Fix the broken reporting system

[Flosen8000]

Few things need as much fixing as this stupid reporting. It is rarely used for its supposed purpose. Usually its abused for reporting people who play CV, sub, something with radar, something with smoke, something with torps, because it is Wednesday, or just randomly probably. Most commonly CV obviously. Actual poor gameplay will be last on the list. I suggested this before and want to say it again: give it a damn purpose.

Everybody should start out with a fixed amount of reports and compliments. Without ever refreshing it. You get a new report for using a compliment and vice versa. That would reduce toxicity a lot. And if someone was reported at least it more likely was for a valid reason, not for playing a certain ship or whatever. Toxic people will still abuse it, but less at least.

People who report others for playing subs or whatever are the one who break the game with their toxicity. Not the people playing the game the way WG made it. Complain to WG if you dont like something about the game, not to the players.

[_You_Shell_Not_Pass_]

Who cares about karma? It has absolutely no impact nor consequence, except the number of reports/compliments you can use per day, and in some cases, an automatic chat ban that you can contest if it's not legit.

[Tanaka_15]

Agian this system is just for reporing CVs. 

For subs there is other cool feature you can use deep charges on subs without Frendly Fire peanality :) 

[Khaba_Gandalf]

Vor 1 Stunde, Flosen8000 sagte:

People who report others for playing subs or whatever are the one who break the game with their toxicity. Not the people playing the game the way WG made it. Complain to WG if you dont like something about the game, not to the players.

Id rather see people report subs and cvs than behave like absolute racist neanderthals in chat...

 

Also how does reports and karma break the game? 

 

If you have zero karma you can still play whatever ship you want and how much you want it. Yet if you don't have zero karma, the game behaves exactly the same.

 

Also your system would not work...let's say I want to report both CVs in a match because it helps me vent steam and stops me from getting riled up. 

 

In the current system all my 15 reports may be gone at some point. I know of people who report all subs and if all their reports are gone they stop playing for the day...

 

In your system the only thing I have to do is to compliment two players who did well (which I often do) to get my CV reports back. So it would be even worse, because I could play for 12h straight on a weekend day and report the hell out of all CVs each and every game...or said submarine haters could compliment anyone who sinks a sub and thus get the report back they spend on the sub player.

 

Makes no sense to me.

 

[Northern_Nightowl]

Vor 8 Minuten, Tanaka_15 sagte:

Agian this system is just for reporing CVs. 

For subs there is other cool feature you can use deep charges on subs without Frendly Fire peanality :) 

Yes, you can depth charge allied subs without getting pink paint. But you'll still have to pay for it IIRC, ASW weapons are charged at the end of a battle with the maintenance costs.

I'd rather have subs (and CV, for that matter) on my team that use their power to help winning the battle for us.

The red CV stalks you? A good allied CV may drop fighters for you on request.

You're using a hydro-less ship and get targeted by a red sub? Ask for ASW support by your own submarine. Assuming that you can call an airstrike, this will be at least a 2-vs.-1 against the red stalker, helping the odds for you.

And a sub is finally a counter for CV, all the more when those cannot be reached by artillery.

 

Of course, their (subs and CV) implementation in game leaves much to be desired (spotting for CV and speeds for subs deserve well to be criticised). But I think that one's opinion has more worth and is stronger when we'll try to make the best out of the current iteration, failing somewhat at it and providing examples on how to better it. But this way calls for cooperation and inclusion of the players using CV and submarines. 

 

I'm using reports in more than 95 percent of the games for chat toxicity. The remainder is for bad play, especially when some egoistic guy fails Narai or another ops for the whole team or steals a Shark among Shrimps achievement by shooting purposefully at a nearly dead transport that was already engaged.

 

Regards, Nightowl

[Flosen8000]

15 minutes ago, Khaba_Gandalf said:

Id rather see people report subs and cvs than behave like absolute racist neanderthals in chat...

That is the exactly "racist". You report people for playing the game the way WG made it. Not for doing something wrong. Seeing a message after battle for being reported 4 times despite not having done anything wrong leads to a lot of toxicity. Which is exactly what you pretend to avoid with your reports instead of saying anything abusive in chat. Also that leads to unjustified chat bans which is a huge annoyance.

 

19 minutes ago, Khaba_Gandalf said:

Also your system would not work...let's say I want to report both CVs in a match because it helps me vent steam and stops me from getting riled up.

You don't let off steam that way, you just drop it on someone else. And still that system would work very well in fact. If you get a lot of compliments for playing well, you would mind less being reported for no valid reason every now and then by someone toxic as you.

 

As meaningless as karma is, it is a nice, easy and cheap way of getting positive feedback. But instead it's only abused for reporting people who played the "wrong" ship in someones opinion. This could be used to improve the situation with toxicity in this game, but instead it just makes it worse.

My personal experience with CV reporting is: I don't play CV much, but when I do and get reported I stick to it. And I do not support my team with fighters or spotting then, but I pick single ships on the enemy team and annoy the crap out of them to ruin their game. Is it toxic? Yes, toxic af. Why am I toxic? Because I got reported by some other toxic d...ks earlier which will probably lead to another chat ban a day later. The cycle of toxicity for which this reporting/karma system is abused. That's why it needs fixing.

[HARBINGER_OF_SKULLS]

5 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

That is the exactly "racist". You report people for playing the game the way WG made it.

Are you aware that neither CV, nor griefers, are a race?

[yXOLAXy]

1 ora fa, Flosen8000 ha detto:

Poche cose hanno bisogno di essere sistemate come questa stupida segnalazione. È usato raramente per il suo presunto scopo. Di solito è abusato per segnalare persone che giocano CV, sub, qualcosa con radar, qualcosa con fumo, qualcosa con torps, perché è mercoledì, o solo casualmente probabilmente. Più comunemente CV ovviamente. L'effettivo gameplay scadente sarà l'ultimo della lista. L'ho suggerito prima e voglio dirlo di nuovo: dagli uno scopo maledetto.

Tutti dovrebbero iniziare con una quantità fissa di rapporti e complimenti. Senza mai rinfrescarlo. Si ottiene un nuovo rapporto per l'utilizzo di un complimento e viceversa. Ciò ridurrebbe molto la tossicità. E se qualcuno è stato segnalato almeno è più probabile che fosse per un motivo valido, non per giocare a una certa nave o qualsiasi altra cosa. Le persone tossiche continueranno ad abusarne, ma almeno meno.

Le persone che segnalano gli altri per giocare a sub o qualsiasi altra cosa sono quelle che rompono il gioco con la loro tossicità. Non le persone che giocano al gioco nel modo in cui WG lo ha fatto. Lamentati con WG se non ti piace qualcosa del gioco, non con i giocatori.

Prima di tutto credo che il sistema Karma sia per certi aspetti una sorta di black list, cioè se il tuo karma è alto il MM ti seleziona con giocatori simili se il tuo karma è zero va da sé va da sé con chi entrerai in battaglia come alleato. Questa è l'impressione che ho sempre avuto.
Il fatto che molti utilizzino il sistema di segnalazione soprattutto nei confronti di chi usa CV e subacquei, dovrebbe farvi capire che in questo gioco qualcosa non funziona correttamente, che non c'è equilibrio in gioco e qui c'è troppa tossicità. E il concetto è spiegato relativamente bene in questo video.

Perché Flamu è corretto solo a metà sui CV - YouTube

Perché tutta questa tossicità? Perché le modifiche ai CV hanno portato un nuovo sistema idiota-friendly. Per capirci meglio con questo sistema anche una scimmia addestrata riesce a piazzare siluri! Chi ricorda come sono stati utilizzati i CV nel 2015/2016/2017 sa bene che ci è voluta pazienza per imparare bene a compiere attacchi con gli aerei, ma anche il più forte non sempre ha segnato.
Questo perché il gioco CV riguardava principalmente il supporto, il targeting del nemico, la difesa degli alleati dagli aerei nemici, l'attacco diretto dei nemici e le battaglie aeree con l'altro CV in gioco. Ora, invece, sono l'equivalente di una super yamato nell'angolo della mappa che può colpire ovunque senza subire danni, arrivare a lanciarsi con il siluro a 0,6km dal bersaglio non lascia alcuna possibilità di reazione al bersaglio, questo perché in fase di attacco è possibile modificare la traiettoria da prendere direttamente in volo. Non so da quanto tempo stai giocando, ma i primi anni di CV che andavano a caccia di DD, non riuscivi a trovarli o almeno c'erano pochi bravi che usavano due lanci di siluri contemporaneamente a X per abbattere un dd, con i bombardieri che non provavano nemmeno!
 

Quindi combina l'arrivo di unità sottomarine per amplificare la tossicità del gioco! Entri in battaglia e hai uno stalker che ti pinga addosso, lanciandoti siluri telecomandati ... stronzate che vanno di pari passo con radar e idroacustica, rilevando nemici coperti da ostacoli fisici come isole, praticamente pura eresia scientifica. Ma questo stalker ha un fratello che è il CV e quando li trovi entrambi in battaglia sai già che sarà una battaglia di S !!!
Le persone giocano molto nelle ore pre-serali, finiscono il lavoro e vorrebbero giocare anche per rilassarsi, ma in questo modo non fanno altro che esasperare gli spiriti dei giocatori. Se mettono una funzione che consente al giocatore di decidere autonomamente se entrare in battaglie con o senza CV e sottomarini, quanti giocatori in %, pensi che sceglieranno di non averli nel gioco? Poniti questa domanda!

[Flosen8000]

10 minutes ago, HARBINGER_OF_SKULLS said:

Are you aware that neither CV, nor griefers, are a race?

Are you aware of the quotation marks I put it in? He discriminates people based on a ship, regardless of how they behave. That is racist behavior.

As you apparently also are not aware, racists discriminate others for a lot of things, like their religion for example. Which has nothing to do with race. Besides "race" is a stupid term anyway, but he used it so I referred to it.

[Flosen8000]

5 minutes ago, yXOLAXy said:

Questo perché il gioco CV riguardava principalmente il supporto, il targeting del nemico, la difesa degli alleati dagli aerei nemici, l'attacco diretto dei nemici e le battaglie aeree con l'altro CV in gioco. Ora, invece, sono l'equivalente di una super yamato nell'angolo della mappa che può colpire ovunque senza subire danni, arrivare a lanciarsi con il siluro a 0,6km dal bersaglio non lascia alcuna possibilità di reazione al bersaglio, questo perché in fase di attacco è possibile modificare la traiettoria da prendere direttamente in volo. Non so da quanto tempo stai giocando, ma i primi anni di CV che andavano a caccia di DD, non riuscivi a trovarli o almeno c'erano pochi bravi che usavano due lanci di siluri contemporaneamente a X per abbattere un dd, con i bombardieri che non provavano nemmeno!
  

Quindi combina l'arrivo di unità sottomarine per amplificare la tossicità del gioco! Entri in battaglia e hai uno stalker che ti pinga addosso, lanciandoti siluri telecomandati ... stronzate che vanno di pari passo con radar e idroacustica, rilevando nemici coperti da ostacoli fisici come isole, praticamente pura eresia scientifica. Ma questo stalker ha un fratello che è il CV e quando li trovi entrambi in battaglia sai già che sarà una battaglia di S !!!
Le persone giocano molto nelle ore pre-serali, finiscono il lavoro e vorrebbero giocare anche per rilassarsi, ma in questo modo non fanno altro che esasperare gli spiriti dei giocatori. Se mettono una funzione che consente al giocatore di decidere autonomamente se entrare in battaglie con o senza CV e sottomarini, quanti giocatori in %, pensi che sceglieranno di non averli nel gioco? Poniti questa domanda!

From what I understand from google translate of what you said: You might have some beef with the concepts of CVs and subs, and that is fine. But my point is: it is not the players fault. WG made those ships what they are. And if its in the game, people play it. Period.

 

Besides, as you refer to the CV rework: Yes it took an awful lot more skill to be good in CVs back in the day. But it is a good thing for the game that this was changed. CVs are nowhere nearly as decisive as they used to be. Back then, with one team having a really good CV player and the other having a bad or mediocre CV player, there was no point in even playing the match. It was pre-determined. Now at least a CV can't decide a match all alone if the rest of the teams are balanced enough.

[Siagor]

13 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

He discriminates people based on a ship, regardless of how they behave. That is racist behavior.

 

No, it is not.

Racism is persecuting and enslaving people due to different skin color. Please get a perspective, will ya? Don't offend people who suffer with real racism, with maybe their lives at stake.

 

Ffs, you're like those Karens who claim to be 'survivors'. "I've survived harsh words in a mall".

 

Don't offend the real victims.

[Asatori]

I use it to give CV and sub players a -1.

As far as I'm concerned the system works as intended.

[Flosen8000]

1 minute ago, Siagor said:

Racism is persecuting and enslaving people due to different skin color.

It absolutely is not limited to that. I do certainly not offend any victims of racism and I did not even bring the word to this discussion. I merely cited it.

Nzs in WW2 were very clearly racists in my book. But they persecuted people for far more than just the color of their skin.

[Flosen8000]

3 minutes ago, Asatori said:

I use it to give CV and sub players a -1.

As far as I'm concerned the system works as intended.

Thanks for proving my point. That's the toxicity this is abused for and why it needs fixing.

[lovelacebeer]

The karma system is hardly broken, in fact as it stands I imagine to WG’s perspective it’s working perfectly. That’s not to say it couldn't be improved but it’s certainly not game breaking.
 

Sure you have a good game or defeat someone who resents it and you get -1 but that’s the point, that person can vent their frustrations in a meaningless way. It does nothing to stop you playing the vessels you like. Whilst at the same time stops a lot of people sending abusive messages in chat either during or after the battle. 
 

Sure I sometimes get the odd post battle message using derogatory language usually of either a racist or anti semitic nature, but I’m far more likely to just get a -1 which at least to me is preferable. 

[Flosen8000]

1 minute ago, lovelacebeer said:

The karma system as it stands is hardly broken, in fact as it stands I imagine to WG’s perspective it’s working perfectly. That’s not to say it couldn't be improved but it’s certainly not game breaking.
 

Sure you have a good game or defeat someone who resents it and you get -1 but that’s the point, that person can vent their frustrations in a meaningless way. It does nothing to stop you playing the vessels you like. Whilst at the same time stops a lot of people sending abusive messages in chat either during or after the battle. 
 

Sure I sometimes get the odd post battle message using derogatory language usually of either a racist or anti semitic nature, but I’m far more likely to just get a -1 which at least to me is preferable. 

I agree on that, but it's still a source of frustration, which could easily be improved by making people also recognize good play in order to get those reports. Especially if it leads to chatbans its more than just the meaningless -1. You wont even see a notification pop up for -1. But you will for anything higher than that. Like "You were reported. You karma has decreased by 3". The message does not include who or why they reported you. But they could just add "You dared playing CV". Because thats why in at least 4 out of 5 cases. Maybe 3 out of 5 since subs are a thing.

[Khaba_Gandalf]

Vor 1 Stunde, Flosen8000 sagte:

That is the exactly "racist". You report people for playing the game the way WG made it. Not for doing something wrong. Seeing a message after battle for being reported 4 times despite not having done anything wrong leads to a lot of toxicity. Which is exactly what you pretend to avoid with your reports instead of saying anything abusive in chat. Also that leads to unjustified chat bans which is a huge annoyance.

I get reported occasionally, sometimes its my own fault because I fucked up in ranked and randoms, was in the COOP queue and switched to the desktop and gut hung up on YT searching for new background music, or very rarely get a call at the start of a match and then decide to beach at a save position. Which means that as a DD i'm the bad guy that doesn't provide spotting. I also get reported because people either don't have any clue how the game works and blame me, or made very stupid decisions and then blame the guy who punishes them. Or don't know the concealment value of my ship and think that I have to cap ASAP in a 8km  concealment DD in a match with 3 DDs that outspot and outgun me at close range.

 

So it's not that I don't get reported. But somehow I managed to a) not feel toxic if people report me, because karma is meaningless anyway (and we all know that) and b) I also get complimented, more so than getting reported btw.  And if I ever got reported more than 2 times in the same match it was most likely me being AFK (phone call, internet disconnect) and someone in chat writing "please all report our DD for being AFK". 

 

On the other hand I have never ever been chat banned, despite getting reports... And I do use the chat and if my some parts of my team make really questionable decisions I do sometimes say so in chat. But here's the key, it's all about how you phrase it... Let's say more than half of your (slow) BBs are going down the 9-10 line on North, while the enemy wipes manages to get all three caps uncontested, kills the DD in C due to his support making a cruise tour. 

 

- Some people would go out and flood the chat with various insults, ranking from mere "idiot BB players" to racist slur that's way over the top and thus most likely also get reported, if not getting dropped a support ticket on their head. Which they totally deserve...

- I would simply ask in a very sarcastic manner, if it's true that the islands on the 9-10 line are treasure island. And if so, do the treasure chest on them contain the bikini pictures of Dasha they were looking for? So basically I'm mocking their questionable play, without insulting them as a person. Which more often than not results in me getting a report from one of the BBs and 2 compliments from my fellow team mates for not being an assh*le in chat...

 

But I don't play subs outside of coop (never got reported there) and CVs outside of coop and operations (also never got reported there)... Now, if I did play those in randoms or ranked I had no problem if someone would report me for playing a griefing class, that's basically the tax you pay for choosing a class that takes a massive dumb on a ton of core game mechanics other classes can't simply ignore.

 

Zitat

As meaningless as karma is, it is a nice, easy and cheap way of getting positive feedback. But instead it's only abused for reporting people who played the "wrong" ship in someones opinion. This could be used to improve the situation with toxicity in this game, but instead it just makes it worse.

My personal experience with CV reporting is: I don't play CV much, but when I do and get reported I stick to it. And I do not support my team with fighters or spotting then, but I pick single ships on the enemy team and annoy the crap out of them to ruin their game. Is it toxic? Yes, toxic af. Why am I toxic? Because I got reported by some other toxic d...ks earlier which will probably lead to another chat ban a day later. The cycle of toxicity for which this reporting/karma system is abused. That's why it needs fixing.

Are you really sure that you a) never wrote anything that could lead to a ban at all or b) got banned despite not participating in chat at all. I'm not want to sound rude, but we had ton of cases here in the forums where people said they got chat-banned for no obvious reason and then a WG CM checked and the guy wrote stuff in chat, but simply thought that calling people idiots because they play like idiots is a fact and not an insult.

 

I get positive feedback from playing good and playing in the upper half of my team or at/near the top. I may get a few more compliments in your system if people are forced to compliment to get more reports, but for most of the average (or below average) player base that wouldn't change too much. Ironically I get more compliments in ranked recently than I get in randoms...

 

EDIT: and if I wanted the whole system wouldn't change anything for me. I do report CVs (not all the time, but sometimes), I have no issue saying so. I don't report subs unless they play bad, because they don't bother me that much. But I also compliment people for either actual teamwork, heck I sometimes even compliment my CV player if he does his job. So I would always get my reports back and if I got serioulsly pissed by the MM for getting 6 CV matches in a row and the CV always scouting my side of the map first, I could always compliment someone from my team just to get that report back.

 

So your system wouldn't change anything and as has been said before, the Karma system works (at least for WG) and you get no value out of Karma anyway. I have more than 700 karma, do I get any benefits from that? Nope...

[HARBINGER_OF_SKULLS]

35 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

He discriminates people based on a ship, regardless of how they behave. That is racist behavior.

No, it is not. Please educate yourself.

Racism is discrimination against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, as well as the belief in the superiority of a certain race etc.

 

[lovelacebeer]

1 minute ago, Flosen8000 said:

I agree on that, but it's still a source of frustration, which could easily be improved by making people also recognize good play in order to get those reports. Especially if it leads to chatbans its more than just the meaningless -1. You wont even see a notification pop up for -1. But you will for anything higher than that. Like "You were reported. You karma has decreased by 3". The message does not include who or why they reported you. But they could just add "You dared playing CV". Because thats why in at least 4 out of 5 cases. Maybe 3 out of 5 since subs are a thing.

To get a chat ban though you need to do something more than just play a ship, and support are in my experience very quick to help if the automatic system issues a ban in error, and I have not seen it make that mistake in years now.
 

Also what would be the value in knowing the reason why, considering the report options are highly open to interpretation. You can easily get reported for “playing poorly” when not supporting a suicide charge or outplaying a sensitive soul. 
 

If it was up to me the karma system would be more along a reward based system as used in some other games. Still WG would never want to be so generous. Getting a -1 or -2 etc is still meaningless it’s just a number next to your game name.

[Flosen8000]

4 minutes ago, HARBINGER_OF_SKULLS said:

No, it is not. Please educate yourself.

Racism is discrimination against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, as well as the belief in the superiority of a certain race etc.

 

And again, I used it as citation, put in quotation marks only anyway. Also I don't care how you define that word for yourself and it's not at all the point here. Make a new thread elsewhere if you want to define words.

[Karkong_the_Impaler]

1 hour ago, Flosen8000 said:

You report people for playing the game the way WG made it

The players reporting them are just considering the personalities of players attracted to griefer ships.

 

Also, subs are usually being played by 45% wr players, a lot of the reports for them are probably justified one way or the other.

[Flosen8000]

2 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

To get a chat ban though you need to do something more than just play a ship, and support are in my experience very quick to help if the automatic system issues a ban in error, and I have not seen it make that mistake in years now.
 

Also what would be the value in knowing the reason why, considering the report options are highly open to interpretation. You can easily get reported for “playing poorly” when not supporting a suicide charge or outplaying a sensitive soul. 
 

If it was up to me the karma system would be more along a reward based system as used in some other games. Still WG would never want to be so generous. Getting a -1 or -2 etc is still meaningless it’s just a number next to your game name.

Sure, there are plenty other wrong reasons to report people. But it remains, that this has lots of room for improvement very easily. You could as well argue, if you don't like what people talk, blacklist them and they will never bother you again. No need to abuse the karma system for it.

[Tanaka_15]

29 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

Thanks for proving my point. That's the toxicity this is abused for and why it needs fixing.

Yeh we need more raports. 

[Flosen8000]

10 minutes ago, Khaba_Gandalf said:

Are you really sure that you a) never wrote anything that could lead to a ban at all or b) got banned despite not participating in chat at all. I'm not want to sound rude, but we had ton of cases here in the forums where people said they got chat-banned for no obvious reason and then a WG CM checked and the guy wrote stuff in chat, but simply thought that calling people idiots because they play like idiots is a fact and not an insult.

I did get chat bans in the past and knew why. Not always though. And even if you put aside the chat bans, there is still that little karma number. That is worth as much or little as any other digital achievement frequently used across all games today. Until about a year ago mine was always around 50, give or take. And then within a few weeks it plummeted down to Zero. Sometimes by as much as 4 in one game. Without doing anything wrong, playing bad or saying anything in chat. It purely was out of toxicity because I played well ironically. That made me a lot more toxic than I used to be.

[lovelacebeer]

3 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

Sure, there are plenty other wrong reasons to report people. But it remains, that this has lots of room for improvement very easily. You could as well argue, if you don't like what people talk, blacklist them and they will never bother you again. No need to abuse the karma system for it.

I suppose it depends what you consider “abuse of the karma system” for example I will still send reports to support when CV players send me post battle messages using offensive language directed against Black or Jewish people. Rather than just black list them and leave it at that. 
 

As to your desire to change the karma system, your best bet would be to make a financially beneficial case to WG for why the karma system needs changing, emphasis being how it benefits them.