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

Instead of Report System, design a Honor System

6 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
765 posts
4,327 battles

Continuation of this thread:

 

While the idea of a system that automatically checks conditions for misbehaviour is useful, it does not actually reward good behaviour nor guarantee its checks for bad behaviour cannot be gamed / send the wrong message.

 

So instead of "hard" checks programmers love, imagine also "soft" checks based on statistics. Perhaps driven by machine learning.

 

Imagine if there was an "honor system" that had options for players to commendate for certain types of good behaviour, such as supporting team over selfish gain, playing role well, bravery and valor, good use of consumables / good marksmanship, performing a game winning action, taking on multiple ships / diverting pressure from teammates with a lesser ship against a superior opponent, etc.

 

Suppose there was an incentive to honor people, that this part was all figure out. E.g. Giving a small reward similar to the flags for an achievement.

 

Then, whenever a "hard" report is leveraged, the program can check whether this player was on a streak of this behaviour, whether this player had streaks of good behaviour to counter this out, whether this was likely an accident due to the usual playstyle / circumstances of the player. Or whether it was likely a systemic fault on the player's side.

 

In the end, the purpose of a regulatory system is not to punish players, but to encourage continued good behaviour from those who do, and help those with bad behaviour overcome it. This can start as simple as a congratulatory message for a player with a bad streak ending its bad streak, starting playing better. Or popping up non-intrusive notifications to guide the player towards the wiki, forums, or Q&A section to find info they need to "play less badly". Even going as far as technical support if that is what is causing their AFKs. Sometimes just the gesture is enough to matter. Players with streaks of good behaviour may be invited to "share their experience / tips" on how they manage to play with honor. Maybe a "mentor" program to match good players with people who need help, for a reward of course. 

 

Ideally it should still be a system combining both hard checks with soft checks. But WG seems to be more interested in building grind features such as the coal and steel system, rather than improving the general experience of players.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
765 posts
4,327 battles

More commendations of the same type paired with system checks (for in-game circumstances) increase credibility of a player to "receive" the commendation. Commenders who commend accurately will have their commendations worth more "weight" whenever they commend accurately again. 

 

Perhaps even messages similar to "XX, YY, ZZ etc. commended you (successfully)!" or "player XX was rewarded for your commendation!", "want to division up with them?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
[HAERT]
Players
1,123 posts
2,189 battles

And just where are these AI calculations supposed to be performed?

 

Do you have any clue on the logic and CPU power actually required to do what you ask? Foe every battle played analyse the actions of up to 24 individuals. 

 

If it was easy or cost effect WG would have done it already and it wouldn't be honor awarded, it would be XP and credits for team play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
765 posts
4,327 battles

Yes, because giving supportive messages or tips (like, actual tips instead of the ones on the loading screen ppl just hide by default) now and then is very cost ineffective.

 

Stop seeing games as tools to gain WG as much benefit-income while manipulating players with lowest cost/effort. Ofc they are still tools no matter what I say, but they can be not only tools which benefit WG, and not the player experience. They can be both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
[HAERT]
Players
1,123 posts
2,189 battles
6 minutes ago, KarmaQU_EU said:

Stop seeing games as tools to gain WG as much benefit-income while manipulating players with lowest cost/effort. 

Wut!

 

It's called making a profit, all companies have to do it, to pay the staff and the bills. Yes WG could put in extra CPU resources after spending dev time to do all the backend required, but  the devs wouldn't be able to give us content whilst they did it. And who is going to pay for the dev time AND the extra CPU resources? We are, and since this is a free to play game, they would have to increase the price we have to pay for the stuff we buy to cover something that really isn't needed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
765 posts
4,327 battles

Whenever a player loses control of their emotions and "blows up" in chat, give them a targeted notification with 1 detonation flags. "We all have bad days sometimes, but ..." e.g. humor. 2nd time, 2 detonation flags. 3 times, 3 flags, with something along the lines of "pls try to stop or we will have to give you a little help the next time this happens".

 

The only thing lost in this case is the real-money worth of 2 detonation flags, some time for a certain dev and some writers to sort their actual job out, and voila, game already improved by 5%.

 

These little gestures do count, are viewed by millions of players worldwide, and all it costs is the devs trying to do their actual job.

 

Sure defend WG as much as you want, just know that out there there are other devs and other games too. Yes I'm implying something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×