I'm sure you've seen it by now. Some random unleveled, unplayed account made for free is sat alone in the lobby of whatever arcade game you want to play, automatically kicking anyone who joins. Honestly I think I've been lucky to avoid this happening too many times to me, but I'm a firm believer in the whole "First they came for my neighbor" thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...) and, to be honest, it's a problem that needs sorting out sooner or later.
Take Bunker Wars X. There's some troll set up there who kicks everyone who tries to join, purely because he wants players to use a different version which he personally considers to be better.
Or Star Battle, which has constantly fought with trolls whom have managed to lock down the game for months at a time sometimes.
Removing the kick feature from starter accounts would help. It'd force trolls to use their paid accounts. I play a lot of arcade maps and I can count the number of times I've needed to use the kick feature on, well, zero hands. I'm sure kicking has legitimate uses, but I can't see any reason to allow trial accounts to hold lobbies hostage like this.
Better yet, allow arcade creators to turn off the kick feature entirely for their lobby. Sometimes, you just need the nuclear option to deal with trolls, and this would be it. Before, the nuclear option was disabling the lobby entirely, but this feature has (rightfully) been removed. However the one purpose it did serve is now gone.
I suggested expanded map slots with a few reasons and it happened a few weeks later. I'm sure Blizzard already had it in mind though. Might've even just been a coincidence. Can't hurt though, lobby trolling is getting pretty silly now.
I'm sure you've seen it by now. Some random unleveled, unplayed account made for free is sat alone in the lobby of whatever arcade game you want to play, automatically kicking anyone who joins. Honestly I think I've been lucky to avoid this happening too many times to me, but I'm a firm believer in the whole "First they came for my neighbor" thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...) and, to be honest, it's a problem that needs sorting out sooner or later.
I think we need an option to report a lobby host outside lobby, for example create a right click context menu with option "Report a lobby host". Seems reasonable? I think in this case players just reports lobby host and it's automatically kicks/bans lobby host for some time.
It takes 5min to create a new starter account. I don't think the time investment required to get a bad host off sc2 would be reasonable when compared with how fast that same bad host could recreate their account to circumvent the temporary ban.
I think we need an option to report a lobby host outside lobby, for example create a right click context menu with option "Report a lobby host".
I dont think it would work. As Tya suggests, creating a new free account is really easy. Not sure if you saw it, but our [Probes vs Zealot 2] "troll of the year" for last year actually posted a 'how i make a new account for trolling in under 45 seconds' on sc2gump.com
I'd be more inclined to suggest that "free" accounts can host arcade games, but should not get host privileges. ie; a free account host cannot kick people ... but if people do legitimately need kicking from lobby (long time penders - an issue which has basically gone away - or people that continually invite penders to stop the lobby from starting), then host can be passed to somebody on a paid account, who has those rights.
It takes 5min to create a new starter account. I don't think the time investment required to get a bad host off sc2 would be reasonable when compared with how fast that same bad host could recreate their account to circumvent the temporary ban.
My suggestion was to not ban sc2 account. Just kicks troll from lobby and suspend ability(for example for 1 hour) for troll to create lobby with map that he hosted. So when abuser got kicked he can't create lobby with map and other players are free from this troll.
@KorvinGump: Go
I'd be more inclined to suggest that "free" accounts can host arcade games, but should not get host privileges. ie; a free account host cannot kick people ... but if people do legitimately need kicking from lobby (long time penders - an issue which has basically gone away - or people that continually invite penders to stop the lobby from starting), then host can be passed to somebody on a paid account, who has those rights.
Because of that, I think that disabling kicking for everyone wouldn't work out in the end.
Another variant would be the person who joins over and over again until he is finally in, when the game starts and then he does the trolling ingame when it starts and leaves early. For that reason it would be nice to have the kick feature actually keep the kicked person from joining the game he was kicked out of for 30 to 60 seconds and automaticly redirect him to another lobby or make his own lobby if there are no other open ones or join another existing one (but can still be reinvited in case of missclick).
Couldn't that even work instead of removing the kick feature? If someone is kicked he can't come back within 30 or so seconds. If the kicked person was the lobby holder you have a fair chance to have someone serious in your game. If the kicking person was the holder, you don't have to care about being pushed back into his lobby and are actually serviced to a new lobby.
Otherwise I am not strictly against restricting free accounts from host privileges. That way the holders has to put some money on the line at least... However I think there would still be many ways to circuvent it if you are intent on lobby holding.
Yeah, I agree, disable both kick and invite for starting accounts. I don't think you even need a valid e-mail for them, just any unverified gibberish works.
the only solution is to disable the kick feature entirely ( banning accounts etc wont solve anything)
Now the reason why blizzard allowed kick was because of some pending players issue.
To solve that , blizzard servers should automatically kick a pending player after 45 seconds. Once the automatic kick happens, the player is then not allowed to rejoin the same lobby until the next one has started.
Now the reason why blizzard allowed kick was because of some pending players issue.
To solve that , blizzard servers should automatically kick a pending player after 45 seconds. Once the automatic kick happens, the player is then not allowed to rejoin the same lobby until the next one has started.
Blizz already kick pending players after a shorter period... that got done in the same patch that created the kick problem.
The release notes for the change that introduced kick said the host was only able to kick PENDING players. It doesnt work as the patch notes say it should.
Kick features / ignore features (on twit ch) .. all of it is bad.
Ask not what your platform can do for you but what
YOU
can do for your community!
Any form of kick feature is bad, it always ends up being abused.
Lobby holder happened with pc for a good 6 months.. schnitzel was adamant to block the lobby..
instead of blizz sending a simple message to him/her/it telling that user to stop or he will be ip banned from battlenet...
this after (again) 6 months of reporting "it".
(yes i refer to people that dumb (preventing others from having sane legitimate fun) as "it")
People kill the fun, computers facilitate it by developers being lazy.. by people being lazy in lobbies.
hashtag proper hosting is required, just like for forums!
You can't have cake and eat it too!
Multiplayer games require dedicated social people to make it work, thinking otherwise is wishing everyone had a personal OS all the time with them on internet and in real life.. serving as a cane / crutch of sorts to allow unneeded rest from though processes and relinquishing social manners / normal basic republican civil demeanour required to play such MULTI player games!
instead of blizz sending a simple message to him/her/it telling that user to stop or he will be ip banned from battlenet...
[...]
Multiplayer games require dedicated social people to make it work, thinking otherwise is wishing everyone had a personal OS all the time with them on internet and in real life.. serving as a cane / crutch of sorts to allow unneeded rest from though processes and relinquishing social manners / normal basic republican civil demeanour required to play such MULTI player games!
Let's suppose for a second that neither blizz nor map developers have the motivation/manpower/time to reform all lobby holders by personal interaction (for whatever reason), what is the best solution under these circumstances?
I don't buy the argument, that there is no technical solution that is better then the current one. Sure it might still be abusable, but the impact, that the possible abuse has can be lessened.
And making one more assumption: let's say we could (or had) conceive(d) such a better technical solution, shouldn't try to conceive (/implement) them, because it helps the many who would actually enjoy playing the maps if it wasn't for lobby holders?
again, this is a first world problem .. blizzard cared enough to implement a stupid auto start patch up but it is barely more than a " you die on the operating table" solution!
this made just stuff more likely to deter players joining arcade maps
the arcade is not successful enough and games / communities die
people on bnet make it so.. not anything any dev would implement will change that
this is not game heart (lol) the one all fix all fits all sizes unfair monopoly dumb solution
Dealing with lobby blockers is not catering to people who want to play/interact with others within a game, it is sad people in need of reforming
No we might not be all responsible / have to care / do stuff for these people.. all the time..
`thing is, no one ever does anything about it.. and yet the buck is always going to stop somewhere!
you asked "what if?"
i ll answer : people make private lobbies (we lost very few people to schnitzel when people wanting to play photon cycles really wanted to)
while someone deals "live" with the blocker (next time it happens to me (which is unlikely) i'll spam to get a tray sent
you can abide and one of the "pack" playing after another gets to stay a bit in the menus typing to these "
lobby blockers
"
tldr: if one wants to play with "anyone" on net .. one is accountable for his acts
multiplayer games require interaction, in short people who care more about having the game played with nice people rather than let the bad dictate us anything...
Let's suppose for a second that neither blizz nor map developers have the motivation/manpower/time to reform all lobby holders by personal interaction (for whatever reason), what is the best solution under these circumstances?
that is the case
sad indeed
bnet is a good example of how f ked up our social practices are .. yes!
to be clear, when i asked the "developer" of" photon cycles to help, his first instinct was to put more work / responsibility on me ..?! How lame can one get?
Second response was even worse: get kick function online with mod kicking powers and lalalalalala backward thinking
fairness is available in some places in the world (arguably) .. this is the result of many people (not nearly enough of course) fighting for this FAIRNESS.
It isn't a given and bnet is a bad place in this regard, a place in need of people reforming it.. and again no one will.. (so why would blizz? do anything)
i guess the last stop for someone publishing a map is there.. you are at the mercy of other people and if you are not able to lobby the publisher WITH other users (mapmakers/players invested in a particular map) .. then you have laid your weapons on the altar and any "function" will seem like a band-aid on a medusa shipwreck victim.
people on bnet make it so.. not anything any dev would implement will change that
bnet like any other community conists of many different kinds of people. There is nothing you can change about that. Which kinds of people hold power or more precisely in which way you can exercise power is defined by the system. bnet currently gives power to spoilers (trolls lobby blockers, what ever we wanna call them). 1 single person can make tens of people play 2v3 matches instead of 3v3.
1 single person can also occupy the lobby which everyone autojoins to and possibly block or deter even more people. People integrated in the community can deal with this by making private games, but what about the people outside the established community? Devs can change the system. It is hard, since the system is complex. But I believe it is possible.
this is not game heart (lol) the one all fix all fits all sizes unfair monopoly dumb solution
No. It isn't. It doesn't make spoilers go away (I will go with 'spoilers' from now one, given your sentence about these being people not searching game interaction, I know we are talking about the same people). But it can be a solution to limit spoilers ability to block lobbys, if done right. That would be a move in the right direction.
It is not a solution to 2v3 for example. These are our job. We can't make 2v3 go away, but we can make it playable. We can design our system such that one can't entirely ruine stuff for 5 others at a time.
if one wants to play with "anyone" on net .. one is accountable for his acts
That's how it should be. But if I was spoiling frequently and then made a new free account, how would I be accountable for what I did? How would I be accountable even without changing accounts? People know one of my names but with another name I could allways come back and play with them as if nothing happened. Accountability is essentially dead with free accounts.
But I would like to bump another idea I thought about:
[...] it would be nice to have the kick feature actually keep the kicked person from joining the game he was kicked out of for 30 to 60 seconds and automaticly redirect him to another lobby or make his own lobby if there are no other open ones or join another existing one (but can still be reinvited in case of missclick).
Couldn't that even work instead of removing the kick feature? If someone is kicked he can't come back within 30 or so seconds. If the kicked person was the lobby holder you have a fair chance to have someone serious in your game. If the kicking person was the holder, you don't have to care about being pushed back into his lobby and are actually serviced to a new lobby.
In essence it is even the same idea as using private lobbies. You just go somewhere else instead of confronting the spoiler.
It is not a solution to unlimited free accounts, but it might be a solution to make the kick feature less abusable.
BTW, i think we NEED these fucntions, i advocated for them.
You know why? Because when someone join the game that is a known troller and the game doesn't have auto kick feature, and i hosted the game, why can't i kick before it's a problem? Besides sometimes its a known spammer, troller, not to mention if someone is one that lags the whole game out and joins it every time anyways, ya i'm going to kick him if i'm hosting, If he wants to play he can host his own lobby, who cares.
You don't need the kick feature if you're on a starter account. Starter accounts could pass host to a paid account who could then kick, but would not be able to kick themselves. This forces trolls to use paid accounts.
Mapmakers should have the ability to turn off the kick feature for a chosen map. This gives mapmakers a nuclear option for dealing with trolls.
Mh, you could just make a private lobby and then open it to the public, thus creating another public lobby. Doesnt that work? But yeah, I do still agree with your post.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm sure you've seen it by now. Some random unleveled, unplayed account made for free is sat alone in the lobby of whatever arcade game you want to play, automatically kicking anyone who joins. Honestly I think I've been lucky to avoid this happening too many times to me, but I'm a firm believer in the whole "First they came for my neighbor" thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...) and, to be honest, it's a problem that needs sorting out sooner or later.
Take Bunker Wars X. There's some troll set up there who kicks everyone who tries to join, purely because he wants players to use a different version which he personally considers to be better.
Or Star Battle, which has constantly fought with trolls whom have managed to lock down the game for months at a time sometimes.
Removing the kick feature from starter accounts would help. It'd force trolls to use their paid accounts. I play a lot of arcade maps and I can count the number of times I've needed to use the kick feature on, well, zero hands. I'm sure kicking has legitimate uses, but I can't see any reason to allow trial accounts to hold lobbies hostage like this.
Better yet, allow arcade creators to turn off the kick feature entirely for their lobby. Sometimes, you just need the nuclear option to deal with trolls, and this would be it. Before, the nuclear option was disabling the lobby entirely, but this feature has (rightfully) been removed. However the one purpose it did serve is now gone.
What do you think?
Sounds reasonable. Do blizzard make mapmakers' suggested changes in less than a year pace?
I suggested expanded map slots with a few reasons and it happened a few weeks later. I'm sure Blizzard already had it in mind though. Might've even just been a coincidence. Can't hurt though, lobby trolling is getting pretty silly now.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI think we need an option to report a lobby host outside lobby, for example create a right click context menu with option "Report a lobby host". Seems reasonable? I think in this case players just reports lobby host and it's automatically kicks/bans lobby host for some time.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussianMapster
It takes 5min to create a new starter account. I don't think the time investment required to get a bad host off sc2 would be reasonable when compared with how fast that same bad host could recreate their account to circumvent the temporary ban.
I dont think it would work. As Tya suggests, creating a new free account is really easy. Not sure if you saw it, but our [Probes vs Zealot 2] "troll of the year" for last year actually posted a 'how i make a new account for trolling in under 45 seconds' on sc2gump.com
I'd be more inclined to suggest that "free" accounts can host arcade games, but should not get host privileges. ie; a free account host cannot kick people ... but if people do legitimately need kicking from lobby (long time penders - an issue which has basically gone away - or people that continually invite penders to stop the lobby from starting), then host can be passed to somebody on a paid account, who has those rights.
Should be simple enough to implement...
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumMy suggestion was to not ban sc2 account. Just kicks troll from lobby and suspend ability(for example for 1 hour) for troll to create lobby with map that he hosted. So when abuser got kicked he can't create lobby with map and other players are free from this troll.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussianMapster
Because of that, I think that disabling kicking for everyone wouldn't work out in the end.
Another variant would be the person who joins over and over again until he is finally in, when the game starts and then he does the trolling ingame when it starts and leaves early. For that reason it would be nice to have the kick feature actually keep the kicked person from joining the game he was kicked out of for 30 to 60 seconds and automaticly redirect him to another lobby or make his own lobby if there are no other open ones or join another existing one (but can still be reinvited in case of missclick).
Couldn't that even work instead of removing the kick feature? If someone is kicked he can't come back within 30 or so seconds. If the kicked person was the lobby holder you have a fair chance to have someone serious in your game. If the kicking person was the holder, you don't have to care about being pushed back into his lobby and are actually serviced to a new lobby.
Otherwise I am not strictly against restricting free accounts from host privileges. That way the holders has to put some money on the line at least... However I think there would still be many ways to circuvent it if you are intent on lobby holding.
Yeah, I agree, disable both kick and invite for starting accounts. I don't think you even need a valid e-mail for them, just any unverified gibberish works.
the only solution is to disable the kick feature entirely ( banning accounts etc wont solve anything)
Now the reason why blizzard allowed kick was because of some pending players issue.
To solve that , blizzard servers should automatically kick a pending player after 45 seconds. Once the automatic kick happens, the player is then not allowed to rejoin the same lobby until the next one has started.
Blizz already kick pending players after a shorter period... that got done in the same patch that created the kick problem. The release notes for the change that introduced kick said the host was only able to kick PENDING players. It doesnt work as the patch notes say it should.
Kick features / ignore features (on twit ch) .. all of it is bad.
Ask not what your platform can do for you but what
YOU
can do for your community!
Any form of kick feature is bad, it always ends up being abused.
Lobby holder happened with pc for a good 6 months.. schnitzel was adamant to block the lobby..
instead of blizz sending a simple message to him/her/it telling that user to stop or he will be ip banned from battlenet...
this after (again) 6 months of reporting "it".
(yes i refer to people that dumb (preventing others from having sane legitimate fun) as "it")
People kill the fun, computers facilitate it by developers being lazy.. by people being lazy in lobbies.
hashtag proper hosting is required, just like for forums!
You can't have cake and eat it too!
Multiplayer games require dedicated social people to make it work, thinking otherwise is wishing everyone had a personal OS all the time with them on internet and in real life.. serving as a cane / crutch of sorts to allow unneeded rest from though processes and relinquishing social manners / normal basic republican civil demeanour required to play such MULTI player games!
i see dumb people =/= i should ignore them
Let's suppose for a second that neither blizz nor map developers have the motivation/manpower/time to reform all lobby holders by personal interaction (for whatever reason), what is the best solution under these circumstances?
I don't buy the argument, that there is no technical solution that is better then the current one. Sure it might still be abusable, but the impact, that the possible abuse has can be lessened.
And making one more assumption: let's say we could (or had) conceive(d) such a better technical solution, shouldn't try to conceive (/implement) them, because it helps the many who would actually enjoy playing the maps if it wasn't for lobby holders?
How did we get schnitzel out? by losing!
it lost interest somewhat and left...
again, this is a first world problem .. blizzard cared enough to implement a stupid auto start patch up but it is barely more than a " you die on the operating table" solution!
this made just stuff more likely to deter players joining arcade maps
the arcade is not successful enough and games / communities die
people on bnet make it so.. not anything any dev would implement will change that
this is not game heart (lol) the one all fix all fits all sizes unfair monopoly dumb solution
Dealing with lobby blockers is not catering to people who want to play/interact with others within a game, it is sad people in need of reforming
No we might not be all responsible / have to care / do stuff for these people.. all the time..
`thing is, no one ever does anything about it.. and yet the buck is always going to stop somewhere!
you asked "what if?"
i ll answer : people make private lobbies (we lost very few people to schnitzel when people wanting to play photon cycles really wanted to)
while someone deals "live" with the blocker (next time it happens to me (which is unlikely) i'll spam to get a tray sent
you can abide and one of the "pack" playing after another gets to stay a bit in the menus typing to these "
lobby blockers
"
tldr: if one wants to play with "anyone" on net .. one is accountable for his acts
multiplayer games require interaction, in short people who care more about having the game played with nice people rather than let the bad dictate us anything...
that is the case
sad indeed
bnet is a good example of how f ked up our social practices are .. yes!
to be clear, when i asked the "developer" of" photon cycles to help, his first instinct was to put more work / responsibility on me ..?! How lame can one get?
Second response was even worse: get kick function online with mod kicking powers and lalalalalala backward thinking
fairness is available in some places in the world (arguably) .. this is the result of many people (not nearly enough of course) fighting for this FAIRNESS.
It isn't a given and bnet is a bad place in this regard, a place in need of people reforming it.. and again no one will.. (so why would blizz? do anything)
i guess the last stop for someone publishing a map is there.. you are at the mercy of other people and if you are not able to lobby the publisher WITH other users (mapmakers/players invested in a particular map) .. then you have laid your weapons on the altar and any "function" will seem like a band-aid on a medusa shipwreck victim.
bnet like any other community conists of many different kinds of people. There is nothing you can change about that. Which kinds of people hold power or more precisely in which way you can exercise power is defined by the system. bnet currently gives power to spoilers (trolls lobby blockers, what ever we wanna call them). 1 single person can make tens of people play 2v3 matches instead of 3v3.
1 single person can also occupy the lobby which everyone autojoins to and possibly block or deter even more people. People integrated in the community can deal with this by making private games, but what about the people outside the established community? Devs can change the system. It is hard, since the system is complex. But I believe it is possible.
No. It isn't. It doesn't make spoilers go away (I will go with 'spoilers' from now one, given your sentence about these being people not searching game interaction, I know we are talking about the same people). But it can be a solution to limit spoilers ability to block lobbys, if done right. That would be a move in the right direction.
It is not a solution to 2v3 for example. These are our job. We can't make 2v3 go away, but we can make it playable. We can design our system such that one can't entirely ruine stuff for 5 others at a time.
That's how it should be. But if I was spoiling frequently and then made a new free account, how would I be accountable for what I did? How would I be accountable even without changing accounts? People know one of my names but with another name I could allways come back and play with them as if nothing happened. Accountability is essentially dead with free accounts.
But I would like to bump another idea I thought about:
In essence it is even the same idea as using private lobbies. You just go somewhere else instead of confronting the spoiler.
It is not a solution to unlimited free accounts, but it might be a solution to make the kick feature less abusable.
i have been banned repeatedly for a few minutes on and on and on on photon cycles..
so what`?
if people care about having a nice game they react
they send whispers:
"hey dude what's up with the host?"
"welll.. here's "x" and this is the other game you can join"
:D i'll drop it.. i'm too old for this"
ps: i had to add user slots just to neutralize the useless auto start .. useless for my map
BUT again, the system is applied to all maps, making it for the "big " (lol) maps and punishing the small ones is pure kamikaze practices.
BTW, i think we NEED these fucntions, i advocated for them.
You know why? Because when someone join the game that is a known troller and the game doesn't have auto kick feature, and i hosted the game, why can't i kick before it's a problem? Besides sometimes its a known spammer, troller, not to mention if someone is one that lags the whole game out and joins it every time anyways, ya i'm going to kick him if i'm hosting, If he wants to play he can host his own lobby, who cares.
Sure. I agree. To clarify my position;
Mh, you could just make a private lobby and then open it to the public, thus creating another public lobby. Doesnt that work? But yeah, I do still agree with your post.