is even deeper.
If quitting punishments are too hard, players will just AFK out a match, in which case, they are even more damaging than quitters.
There should not be harsh punishments for quitting, not much more than they are now.
|
[Veteran_Ryean]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:33:00 -
[56] - Quote
Do you even play eve? We have organized battles all the time. People set their alarm clocks so that when we show up to defend something we have more firepower than the other guys. And get this, the reason these alarm clocks get set is that we have timers. If the defenders aren't in place with enough force before the pos / station / poco enters vulnerability, then you lose. A corp being paid off to not show up as expected, or turn on the defenders, would affect a hell of a lot more than a Dust battle could. You could wind up losing thousands of dollars worth of isk, assuming you were foolishly rich and actually bought it all. |
[Veteran_EnglishSnake]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:43:00 -
[57] - Quote
Ryean wrote:Do you even play eve? We have organized battles all the time. People set their alarm clocks so that when we show up to defend something we have more firepower than the other guys. And get this, the reason these alarm clocks get set is that we have timers. If the defenders aren't in place with enough force before the pos / station / poco enters vulnerability, then you lose. A corp being paid off to not show up as expected, or turn on the defenders, would affect a hell of a lot more than a Dust battle could. You could wind up losing thousands of dollars worth of isk, assuming you were foolishly rich and actually bought it all.
These POS/Stations etc have a damn good time limit on them before they go into ref timers tbh so if you let it happen then really its your own fault
DUST tho have timers basically, its the MCC shield and armor and also att tickets so can be like 10-20mins
In EVE ther really isnt much which has such a short time limit unless you count plexes in FW, everything else is hours and days
Your comparing chalk and cheese tbh |
[Veteran_Sintel Jenner]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:51:00 -
[58] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:Only reason why i think ppl are against this is because they quit a lot themselves I know I'm showing my age here, but what the hell is wrong with this new generation? This is the most bizarre form of self centric thinking I've ever witnessed, and I'm starting to see it everywhere. They assume everyone is exactly like they are, and make judgments about them accordingly.
It's a beta, people are crashing left and right. Look around the forums and you'll see thread after thread either giving detailed information about what they were doing when they crashed or just ranting incoherently about how much the game sucks because of all the crashing. But no, apparently to these little brats everyone else is lying and is just quitting to better their stats that we all know are going to be wiped several times over in the course of testing.
Why would they think that? Methinks they doth protest too much.
If your first assumption is that everyone else playing this game is trying to screw you over just to make a little number in their profile bigger you're either paranoid, or that's how you play it and assume everyone else is too. |
[Veteran_EnglishSnake]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:54:00 -
[59] - Quote
Sintel Jenner wrote:EnglishSnake wrote:Only reason why i think ppl are against this is because they quit a lot themselves I know I'm showing my age here, but what the hell is wrong with this new generation? This is the most bizarre form of self centric thinking I've ever witnessed, and I'm starting to see it everywhere. They assume everyone is exactly like they are, and make judgments about them accordingly. It's a beta, people are crashing left and right. Look around the forums and you'll see thread after thread either giving detailed information about what they were doing when they crashed or just ranting incoherently about how much the game sucks because of all the crashing. But no, apparently to these little brats everyone else is lying and is just quitting to better their stats that we all know are going to be wiped several times over in the course of testing. Why would they think that? Methinks they doth protest too much. If your first assumption is that everyone else playing this game is trying to screw you over just to make a little number in their profile bigger you're either paranoid, or that's how you play it and assume everyone else is too.
Its your age
Re read my entire post
|
[Veteran_Sintel Jenner]
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 17:56:00 -
[60] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:Its your age
Re read my entire post
There you go again. Assuming I haven't. There's an old saying about assuming that I think you might want to become familiar with. In the meantime, please try to come to terms with the fact that someone can read every word you wrote and still think it's bullshit. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |