[SUGGESTION] Anti sore loser feature?

Well, let's play togheter so and let's see if the stats are correct or not

Well, let's play togheter so and let's see if the stats are correct or not

Since you have played so few games, the stats won't really be statistically significant yet. Give it a few more hundred games to find a closer answer to that question - provided you do actually run out the clock on them all, and not just the favourable ones...

Kudos for sticking out the clock though in a couple of recent losing games despite dropping mad ELO for it. Please keep up this sporting spirit and your stats will actually mean something.

Rad dj ahhahah really? Well, why won't play togheter and let's see if these stats are right or not ? and another thing, i never palyed against you i hope to find you online soon so

Well we already established there's no evidence of the match, my actual gripe here in general rather than this isolated incident, so; plausible deniability FTW!

I'm willing to believe it must have been some dastardly other guy calling himself "Dominick" who threw a childish tantrum or is intentionally attempting to smear your name... Seems legit! Hopefully the crowd buys it too. The alternative that I'm a hallucinating lunatic or compulsive liar is a distinct possibility in their minds already I'm sure and so therefore equally probable...

Happy to play again if we chance to meet. But I'll have to put on record demos and post the outcome if it turns out to be another quitting "impostor"!

Dominick is a common European name btw, I've got a friend who's name is Dominic (without the K). I would first assume that it was just another Dominick that you played with, if not for it being their actual name then perhaps due to simple admiration of that name or whatever. Currently there's over 64,000 players tracked by XonStats from which an average between 200-300 play daily. Most Xonoticers are from Europe (specifically Germany) so it's statistically plausible that you just ran into another Dominick. It would not surprise me at all if there was a yet another, completely irrelevant Dominick playing Quake Live currently as well.

I know of three different Z's in this community. There may be more. It's confusing.

I was writing another post about this but then remember we had discussed this here.

I was searching how to deal with rage quit, hoping to find how others tolerate such behavior, this article came up, explaining it's actually healthier for those who are incapable of dealing with their own emotion. Alright.

Anyway, I'd like to boycott quitters, but then it feels like I'm kicking myself off the game (and making myself look like a quitter). How do you even do it?

By the way, Antibody, can there be an option for servers to opt-in game info recording (maps, players, scores) but opt-out on elo? I can think of two use cases:

1. Jeff's servers, which have drastically different balance setting to contribute meaningful stats.
2. Casual server like my FUN server.

I still would like maps, players, scores to be recorded, as part of Xonotic history though. (I personally go back to check out new maps I played today to learn them)

Actually I have less problems with rage quitters than with people that can't deal with a loss and then spill miserability all over the place when they lose. I find rage quitters plain pathetic, imho they ridicule themselves. But nevertheless I follow a very clear policy: I play the game for having a fun with someone. If it turns out reproducibly that my opponent is not having fun, it spoils the fun for me, too. Easy solution: don't play that person any more. I have several times attempted to give people a third or even fourth try, but to no avail, so I'm sticking to two times. Luckily there still are enough people around that can deal with a loss (or that I can't win anyway, then it's somehow never a problem at all).

Oh, I already sort of wrote that :o)

I'm not sure what you're hoping for to be honest. Everyone can quit a game any time he or she wants and I kinda like it that way too. Any solution that would not involve your own good judgement of who to play or not would be overkill in my book.

By the way, Antibody, can there be an option for servers to opt-in game info recording (maps, players, scores) but opt-out on elo?

This option exists (only recently - see here), but it is only enabled manually and the default is to capture Elo. If you'd like I can turn it on for your servers!

Oh, I already sort of wrote that :o)

Thanks, Halogene. Yes, my question about how you actually do it came from this suggestion of yours.

How do you actually not play with the person? It's easy if it's a duel situation, but what about a group situation? If the person is in a game (with many other players), you just don't join? If you are already in a game and the person joins, you simply quit right there?

I'm not sure what you're hoping for to be honest. Everyone can quit a game any time he or she wants and I kinda like it that way too. Any solution that would not involve your own good judgement of who to play or not would be overkill in my book.

Mostly above. I am also hoping to promote a better culture through my playing and how I manage the server, so I'm seeking for some wisdom here.

This option exists (only recently - see here), but it is only enabled manually and the default is to capture Elo. If you'd like I can turn it on for your servers!

Yes, please turn it on only for my FUN server. (My pickup server is down due to low utilization anyway.)

Thanks a lot!

Well you can of course avoid people in duels, but in pickup games it's tricky. But then again such jerks are only one of a couple of players, so they do not weigh that much on the fun balance imho. In team games I can pretty much ignore them, but I also found that due to the team effort leading to win or loss sore losers can more easily cope with a loss, as they may blame at least parts of it on the other team members. Grieving about a loss happens mostly in duels, I think.

As we become more advanced, we often underestimate our own skill and unintentionally stack the winning team. People on the losing team will often notice this and spectate or quit, as there's no point continuing if nobody is going to reshuffle.
I see this happen all the time on public American CTF servers. There's very little that can be done about it, besides hoping the better players will listen or notice and switch before it's too late.

In these cases, I think it's wrong to blame the losing team, as it's very annoying to be outgunned and/or outnumbered due to poor team balance.


Duel is another story, of course; I personally wouldn't be against stats recording anyone who leaves within 10 seconds of the match ending (of course, detecting this would be somewhat difficult).

Yes, I also find it highly immature not to consider team balance when joining a team game or not changing team in FFA matches when noticing that oneself is significantly imbalancing the game. It just ruins the fun for most of the opponent team.

Then again I've learnt that it's actually perfectly fine to be immature if you're young. Such behavior should "grow out" though when you gain more life experience :o) People need to be aware that this game is also played by kids (who may even become rather good over time). Therefore, not every immaturity is unjust. Just relax and assume that someone just hasn't finished pre-school yet :o)

BuddyFriendGuy - done! You should see your FUN server recording games and all that good stuff, but not recording any Elo for any of the participants.

Thanks, Antibody.

Mario, I believe not all servers allow players to switch to a larger but losing team. I always try to join the weaker team but am rarely able to do that (hence I asked about that setting in another thread).

Halogene, thanks for that perspective. That helps a lot.

Elo, when it is gamed, encourages avoiding losses and point farming. So there's an incentive to play against new players (guaranteed small boost) over playing a closely matched opponent (wins/losses that may result in a small net gain or loss). If a significant portion of rage quitters are point farmers (which can't really be determined since XonStats doesn't track people who were previously in-game for a match), then a revision of the rating system would solve the issue.

Also I don't think the points really indicate anything right now because of how inaccurate it is. It doesn't even distinguish between instagib(+hook) and the standard mode. 3 player Deathmatch where 1 person quits is considered a Duel. In general, it's evaluating players by matches with varying inconsistent rules.

Antares, if you have a better suggestion, I'm open for pull requests!

LOL@this thread still alive >1 annul later.

Ya'll know the very concept is a red herring, right? It harkens back to classical social systems. The concept is incompatible with a free game/society; i.e You *can't* solve this shitty humanesque behaviour via authoritarian rule-sets... Not without replicating the consequence for action that used to exist in small communities. That is my hidden proposition.

Don't you know it's the free market and everybody has choice with whom to play?? In a game where a casual player meets a new nick *every* *single* *game*! Totally realistic and reasonable! <sarcasm/> (i.e. You cannot simply avoid let alone remember those who play like wankers and it's ridiculous to expect this beyond a small local tribe. (where this kind of system worked) In the global economy this is outside our evolved capacities)

Case in point; my most recent casual game against *really great player* "zbionic": http://stats.xonotic.org/game/813889
Guy told me to "get a better ISP" when I joined with 350ms. Told him I'm in Australia, he says "get a better country" and then when he beats me by a valiant and utterly *demolishing* ratio of 28:24.... "don't camp" and "laggy pussy". Hmm seems like my accuracy is 29% where his is 20% @ 300ms disadvantage, so I must repent? After all he is the alpha and I must be the beta...... Hey! At least he didn't quit!!!! Ecstatic. Well, he was beating the absolute snot out of me of course, why wouldn't he stay?!

As soon as that dominance narrative begins to slide = instant RQ. Accurate stats, fo' sho. Tells the whole picture you can bank on it.

TL;DR - You cannot regulate assholism without ejecting large swathes of the populace. It's human nature to be a complete cunt. This is genetic, FFS! And the internet is the ultimate ego shield (metal box; a vehicle for example) which will protect those who otherwise would not dare speak against their superiors! <only partial satire/>

Competitions have rules, for a reason. Question mark.

Mario: Team balance RE: USA servers. Notoriously pathetic stacking zeitgeist, surprise much? Look at the culture. From the outside looking in - Nobody seems to bother to even look at the scoreboard let alone try to take matters into their own hands to shore up the balance for the sake of enjoyment of all the oppressed losers. (So much for social justice). Altruism? Wassat? Why bother care about equality of outcome when you can be the ultimate WINNORRRR?!?! (No wonder I prefer duel?)

Hey, the game *could* easily eject the top player from the winning team to the loser team when the score ratio surpassed a scientifically determined limit (2:1? gawddamn) but as many in this thread seem to believe - "just don't play against the jerks!" and "take responsibility for this kind of thing!". hahahahaha.

Whilst in reality: entire losing team quits at round end.

LAWL Problem solved!!!11!11 glhf

Makes me wonder if we need a flagging system in the game to help us "track" the idiots and our friends.

Idea for players being that this is all local of course (ie: it's limited to the client). Simply allows you to flag users with a rating of some sort, which shows up on your end. Basically just an address book of players so you know who is who. Something like this should work on the users ID, not on on their name (also means you could always know who someone is, regardless of what they've set their name to).

For admins, this could even be pushed to the server too (ie: when the rating is done and the admin is connected to that server, no offline sync, no sync to a different server). Assuming banning ever actually works, something like this could also allow admins to track users who keep being idiots, and eventually after they've being annoying enough they'd have all the info to ban them, all the while tracking their history. If the admin wants the bans on one server to sync to all servers (eg: banned on one SMB server, banned on all), then that would have to implemented outside this (shouldn't be that hard really).

Ahh well, another idea that I have no time to code... *sigh*

LOL@this thread still alive >1 annul later.

I don't expect there to be any system in place to moderate overall user behavior. However what can be done is improving the player rating system to better assess players i.e not make every match a ranked match and remove the means for point farming.
Rest of the post reads llike a spergout.

Antares - there will *always* be a way for people to farm points. It just may get more difficult and/or time consuming to do so. As an example under the current system: if someone wants to spend their time playing noobs or versus one person repeatedly, they have *earned* those points! Let them have 'em, if that's the way they want to spend their time in the game. That aspect won't change much even if I segregate Elos into separate "buckets" by settings or mods (e.g. Vanilla Duel, Insta, etc etc etc).

What do you mean by "not make every match a ranked match"? That's already the case, so I'm not understanding your suggestion there. To clarify, here are some scenarios where Elos are not calculated (thus are not ranked):

- Games in which no players fire a weapon (non-CTS)
- Games in which no players complete a "fastest" lap (CTS)
- Games having less than the required minimum players
- Games with entirely anonymous, untracked players
- Duels in which one player is not tracked

I meant that as admin I can set the server to something goofy, that doesn't have any transferrable skills to the actual game. And then XonStats will evaluate players as usual so long as it's not CTS, etc.

spergout.

I humbly and sincerely thank you for teaching me a new racist slur.

Oh hah this one's new for me, too. Before looking it up, I thougt it was a funny transfer of the German word "Sperrgut" into the English language, which means "bulky goods" and would have fitted to more complex usage of language. I somehow like this erroneous interpretation of mine much more than the "official" one from the urban dictionary.