Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Blechhaube

How to reduce toxic behaviour

153 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TOXIC]
Players
4,529 posts
11,480 battles
7 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:
  Reveal hidden contents

 

image.png.92b2ab5743b7f1b88e4c60fb22076390.png

No, you just had no point to begin with. You only deluded yourself into believing otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4 posts

As a beginner, I feel that the game fails to reward good behavior or good gameplay.

Many people mistake good gameplay for good behavior...or forgive bad behavior for good gameplay.

Many people mistake poor gameplay (and/or decisions) for poor skill, often then castigating rather than encouraging or helping.

My most common encounter has been somebody screaming "You &^%$ing idiot do you know nothing about this game?" to which my (n00b) response is: "Not a lot, no, want to teach me?"

The most common reply then is something like "Nobody has the time - go find another game, you Frakking n00b!"

On no less than 3 occasions I've witnessed a (ranked icon high-game-number) player harass a Langley CV player by screaming "F&^ing useless noob do you not know how to CV!!?"

(I did point out, on all three occasions, that they were in a Langley and therefore, almost certainly did not know 'how to CV'... each time resulted in me getting negative karma.)

Similarly, it is very often the case that when sticking up for n00bs, I get negative karma from "experienced players":  "Dont shout at them, teach them how the game works." appears to be a grave insult to many, many "experienced" players. (This forum exhibits similar sentiments rather often)

(I am saying "experienced" as there is oftentimes a clear disconnect between experience and skill - although many seem to believe that "I have a higher tier ship than you = "Mo Skilz". )

I have played with tier 7 DD gamers who do not know that CAPing gets your more reward than snatching a kill - the game information has never told them that, nor have any other gamers.
Many people at my tier (4-5) believe that getting a KILL means a higher reward than causing damage or CAPing or anything else... they have never been taught by the game or by other gamers. 

All of this indicates a poor learning environment inside a poorly educated community - it should be somewhere every player should be treating all newcomers as potential division mates, clan members or even friends - however, they don't... and this is the "toxic" part: Toxicity is not shouting at people, that is rudeness; toxic communities are ones that self-harm and any community that fails to invest in its own future is self-harming and therefore toxic.

The game intro and Co-OP gameplay mode does a truly awful job of teaching new players the game mechanics FOR ANY OTHER PART OF THE GAME - none of it prepares them for Random. In random very few other players prepare them for a future in the game either.

Any perceived community "low skill set" or "n00b don't know nothin' 'bout the game" can only really be placed at the feet of the remainder of the player base - who, for the future of the game and THEIR future in the game, should pick up the ball - I've not seen many willing to do that.

I think my stats are reasonable, however, around 60% of the games in which I have played I have been verbally abused by sex, race, religion, nationality, intelligence, menstrual cycle, and ... species ... and a whole variety of terminal diseases wished upon me.
On each occasion, I go and look those players up and in most cases, it is a "more experienced" gamer responsible. I then blacklist them as I simply do not want to play with that sort of person (sadly Blacklisting does not work as they often appear in other coop or random games)

It is worth bearing in mind that for every wolf you need about 15-20 sheep:  One has to wonder if the wolves realise what happens when the sheep run out ..? Keeping the sheep happy means they breed more, more sheep = happy, well-fed wolves.

This should not be a troublesome or contentious concept.

Finally: the game lacks a pre-game and post-game lobby - the lack of a pre-game lobby could be deliberate (for *reasons to do with gaming*) however, the lack of a post-game lobby means that there is no room in which to build relationships formed during the match - you pull off a last-second win and Kraken - game ends, and you may never see those people ever again.  Maybe, 1 in 10, your Karma goes up.   (The game needs a post-match lobby for people to talk, discuss and, maybe even, teach... of it into a post-match lobby then, perhaps, a separate in-game channel (where the dead can gather and not spam the game chat).)

So, there are only two sources for a poor gaming community -  the tools provided by the developer to build a community and the gamers who use them.

The buck stops right there because those two things are also the solution. 

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
11 posts
9,604 battles
19 hours ago, SnuSnu_RIP said:

I  prefer it when casual and weekend players would play more team oriented, reading informations, watching videos about the game mechanics and improve their play style (this game and the work of the developers deserve it), than just buying a Tirpitz and being the next fail toptier in a match. That is the main reason for toxic behavior. Also the non existing communication during battles. But what I'm saying... 

Its ironic really.

 

Fairly new to the game but finally getting my WR to rise. In randoms can rarely buy a win on my torpitz  but in the ranked battles I have a got a very high WR in the 2 days so far I played it. The difference? Less whining and arguing and peeps would pursue a plan even if some didn't agree with it.

 

A bad plan properly executed is better than a good plan  that isn't. If some players went with the flow more often instead of insisting on wide flanking or capping the opposite point to the main group (yep bitching at DD's here in randoms) and then ranting about it afterwards I think there would be a better chance of winning with happier players.

 

I think its all about those who like to see themselves as always right and some would rather throw a game than go with a plan they thought was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
1,803 posts
9,790 battles
5 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

...
Finally: the game lacks a pre-game and post-game lobby - the lack of a pre-game lobby could be deliberate (for *reasons to do with gaming*) however, the lack of a post-game lobby means that there is no room in which to build relationships formed during the match - you pull off a last-second win and Kraken - game ends, and you may never see those people ever again.  Maybe, 1 in 10, your Karma goes up.   (The game needs a post-match lobby for people to talk, discuss and, maybe even, teach... of it into a post-match lobby then, perhaps, a separate in-game channel (where the dead can gather and not spam the game chat).)

...

Great idea! Ive played a lot of Battlefield games and there it has been implemented (The possibility of post battle chatting).

It would be great to be able to speak to your team after the match. Ofcourse there will be flaming from time to time but I think it would be a great addition to the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,760 posts
10,760 battles
On 29.04.2018 г. at 3:51 AM, Runegrem said:

I dislike that idea. While removing after death chat would remove a fair amount of toxicity it would also remove a lot of pleasant chat from the game. A lot of games I've been in had players talk about good or funny duels after one of both of the involved players died. That kind of chat makes the game more social and the opponents seem less like bots that are only there to be shot down. I'd actually want to go in the other direction and allow for a few more seconds of chat after the game has ended instead of immediately going to the results screen. Isn't that how it is in WoT? Though at least we can still chat with our opponents in this game.

I agree with this. And I actually wouldn't mind the battle waithing a few seconds after one team has won. I do find the chat to be one of the most important parts of multiplayer gaming. It's an essential part of the experience to me! :Smile_great:

I don't care about green or red team, in the end we're all in the same boat and I've had many interesting little conversations with people from red team after we had died. And I also often keep watching the game and sometimes give hints and this actually helps win games from time to time.

 

On 29.04.2018 г. at 10:44 AM, Sameen said:

So please tell me in what way it is helpfull to click nearly 100 times on the same point of the map?

 

Maybe my english is not so good, so please tell me the tactical meaning of moron, [edited], idiot... :-)

 

That's not a good argument. Just because it is worse elsewhere its not good here. 

But it seems, there are mods. Maybe my problem can be solved.



 

This is not a problem with the chat, it's a problem with the toxicity of some of the players.

The chat is essential for a teambased game like WoWS.

On 29.04.2018 г. at 1:40 PM, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

 

With regards to Myth#1:

Tthe point of contention is whether or not free will exists; if it does then yes toxic players are responsible for their actions, but, if free will is an illusion then toxic players are not responsible for their actions as those would simply be the result of external causes that trigger that exact behaviour rather than the expression of free will, in this case game mechanics, gameplay experience and the actions of other players that force some players to behave toxic or destructive.

My life experience has shown me that free will is an illusion and that most of our species' actions are the result of non-conscious events taking place in the brain rather than the result of the expression of free will. Obviously this is a major philosophical topic which has massive societal influence depending on what school of thought is adhered to thus it is not suitable to discuss on this forum; suffice to say I am convinced that the expression of free will is an illusion.

I'll concede that we will never reach a common point of view on this as that simply isn't possible but I can recommend this short video on the topic on free will and I hope this adequately explains why I am convinced that the best way to reduce, not eliminate, toxic behaviour is by making a better game that has fewer features that causes and triggers toxic or destructive behaviour in some players:

 

 

Interesting thought, but it is flawed in a way as free will doesn't nessecities behavioral corrections. If someone is being toxic for something this person should (in your opinion) not be held responsible for, this doesn't change the fact that this toxic behavior can still be changed.

And this is true in real life as well, you are held responsible for your actions even if it's not your fault. Being at fault and being responsible for, are 2 separate things.

 

If my roof were to leak which results in damage from water, I can't hold my roof responsible despite the fact that my roof doesn't have free will to not let the water through, but the leak is still caused by the roof misbehaving and this misbehavior can still be fixed by fixing the behavior of the roof (by fixing it, it's hydropermeabilital misbehavior is improved, thereby fixing the problem).

 

My experience is that most people who are being toxic towards me in WoWS, are actually mostly venting their frustration out on me regardless of the fact if I am the actual progenitor of their frustration, it's mostly frustration they build up in the time preceding the battle where this toxic person and me ended up colliding in. And the game can probably not fix this build up of bottled up frustration from other players (or at least most of the time) but it can channel this frustration in such a way that it affects less innocent bystanders.

 

And don't forget that there's also this group of people who simply enjoy provocing other people or don't care, but these are the most damaging toxic people who may actually cause people to quit WoWS permanently. So in a way, toxic behavior is actually damaging to WG and I don't see why WG shouldn't punish this?

 

Frankly, I think something like a chat ban would suffice, then these troxic chatters can scold and blame everyone and their mother for everything in the world all day long untill the end of the universe (of WoWS) and people like me can continu playing the game as intended without having to be troubled by the presence of such troubled minds.

They might seem to forget that I'm playing WoWS so I can enjoy myself, not so I can be their spare time psychologist outside of my free will :Smile_great:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,104 posts
11,183 battles
14 hours ago, eliastion said:

No, you just had no point to begin with. You only deluded yourself into believing otherwise.

You are a slave to your biological programming which dictate all of your behaviour but you lack the analytical capacity to realise it - my condolences.

 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,760 posts
10,760 battles
34 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

You are a slave to your biological programming which dictate all of your behaviour but you lack the analytical capacity to realise it - my condolences.

 

Which is irrelevant as one can still change ones behavior even if one is not aware of this :Smile_great:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,104 posts
11,183 battles
2 hours ago, NothingButTheRain said:

And don't forget that there's also this group of people who simply enjoy provocing other people or don't care, but these are the most damaging toxic people who may actually cause people to quit WoWS permanently. So in a way, toxic behavior is actually damaging to WG and I don't see why WG shouldn't punish this?

Because punishment provides less incentive to changes in behaviour than positive measures do which is well known and proven.

 

Sure some people can be made to change their behaviour by using punishment as a tool but that is only true for people who are executing a premeditated toxic behaviour and which fear the punishment more than they enjoy the reward of their toxic behaviour, people who act on impulses and emotions will not be susceptible to punishment as a method of behavioural change because they are acting on those rather than on conscious thought.

For the latter group of people, which is by far the largest of the two, the best and only way to prevent and/or reduce the numbers of those from engaging in toxic behaviour is to take away the circumstances and causes that triggers the toxic behaviour in them.

There are some options available to that end:

  • Remove the toxic players from the game entirely by account wipe and IP banning
  • Change the game mechanics that frustrate the players to something that do not or at least has a significant lower amount of frustration
  • Better player education
  • Change frustrating maps
  • Change frustrating game modes
  • Change the matchmaker which is one of the major sources of frustration
  • Improve the gameplay experience with new game features
  • Rewarding good sportmansship with ingame goods, increased XP, and credit gain

The keywords are: take away the frustrating parts of the game experience if you really want to reduce toxic behaviour - any other measure will only have very limited effect on the overall level of toxicity.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
1,837 posts
3,492 battles
On 4/26/2018 at 3:43 PM, Jethro_Grey said:

My suggestion to reduce toxicity in chat is for Wg to find a way to increase player skill and to punish bad play by whatever means necessary.

This alone would decrease toxicity by a fair amount.

This is so easy to achieve, Don't reward failure. 

A player can lose every battle they play in a ship and still - all be it over more battles and time - progress up to the next tier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TS1]
Players
658 posts
8,162 battles
11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

As a beginner, I feel that the game fails to reward good behavior or good gameplay.

This problem has been noted before. And at least now they've started doing things like showing potential damage and spotting damage. There are still huge flaws in the game's way of rewarding non-damage contributions, but it seems like it's moving in the right direction. Slowly.

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

My most common encounter has been somebody screaming "You &^%$ing idiot do you know nothing about this game?" to which my (n00b) response is: "Not a lot, no, want to teach me?"

The most common reply then is something like "Nobody has the time - go find another game, you Frakking n00b!"

I don't think I've ever seen that third quote in game. Though I also haven't seen the second one as a reply to the first one. I sometimes ask how certain Operations work the first time I do them and the only replies I've gotten is nothing or some more or less helpful advice.

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

Similarly, it is very often the case that when sticking up for n00bs, I get negative karma from "experienced players":  "Dont shout at them, teach them how the game works." appears to be a grave insult to many, many "experienced" players. (This forum exhibits similar sentiments rather often)

(I am saying "experienced" as there is oftentimes a clear disconnect between experience and skill - although many seem to believe that "I have a higher tier ship than you = "Mo Skilz". )

I find that on the forums it depends a lot on how the newbie expresses himself. If he raves, rants and makes demands he will be mocked or ignored while if he asks for advice most forumers who responds will try to give some manner of advice. Though of course there are always trolls who will mock anyone who shows any kind of weakness, but I feel they're in the minority and if the newbie is actually reasonably polite the trolls themselves will be mocked or ignored.

 

On the forums "Mo Skilz" will mean something between whatever singular stat the player can dig up that will support his opinion and a careful analysis of stats that might actually be relevant for the subject at hand.

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

I have played with tier 7 DD gamers who do not know that CAPing gets your more reward than snatching a kill - the game information has never told them that, nor have any other gamers.
Many people at my tier (4-5) believe that getting a KILL means a higher reward than causing damage or CAPing or anything else... they have never been taught by the game or by other gamers. 

All of this indicates a poor learning environment inside a poorly educated community - it should be somewhere every player should be treating all newcomers as potential division mates, clan members or even friends - however, they don't... and this is the "toxic" part: Toxicity is not shouting at people, that is rudeness; toxic communities are ones that self-harm and any community that fails to invest in its own future is self-harming and therefore toxic.

The game intro and Co-OP gameplay mode does a truly awful job of teaching new players the game mechanics FOR ANY OTHER PART OF THE GAME - none of it prepares them for Random. In random very few other players prepare them for a future in the game either.

I think the tutorial just barely explains how the controls work. I don't actually remember it. It seems WG is now making a series of videos explaining game mechanics, which is a step in the right direction but I think there's a high chance a lot of players who should probably watch those videos will just skip them.

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

I think my stats are reasonable, however, around 60% of the games in which I have played I have been verbally abused by sex, race, religion, nationality, intelligence, menstrual cycle, and ... species ... and a whole variety of terminal diseases wished upon me.

60%? I get insulted in probably less than 5% of all my games. And that's counting even mild insults.

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

Finally: the game lacks a pre-game and post-game lobby - the lack of a pre-game lobby could be deliberate (for *reasons to do with gaming*) however, the lack of a post-game lobby means that there is no room in which to build relationships formed during the match - you pull off a last-second win and Kraken - game ends, and you may never see those people ever again.  Maybe, 1 in 10, your Karma goes up.   (The game needs a post-match lobby for people to talk, discuss and, maybe even, teach... of it into a post-match lobby then, perhaps, a separate in-game channel (where the dead can gather and not spam the game chat).)

A post-game lobby would be an interesting, and probably good addition to the game. :cap_like:

 

11 hours ago, Susan_Ivanova said:

So, there are only two sources for a poor gaming community -  the tools provided by the developer to build a community and the gamers who use them.

The buck stops right there because those two things are also the solution. 

Problem is that those two things covers a whole lot of territory.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, NothingButTheRain said:

in the end we're all in the same boat

This is clearly incorrect. We each have our own boat with which to shoot other boats.

 

 

Oh and @G01ngToxicCommand0, I assume that by premeditated toxic behaviour you include players who have the ability to think of consequences before acting on it. Like people who knows not to punch someone who angered them in the face because there are consequences for doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,529 posts
11,480 battles
1 hour ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

You are a slave to your biological programming which dictate all of your behaviour but you lack the analytical capacity to realise it - my condolences.

 

Ok, let me try and reiterate for you.

It is absolutely irrelevant whether you assume that humans are

a) some mystical beings merely inhabiting bodies of flesh

or

b) biological machines with as much freedom as a alculator

 

It doesn't matter. It has completely no bearing on the discussion at hand. The philosophical question of existence of free will IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT HERE.

 

 

As for other things...

1 hour ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

There are some options available to that end:

  • Remove the toxic players from the game entirely by account wipe and IP banning
  • Change the game mechanics that frustrate the players to something that do not or at least has a significant lower amount of frustration
  • Better player education
  • Change frustrating maps
  • Change frustrating game modes
  • Change the matchmaker which is one of the major sources of frustration
  • Improve the gameplay experience with new game features
  • Rewarding good sportmansship with ingame goods, increased XP, and credit gain

The keywords are: take away the frustrating parts of the game experience if you really want to reduce toxic behaviour - any other measure will only have very limited effect on the overall level of toxicity.

Lol. First you are against punishment and then the first point you mention is... a high-caliber punishment. Nice consistency there.

As for the rest - most of these are comically missing the point due to your insistence on how "game should be improved" - problem is, it's not the things you mention that get people frustrated and lead to toxicity. Toxicity appears when people get angry at other people. General level of frustration might be a favorable factor but - ultimately - frustration does not lead to toxicity unless directed at someone. And game mechanics that actually make this more common are the very parts of the game that enforce some teamplay and create some level of team reliance. On your list there are a bunch good points, but - in general - the better the point, the more it goes against your own claim that it's not the players who cause toxicity. So, yes, trying to decrease toxicity by

 - educating players better

 - rewarding good behavior

or, in worst-case scenarios

 - banning people who are irredeemably toxic to extreme extent

makes sense. But it making sense contradicts your claim how it's not the players that are the main factor here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,104 posts
11,183 battles
2 hours ago, Runegrem said:

Oh and @G01ngToxicCommand0, I assume that by premeditated toxic behaviour you include players who have the ability to think of consequences before acting on it. Like people who knows not to punch someone who angered them in the face because there are consequences for doing so.

More specific players who have the ability to consider the consequences while also being able to not act toxic after weighing the pros and cons of behaving toxic; being able to consider the consequences of being toxic the vast majority of players is able to do when not in a frustrating or stressful enviroment, being able to do so and decide against behaving toxic when in such is an entirely different matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
3,207 posts
18,642 battles

Its simple: use some brain, play better, do not make the same mistakes over and over after tousends of battles, dont derp around without doing anything like a headless chicken. If all players do these, toxicity level in chat is gonna drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TS1]
Players
658 posts
8,162 battles

One way I feel kinda sorta works for me is that I start a lot of battles by saying, "Heylo, peoples!" I feel that in the matches I start with that have an overall nicer atmosphere than the ones where I don't.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
16 hours ago, Hobbewulf said:

Its ironic really.

 

Fairly new to the game but finally getting my WR to rise. In randoms can rarely buy a win on my torpitz  but in the ranked battles I have a got a very high WR in the 2 days so far I played it. The difference? Less whining and arguing and peeps would pursue a plan even if some didn't agree with it.

 

A bad plan properly executed is better than a good plan  that isn't. If some players went with the flow more often instead of insisting on wide flanking or capping the opposite point to the main group (yep bitching at DD's here in randoms) and then ranting about it afterwards I think there would be a better chance of winning with happier players.

 

I think its all about those who like to see themselves as always right and some would rather throw a game than go with a plan they thought was wrong.

(yep bitching at DD's here in randoms)

 

This is me!!!!! :Smile_smile:

 

You have 18 games in DDs, why should I listen to you when it come to how I should play them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
459 posts
8,656 battles
On 4/30/2018 at 6:25 PM, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

More specific players who have the ability to consider the consequences while also being able to not act toxic after weighing the pros and cons of behaving toxic; being able to consider the consequences of being toxic the vast majority of players is able to do when not in a frustrating or stressful enviroment, being able to do so and decide against behaving toxic when in such is an entirely different matter.

 

Not having a sense of humor is the road to Toxic Behavior:cap_cool:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
401 posts
7,872 battles

Ok lets establish why above avrage players get toxic, becouse out of frustration how bad ppl can be with hundreds of hours or sevral thousands of games under they belt cant play. 

 

Atleast i cant understand mind of players who have 4k games and some t10 ships they have worse avrges than newcomers have at t4 with 300-500 games in 1 ship. How is that even possible that they dont know even the basics and do same mistake 4000 times without realizing whats wrong? 

 

 

Now how could WG combat this? Well either give them ways to learn, with more indepth tooltips, apply somesort of tutorials that are forced to players way below avrage. 

Tool tips could explain stuff like why did he die, how could it be avoided (if broadsiding, pushing alone etc). Not all players can spend alot of time watching youtube videos, so there must be way to educate those, with new report system might eliviate the bad player problemwhen they are forced into Co-Op. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
1,803 posts
9,790 battles
3 hours ago, Guillotine said:

Ok lets establish why above avrage players get toxic, becouse out of frustration how bad ppl can be with hundreds of hours or sevral thousands of games under they belt cant play. 

 

Atleast i cant understand mind of players who have 4k games and some t10 ships they have worse avrges than newcomers have at t4 with 300-500 games in 1 ship. How is that even possible that they dont know even the basics and do same mistake 4000 times without realizing whats wrong? 

 

 

Now how could WG combat this? Well either give them ways to learn, with more indepth tooltips, apply somesort of tutorials that are forced to players way below avrage. 

Tool tips could explain stuff like why did he die, how could it be avoided (if broadsiding, pushing alone etc). Not all players can spend alot of time watching youtube videos, so there must be way to educate those, with new report system might eliviate the bad player problemwhen they are forced into Co-Op. 

By not giving people means to have a profit no matter how bad they play. With the current availability of flags, camos and whatnot people can just potato their way to whatever ship and tier they want. 

I know WG is a company and that they should make a profit from selling things like these flags and camos but right now people have no incentive to gitgud.

Why not make the difference between incomes bigger? The lowest xp earners of both teams receive a lot less credit and xp than the top. This will incentivise people to gitgud imo.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,760 posts
10,760 battles
1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

By not giving people means to have a profit no matter how bad they play. With the current availability of flags, camos and whatnot people can just potato their way to whatever ship and tier they want. 

I know WG is a company and that they should make a profit from selling things like these flags and camos but right now people have no incentive to gitgud.

Why not make the difference between incomes bigger? The lowest xp earners of both teams receive a lot less credit and xp than the top. This will incentivise people to gitgud imo.

Bad idea, especially if this is meant to actually decrease the level of frustration instead of increasing it.

 

Rewarding already good players even more is also a bad idea, they already have more credits then they can spend and more ships then they can play. Giving these elite players more will also add the risk of loosing more with a loss, thereby increasing toxicity towards potatoing teammates and it is often the toxic chat from elite clanmembers directed at me that is toxic as these people will even mass-report you.

 

Your suggestion will incentivise people to get more toxic, both good and bad players.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
1,803 posts
9,790 battles

I didnt say reward the good players more, I said reward the bad players less. 

Toxicity will decrease as the skillgap decreases. The skillgap will decrease as the worst players will become better (or when they quit playing ofcourse :p). But right now those players have absolutely nothing that tells them they are 1) not very good, and 2) they could get way higher rewards if they got better. 

 

@NothingButTheRain Actually what I meant with my previous post was that "back in the days" it was a real achievement to unlock a T10 ship and you had to work your [edited]off in order to get one. So by the time you actually got there you would be very familiar with that specific line. That isnt the case anymore unfortunately and thats a major cause of frustration with the  more experienced players. The difficulty to obtain ships, the amount of time and effort it takes, has decreased and so has the knowledge and skill within the playerbase. So wouldnt it make sense that if we increase that level of achievement again, with it the general level of skill within the playerbase will rise?

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,760 posts
10,760 battles
4 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

I didnt say reward the good players more, I said reward the bad players less. 

Toxicity will decrease as the skillgap decreases. The skillgap will decrease as the worst players will become better (or when they quit playing ofcourse :p). But right now those players have absolutely nothing that tells them they are 1) not very good, and 2) they could get way higher rewards if they got better. 

 

@NothingButTheRain Actually what I meant with my previous post was that "back in the days" it was a real achievement to unlock a T10 ship and you had to work your [edited]off in order to get one. So by the time you actually got there you would be very familiar with that specific line. That isnt the case anymore unfortunately and thats a major cause of frustration with the  more experienced players. The difficulty to obtain ships, the amount of time and effort it takes, has decreased and so has the knowledge and skill within the playerbase. So wouldnt it make sense that if we increase that level of achievement again, with it the general level of skill within the playerbase will rise?

Toxicity will not decrease when average skill increases as elite players are also amongst the players being toxic. It has nothing to do with the level of ingame skill so changing this will not reduce toxicity. Thus decreasing the amount of ingame rewards for non-elite players will not improve the game as a whole, it will only make less skilled players (and players who don't have the time to spend 5 hours a day ingame) more frustrated as a loss will impact them more in a negative way.

 

In short: GITGUD will NOT DECREASE toxicity in WoWS. Frankly, I think that's a stupid idea.

[HOME] GarrusBrutus

Battles 5 622 6 31 112
Win rate 66.84% 
Super Unicum
83.33% 
Super Unicum
+ 0.02% 80.65% 
Super Unicum
+ 0.08% 74.11% 
Super Unicum
+ 0.15%
Personal Rating (PR)  
Next level: Super Unicum (+249)
2 201 
Unicum
2 573 
Super Unicum
- 2 827 
Super Unicum
+ 3 2 514 
Super Unicum
+ 6

 

A stupid elitist idea. Of course someone like you would suggest something like this. But people like me (who meets toxic elitist players in ALL tiers, sometimes sealclubbing with their OP broken unobtainable 19pt-crewed ships) will not benefit from such a measure. Instead, my grind will take even longer then it already is.

 

No thanks.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOBS2]
[BOBS2]
Players
529 posts
15,708 battles
3 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

I didn't say reward the good players more, I said reward the bad players less. 

Toxicity will decrease as the skillgap decreases. The skillgap will decrease as the worst players will become better (or when they quit playing of course :p). But right now those players have absolutely nothing that tells them they are 1) not very good, and 2) they could get way higher rewards if they got better. 

 

For that to work the scoring system would have to be clearer so people know why someone got the "way higher rewards". I think we've all had games where it's felt like we did at least okay and wondered why someone else got that much more XP then us (or for the Unicums wondered how someone got almost as much XP as them and nearly knocked them out of first place :Smile-_tongue:), so increasing the difference without making it clear why there is a difference might just increase frustration without changing much else.

 

And I think if increasing the gap is supposed to make people play better then as well as the scoring system being clearer it would have to be part of a rework to make it less damage focussed, so the higher rewards better reflect the actual contribution and people can see how well what they have done actually contributed.

 

Though from my perspective if I ever got any better at this game then I'd run more risk of encountering toxicity; seems like when I have some good luck or do well that that's when someone starts swearing at me. :Smile_hiding:

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[7DSF]
Beta Tester
1,470 posts
4,557 battles

Bah, this thing could be easy solved, more drastic penaltys!

 

1st toxic =  1 day ban

2nd toxic = 2 days ban

3rd toxic = 4 days ban

4th toxic = 8 days ban

......

You know the rest!

 

The toxic players would really fast stop insulting etc.!

 

But it needs eggs at WG staff to do so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,760 posts
10,760 battles
22 ore fa, Johmie ha scritto:

 

For that to work the scoring system would have to be clearer so people know why someone got the "way higher rewards". I think we've all had games where it's felt like we did at least okay and wondered why someone else got that much more XP then us (or for the Unicums wondered how someone got almost as much XP as them and nearly knocked them out of first place :Smile-_tongue:), so increasing the difference without making it clear why there is a difference might just increase frustration without changing much else.

 

And I think if increasing the gap is supposed to make people play better then as well as the scoring system being clearer it would have to be part of a rework to make it less damage focussed, so the higher rewards better reflect the actual contribution and people can see how well what they have done actually contributed.

 

Though from my perspective if I ever got any better at this game then I'd run more risk of encountering toxicity; seems like when I have some good luck or do well that that's when someone starts swearing at me. :Smile_hiding:

 

There's also the difference between players who use premium account and who is not.

I've wondered kinda regularly about why one particular player ended up in first place or why someone else unexpectedly ended up somewhere in the lower half of the list. But this list doesn't really show a lot of information about the performance of other players, except maybe for their kills and if they were still alive at game's end.

 

Frankly this

Alle 4/30/2018 alle 16:26, G01ngToxicCommand0 ha scritto:

Because punishment provides less incentive to changes in behaviour than positive measures do which is well known and proven.

 

Sure some people can be made to change their behaviour by using punishment as a tool but that is only true for people who are executing a premeditated toxic behaviour and which fear the punishment more than they enjoy the reward of their toxic behaviour, people who act on impulses and emotions will not be susceptible to punishment as a method of behavioural change because they are acting on those rather than on conscious thought.

For the latter group of people, which is by far the largest of the two, the best and only way to prevent and/or reduce the numbers of those from engaging in toxic behaviour is to take away the circumstances and causes that triggers the toxic behaviour in them.

There are some options available to that end:

  • Remove the toxic players from the game entirely by account wipe and IP banning
  • Change the game mechanics that frustrate the players to something that do not or at least has a significant lower amount of frustration
  • Better player education
  • Change frustrating maps
  • Change frustrating game modes
  • Change the matchmaker which is one of the major sources of frustration
  • Improve the gameplay experience with new game features
  • Rewarding good sportmansship with ingame goods, increased XP, and credit gain

The keywords are: take away the frustrating parts of the game experience if you really want to reduce toxic behaviour - any other measure will only have very limited effect on the overall level of toxicity.

 

makes more sense. I think I can see where he's coming from, or at least I agree that if a game itself is more frustrating and the difference between winning and loosing increases, an almost-win (which results in a game counted as a loss) will probably result in increased toxicity towards the person who they see as "being responsible" for their loss.

 

I don't agree with most of these points though and I will go by them one by one:

  • Remove the toxic players from the game entirely by account wipe and IP banning

I think this is a REALLY harsh measure, I'm not sure this is even a productive one unless its account is actually dangerous to the game (botting, faul play, used to abuse or ingame advertisement for other games or websites or whatever). This is by far over the top when it comes to punishing a player for just having a bad day.

  •  
  • Change the game mechanics that frustrate the players to something that do not or at least has a significant lower amount of frustration
  • Change frustrating maps
  • Change frustrating game modes
  • Change the matchmaker which is one of the major sources of frustration

Iirc WG was already busy with this, like changing matchmaking to make it even more fair (which imo wasn't even needed, but ok). They could stil improve upon this, for instance the GUI could use some work I think? SO I suppose this is a good point in some way.

  •  
  • Better player education

The thing with this one is, how is this supposed to be implemented? I could see something along the lines of issued chatbans for people who are verbally abusive towards other players. But this point seems too unclear and too vague to me.

  •  
  • Improve the gameplay experience with new game features
  • Rewarding good sportmansship with ingame goods, increased XP, and credit gain

I'm not sure what kind of new game features you'd consider lowering frustration by common players. The last one is maybe your best one, I like it :Smile_great:

 

But still, I doubt this will do much to decrease the amount of toxicity, as I think these things are not fixing most of the reasons why certain players start being toxic in the first place.

 

22 ore fa, Arakus ha scritto:

Bah, this thing could be easy solved, more drastic penaltys!

 

1st toxic =  1 day ban

2nd toxic = 2 days ban

3rd toxic = 4 days ban

4th toxic = 8 days ban

......

You know the rest!

 

The toxic players would really fast stop insulting etc.!

 

But it needs eggs at WG staff to do so!

Wouldn't a chat ban be enough for most players? At least it would fix players who still kinda play nicely but are only less nice in chat.

I do agree with you that making toxic behavior have results that are totally not enjoyable to the offender, this offender will either have to change his behavior or suffer the consequences. A chat ban would be nice for this, I see this as a win-win :Smile_great:

 

Even if the bans would be implemented, this is only as effective as the means in which these are implemented. If it's easy to cheat the system, some of those people will actually make it work for them, getting their victims banned instead. So things like these can act like a double edged sword, you will want to be careful with harsh punishments like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×