| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Minmatar Slave 74136
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
291
   |
Posted - 2012.08.04 11:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
A suggestion to keep track of the number of times that a player has left a battle in progress (via using the 'leave battle' neocom option) as well as track the number of times that a player has cacked his own teammates into his or her employment history, personal stats, what have you. That way someone looking at them as an applicant to their corp can tell whether they are reliable, or likely to shoot them all in the back either by accident or on purpose.
thoughts? |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.04 14:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
On D/Cs from games -
I'd presume people can get around that by killing their internet connection when they don't want to finish a game and don't want the server to count it. Perhaps it'd be more reasonable to count every time they've disconnected from a game. I imagine with the reliability of most peoples connections these days someone who repeatedly bails out would be easy to spot against their peers.
On friendly fire -
I think what you're suggesting might be too useful a tool to be able to determine if someone is going to turn around a stab you in the back. Would it not be better left up to those who do the recruiting to look into someones background before accepting their application?
Of course depending on how complete the statistics are going to be the absence of a friendly kills figure might just not make any sense. |
Dante Daedrik
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2012.08.04 23:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Minmatar Slave 74136 wrote:A suggestion to keep track of the number of times that a player has left a battle in progress (via using the 'leave battle' neocom option)
If I come into a match where the team has already been red-lined. I am not wasting my time, money, and equipment trying to get them out of it. |
Aijul
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
55
|
Posted - 2012.08.04 23:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
How about an indicator and better direction to prevent accidental team killing? First time players probably would not have a clue who is the enemy, and who is on their team. All players on a team should have a visible mark above their heads, or a ground halo which appears at a certain distance if needed to indicate this.
When you shoot at a friendly player, the reticule should reflect this (Instead of an aiming reticule, it would transform in to a "Denied/Restricted" symbol, such as an "X" or a circle with a slash in it)
Now that players are aware, penalties would be put in place.
Second time you shoot at a team mate, your gun temporarily loses the ability to fire. (Say, five seconds?)
Third time, you begin to lose the potential amount of ISK gained at the end of the match.
Fourth time, the team has the ability to kick the offending player off the team.
After the initial team kill and warning, that is when team killing should begin to appear as a statistic for that player.
The idea itself is taken from other shooters, specifically Lost Planet 2 and Uncharted 2, but I'm sure they have been adapted elsewhere in other titles. |
Dalton Smithe
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 00:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dante Daedrik wrote:Minmatar Slave 74136 wrote:A suggestion to keep track of the number of times that a player has left a battle in progress (via using the 'leave battle' neocom option) If I come into a match where the team has already been red-lined. I am not wasting my time, money, and equipment trying to get them out of it.
I completely agree, also if I am doing my best to work with the team, and no one is listening, or just being stupid(been in plenty of games where people are just sitting at the base and not trying to take objectives) then yes I am going to leave the match. Why should I put forth the effort/isk just to see the entire thing fall apart because the team doesn't want to cap objectives and try and win the match.... |
Velexia Ombra
29
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 00:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pretty sure a cowardice counter would be meaningless. Ah yes, this person has been unfortunately disconnected from the game 14 times while in mid-battle.
I wouldn't mind a "Hack" counter, a "Kill Assist" counter, a "Vehicle Kill/Kill Assist" counter... or other things like "Amount of Armor Repaired on Self/Allies" and "Number of times ammo was resupplied" ... clearly we wouldn't need a counter for Nanite Injections, because that would be zero for everyone. |
Maken Tosch
263
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 00:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
Minmatar Slave 74136 wrote:A suggestion to keep track of the number of times that a player has left a battle in progress (via using the 'leave battle' neocom option) as well as track the number of times that a player has cacked his own teammates into his or her employment history, personal stats, what have you. That way someone looking at them as an applicant to their corp can tell whether they are reliable, or likely to shoot them all in the back either by accident or on purpose.
thoughts?
You tell that to the spies who will one day learn to legally circumvent the system as they did in Eve. |
Mobius Kaethis
Planetary Response Organisation
Test Friends Please Ignore
306
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 00:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Aijul wrote:How about an indicator and better direction to prevent accidental team killing? First time players probably would not have a clue who is the enemy, and who is on their team. All players on a team should have a visible mark above their heads, or a ground halo which appears at a certain distance if needed to indicate this.
When you shoot at a friendly player, the reticule should reflect this (Instead of an aiming reticule, it would transform in to a "Denied/Restricted" symbol, such as an "X" or a circle with a slash in it)
Now that players are aware, penalties would be put in place.
Second time you shoot at a team mate, your gun temporarily loses the ability to fire. (Say, five seconds?)
Third time, you begin to lose the potential amount of ISK gained at the end of the match.
Fourth time, the team has the ability to kick the offending player off the team.
After the initial team kill and warning, that is when team killing should begin to appear as a statistic for that player.
The idea itself is taken from other shooters, specifically Lost Planet 2 and Uncharted 2, but I'm sure they have been adapted elsewhere in other titles.
To be honest I don't think this is really in the spirit of EVE. I think infiltrating a corp then team killing like mad during a crucial match is a valid tactic and shouldn't be blocked just because its annoying. Eve is full of things like this. |
Mr Vito
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 01:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Mobius Kaethis wrote:Aijul wrote:How about an indicator and better direction to prevent accidental team killing? First time players probably would not have a clue who is the enemy, and who is on their team. All players on a team should have a visible mark above their heads, or a ground halo which appears at a certain distance if needed to indicate this.
When you shoot at a friendly player, the reticule should reflect this (Instead of an aiming reticule, it would transform in to a "Denied/Restricted" symbol, such as an "X" or a circle with a slash in it)
Now that players are aware, penalties would be put in place.
Second time you shoot at a team mate, your gun temporarily loses the ability to fire. (Say, five seconds?)
Third time, you begin to lose the potential amount of ISK gained at the end of the match.
Fourth time, the team has the ability to kick the offending player off the team.
After the initial team kill and warning, that is when team killing should begin to appear as a statistic for that player.
The idea itself is taken from other shooters, specifically Lost Planet 2 and Uncharted 2, but I'm sure they have been adapted elsewhere in other titles. To be honest I don't think this is really in the spirit of EVE. I think infiltrating a corp then team killing like mad during a crucial match is a valid tactic and shouldn't be blocked just because its annoying. Eve is full of things like this.
This, yes. |
Aijul
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
55
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 04:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
So the point of EVE is to backstab everyone? (Serious question btw) |
|
|
Minmatar Slave 74136
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
291
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 08:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Aijul wrote:So the point of EVE is to backstab everyone? (Serious question btw)
No, but it is not uncommon - in a world where CCP has ruled that unless it breaks the TOS/EULA, and if it does not affect the players account or steal real money from them - then everything under the sun is perfectly legal in-game. be on your toes, and gather friends and corpmates you can really trust (and even then there is no guarantee one wont screw you over)
This game has seen recruitment scams, betrayals and destructions of corps and alliances, financial scams involving ISK (just proving people still fall for old classics like ponzi schemes) and lowbrow ganks galore. some rage quit, some learn to spot scammers and scams, and some learn how to scam others and bathe in their tears.
you can be whatever you want to be - but be on your toes. :0
As for my suggestion - some days i have good ideas and some days not so good - this is one of the latter. |
Jonquill Caronite
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
115
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 11:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
I don't mind a counter of these things... So long as it doesn't arbitrarily prevent you from entering any battle, that makes sense, it would basically operate by giving your Dust player a security status rating just like they have in EVE, which is useful to tell who is a pirate, a backstabbing team killing traitor, and a generally useless ally. I agree with the idea...
HOWEVER, there is a HUGE caveat to this, and that is UNTIL CCP has eliminated bugs like entering a game to have all your fits made invalid and unavailable, and spawn glitches which force you into eternal limbo status, and general stupid glitches that could seriously screw up your security status through no fault of your own, it would be HIGHLY irresponsible of them to implement this sort of system... Basically get the basic **** straight before you get into more complex stuff, and this game is WAY to buggy right now to implement a lot of the things that would be nice that players suggest...
By the way this isn't a complaint about how buggy it is, just a statement of fact that it must be resolved first =). Keep up the good work CCP. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |