Respect in Tron?

For all the help you need with Armagetron!
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11425
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

The main problem with the plan of different server lists is this:
The master servers' security model (apart from the obvious bit that nobody should be able to inject code) is to make it completely useless to feed the masters with false information. The masters only send a list of IPs and ports to the clients, the clients do the rest. The masters communicate with each other using completely non-authenticated packets. Anyone could fake those, but there simply would be no benefit, so nothing is done against it. If the "good servers" list or the servers' scores are handled the same way, this will become a problem; injecting false information would get profitable, and it would get done.

The best way to implement a list of good servers right now, without adding fancy cryptographic stuff to the master server protocol, would be to make the list a pseudo-resource: a resource that is donwloaded maybe once a day and automatically expires, or we bump the version number every time it is changed (cue Luke saying he sure hopes we'd do) and letting the masters tell the clients which version is current.

I'm not too hot for ratings by voting; we'd see vote wars and such, and fact is that server tastes vary too much. People already vote on servers by playing on them, the current player count effectively is a vote based rating, although it does not count the "this server sucks, I'm going home!" votes.

Before we do anything, I'd say we should first identify the problem we actually want to solve :) Is it
- it's hard for all players to find good servers among those on the master list
- new players join servers where they are not welcome and get scared away from the game completely
- the player community is fragmented too much, most players stick to their favorite server all the time and don't interact
- we need to warn all players about known abusive server admins.

If it's just the new players thing, just let the client record how many hours have already been played and some other stats (hackable of course) and let the server reject joins from players with not enough experience.

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

Aha, that just means there are requirements I wasn't aware of. :)

To answer your question directly, I think it's this:
- new players join servers where they are not welcome and get scared away from the game completely

There is an additional clique problem, but I'm not sure that's solvable. I think we should just be trying to mitigate the damages, people naturally form cliques just like they naturally get boners.

The reason I suggested a slashdot-style moderation system is because it would avoid vote wars. People would only get moderation points after doing stuff, preferably for the community. I think the slashdot karma system would do a lot of good here, especially if we could get it ingame somehow.

No idea how to plug it in to the master server browser, it's possible we should have the client get moderation ratings from somewhere else like you suggest, as a resource. That resource could even be a php script that dynamically generates new content, but our resource system would have to be modified a bit to deal with that, and by the time we're done fighting with luke over allowing non-versioned resources we'll have 5.0 released. (Or we could call an admin vote, I'd vote "yes" to eliminating required versioning of resources, just don't cache if it doesn't have a version number)
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

User avatar
Revan
Core Dumper
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:30 am
Location: War Zone.
Contact:

Post by Revan »

Lucifer wrote:There is an additional clique problem, but I'm not sure that's solvable. I think we should just be trying to mitigate the damages, people naturally form cliques just like they naturally get boners.
Cheers for the best simile I've seen in my days. :)
Fonkay wrote:
|AST| }{Alex}{ wrote:canada: i know i called you an idiot, but thats just the way i am. sorry if it offended you, but thats how i talk. anybody who knows me well enough knows that i'm almost constantly on some kind of insults rampage.
I love this excuse, it explains so much.
^I chuckled.

Yeah, it seems now-a-days people have turned into jerks. They say "you suck" and "haha wat a noob" because they have to be good in arma to have more self esteem. Seeing people that are not as good as them fuels their self esteem.

I think we should have some type of rating system. Players can rate others on behavior. Unfortunately that would require some type of account system. I wonder what could do that. *cough*XMPP

Anyways, I think the server rules and regulations shabang is a good idea.
America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, badass speed.
-Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936

User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11425
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Now don't you start with that "XMPP will cure cancer" crap, too :) Anything extra will be built on TOP of authentication, the authentication method is secondary for most our purposes.

Anyway, I'm not a /. reader, there is just too much crap to wade through, how does the karma system work exactly? My guess would be that "good deeds" (posting articles and comments, getting positive votes on them) gain you karma and the more karma you have, the bigger the weight of your own votes gets.

We could have a website for ingame karma once we have any authentication form, or a special server that the clients talk to directly: we can give players the opportunity to give other players and the server thumbs up or down, the client memorizes these choices, and on the next opportunity, connects to the karma server, authenticates with the voting player's credentials and transmits the votes. The karma server then has all the karma votes stored.

Whatever the karma server does with the votes can be made available via http. Not every client needs to fetch the server ratings individually; we could make it so that only the masters fetch from the karma server via http, and give the info out to the clients via the normal master server protocol. That should be secure enough.

What would we do with player karma, other than determining the weight of the votes on servers and, of course, how players shall get reincarnated?

--------------------------------

Anyway, I still suspect the above solves problems we don't have :) Players, after a while, know quite well on which servers they feel at home, and tastes vary; there is no catch-all rating of servers possible. I pull out the pub/bar analogy out once again: servers are like locations in a city to go out at, and not every place meets the tastes of everyone.

To solve the "new players enter servers where they're not welcome" problem, I'd rather suggest a cooperative solution. I'd suggest we let the client track:
1. Stats of playtime. How many hours total, how many last week. How much time in different game modes.
2. A ranking. It shall not be displayed to anyone else so there is no incentive to hack it (which will be easy, of course).
Servers shall then be allowed to lock out players with unfit stats. The risk is, of course, that certain player groups will be locked out of all servers. But I don't think that will happen. I'd recommend team play servers to require about one hour of normal play, and fortress servers one hour of sumo play. Self proclaimed elite servers can use the ranking; other servers can use the ranking to guarantee interesting, not too one-sided fights, by putting up several servers with identical settings, each only admitting a certain segment of ranks. I would say that admins of servers where new players are not welcome know that (or even work towards that) and will cooperate by setting the server up appropriately.

Oh, yes, the ranking: this one should work a bit like ELO, a bit like the ladder. Rough sketch: Ranking points get redistributed at the end of a match between players that have been online the whole match. Ranking needs to be enabled by the server admin explicitly; as said many times before, there is no way to get a reasonable ranking for individual players on a team server. If your rank is really low, you should advance just for showing up. If your rank is low, you should advance for having more score than others at the end of the match. In both stages, you can't lose points. In the higher ranks, you lose points if you fare worse than other players that are ranked close to you and gain points for playing well; how much you gain or lose shall be ELO-like, making it so that winning against a stronger opponent is worth more than winning against a weak opponent. This is by no means perfect and doesn't give accurate rankings of players at the end of the day even if nobody cheats; but it probably is enough to sort players into groups so that two players from the same group can have an interesing fight with unknown outcome. You should not think of it as a league score or anything competitive; think of it as the thing that determines your start position in a mass marathon race. I admit I don't know how they do it precisely, but they somehow take your past performance and put the faster runners more to the front. It works for the purpose of avoiding chaos, nothing more. And nothing more is the goal of the ranking system described here.

Of course, your stats will be saved in a form that you can take with you, so you're not locked out of your favorite elite server while visiting uncle joe.

----------------------------

One thing on the original thread topic: During the first ITW, I had the impression that dez was an OK admin. Single (unconfirmed) incidents won't change my view.

ady
On Lightcycle Grid
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:40 pm

Post by ady »

nice topic, you should call this "lets end with lod" or "lets piss off lod", yes i like how the ppl spreads fake rumours.
Why ppl dont play on our servers? most of them are rubber players so we dont have a rubber server, we host fortress and sumo servers(sumo server its almost full 80% of the day)
Its not my fault that people who comes from rubber servers plays in lod and get kicked coz of their "suckage", fortress requires a level of skills, and what can i do?nothing.
Rain, you was talking about the spam_length, well, there only few times i did it was 1-i was experimenting whats this setting and if it could be useful for something , 2-some dudes was insulting each others, people asked me to silence them, so did i, after they calmed down i put spam_maxlen to normal, and anyways i dont think u need to chat in arma, if you want to, pick a chatroom.
Yes, clan servers are special, but why do they have to be bad eh lucifer?because u was pissed off by me last summer(i had a kid behaviour , i admit it) doesnt mean that now u dont have to forgive us , or me. We are running exactly the same settings of the old CVS server, why is it worst then?
Why people is more "funny" in other servers? people who plays tron have an average age of 18-22, the other players , the "fun" ones are mostly under 15.
And rain, i dont apologize because of all the kicks i had to take, in ct server (your wonderful happy and very good server lucifer(ive got nothing against ct)) and the other day i was tked by one of your members, delta, on your oops server, because i was a "noob". i asked him to stop it but after 5 times i gave up, now let me ask you, did we tk you each time whenu play at LoD fortress? are we so bad? do we ban people for fun? maybe we banned you 3 times in your life and you are making a whole story coz of that.
Why do i check ips? very simple, there are ppl who uses other ppls nick and then insult other players under that fake identity. i could tell u lots of nicks , faked nicks, but i dont feel like revealing this thing. yes, maybe i check ips, but i keep the private info for me i dont spread it in newspapers.anyways what could i get from your ip? your geo location?
And i d like to say one more thing(im sure i forgot to say lots of things but its enough for now), wouldnt be possible to make an password for each nick? like in all online games, an account, that way we could avoid nick stealers, i dont know if its a good idea but think about it.
And thanks to all for not informing us of this topic, we have a forum where you can ask or insult us directly, i prefer directly than indirectly, thanks to all.
Always yours,
Satan

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

Evidently you need to read this thread in more detail, ady. For my part, I have a 7 year old, a 6 year old, and a 3 year old, and I figure those are the only kids I have to raise.

@z-man:

You've got the gist of the slashdot moderation system, but the devil's in the details. :) It's a Republic, basically, where an anarchic system chooses the voters. You earn the right to vote by accumulating karma and showing up often. You don't get any karma for showing up, you just get the opportunity to earn karma. You get karma when a moderator raises one of your posts. A moderator can either add 1 point to a post or subtract 1 point from a post, and posts are scored in the range [-1,5], where anonymous users post by default with 0 score, registered users post by default with 1 score, and if you have a good karma bonus you can post at 2 score, and moderators adjust it.

You get to be a moderator by showing up at some regular interval and earning points on your posts. When you get chosen to be a moderator, you're given 5 posts you can moderate. You pick the 5, of course, but that's it. So when you moderate, you give other people karma.

So the base idea is that you participate, do good things, and you get to rate the things other people do. There are people who moderate regularly because they're there often enough, but I probably read slashdot once in 6 months now (and still manage to post at 2 points for some reason, heh).

Additionally, a registered user can put people on his friends list or his foes list. People who post from either list get a bonus for that user only. Users earn karma when they are put on someone's friends list, but I don't think they lose karma for being on a foes list. I could be wrong about that last part. You can select what kind of bonus to give your friends' posts and what kind of penalty to give your foes.

So extrapolating to arma, we get a lot of interesting possibilities. Take the basic moderation thing. I'll use the idea of a karma server, but I don't want to think of it as a separate process or anything. Maybe it's part of the dedicated server, maybe it's part of the master server, whatever. So you gain karma when people moderate you in particular. You lose karma when people penalize you with moderation. You can probably also lose karma by being vote-kicked, although I wouldn't be in a hurry to do something like that. Now people can choose "I only want to see chat lines by people with 20 karma" or something like that. There are other issues to consider, but you get the idea there.

So when you reach a certain karma level, you can be selected to moderate. Then you get a limited number of points you can use, so youc an't just go moderate everyone you see, you have to be selective. We'd probably also want to moderate servers. By distributing the points in a more or less anarchic way, we should be able to compensate both for renegade moderators and people just not liking a server's settings.

Then you have friends and foes, too, and you can give them a local karma bonus/penalty.

If we were able to tie it into the forums, then participating on the forums could earn you in-game karma, and vice-versa. That would help to alleviate some of the "new to the forums, old to the game" problems (not that there's many). It would also help prevent players from losing karma when they're not playing, providing they're participating here.

Now you guys take it from there and see what else we can do with a karma system. :)

Upon thinking about it further, I think this might help deal with the clique problem we've got going. We'd at least be able to show some sort of empirical evidence that clans tend to be annoying to many. :) Assuming that's true, anyway, it would at least settle an argument and give one side or the other some clues on what they can do to fix the situation. I think there would also be a tendency for people to quit splitting into smaller communities. Those communities would probably still be there, and that's great and wonderful, but I think there'd be a lot less friction between the different little communities.

Of course it all hinges on identifying players, and the channel through which karma is communicated and moderation points given must be secure. (obligatory grumbling about things we could be working on if we had even just a pretty insecure md5 system)

The only problem I've got with anything in this area is that we can't add it to 0.2.8. I'd really like to hear about what we can slip in to the last 0.2.8 release to give some relief now, while we work on a larger system in 0.3.
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

User avatar
Rain
Round Winner
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: a random empty server playing with bots

Post by Rain »

You didnt get what a "community" is, ady.
To host a server, as I already said, is to give to the community a service, and meantime the possibilty of host it is given by the same community.
The community will react depending on your behaviour.

greetings

ady
On Lightcycle Grid
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:40 pm

Post by ady »

I'll stop to play in LoD servers soon even if I have to play alone or to not play fortress style, I'll not play the lod sumo tourney or the lod world cup.
Why?
Because of LoDs behaviour.
What behaviour are you talking about there?
Ady kept checking IP even if you made nothing wrong, just the beauty of monitor players and feel powerful,
since when monitoring people gives more power? wow, ...
he kept kick as admin players for ridiculous reasons,
ridiculous reasons? tell me one please and i will give u my reasons.
last time I played in sumo he setted spam lenght to 0 so nobody was able to talk.
i stopped that insult interchange some guys had on there and i made them go to spam away, arent u happy?
I can go on, but I think everybody knows what I am talking about.
i dont know what are u talking about.
So people, play in other servers.
You can feel free to play in 2020 server, in °°ps arena (where if you want I can set a sumo), there are a lot of good fortress servers.
advertising your server rain? i dont understand your behaviour, since u joined Hg some months ago ive realised what kind of person are you, if u have one problem with me talk it with me not with other ppl.
ah and im not talking to you about community, im just asking you why did u tell that stupid things, thats all.
Always yours,
Satan

meriton
Round Winner
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:33 am

Post by meriton »

Sure it's possible to build a web of trust, or failing that, a global respect ranking. But before we all spend hours fleshing out such a system, let's not forget the effort needed to implement it. Would this effort be well spent? What are we trying to accomplish? Are there easier solutions?

If we are concerned about clashes between new and regular players, why don't we simply make servers dedicated to different skill levels and announce the kind of server on the server list? (even if its just in the server description?). We might then rework the server browser to display only a filtered list of servers, with a user-selectable filter that defaults to "beginners".

I find the user assessing his skill better than the program doing so, because in everything but single-play, skills are hard to assess automatically. It does not require migrating a user stats file from one system to another (how do you migrate this without involving the user? You don't want to involve him, do you?).

User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11425
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

AdY: Really, that kind of response is absolutely counterproductive. You'll just escalate the nitpicking and calling each other liars etcetera. Flamewars can be entertaining, but those concerning innocent users vs. well-mannered admins are usually just pathetic and let both participants just look like crybabies.
meriton wrote:why don't we simply make servers dedicated to different skill levels and announce the kind of server on the server list?
Simple: new players often don't realize they are new players and may run into problems because of that. They just see a server with many players and jump at it no matter what, because it must be fun there, right? Now, hiding "advanced" servers until the player finds out how to disable the filter may work. It's only slightly evil :)

On the ArmaKarma system: Would it be too limiting to make it mostly local to servers? Fact is, people behave differently on different servers, there are different etiquette rules. The coupling of the servers could be limited to the initial karma values: The master servers keep a list of player names, poll the servers about the players' local karma, calculates a global karma value by taking the median value, and if a server comes and asks "hey master, this player here is unknown to me, what can you tell me about him?" the master gives out the global karma value for the server to use as an initial guess. This scheme would not require too much cryptographic stuff, and especially no clientside code.

Sooo, how could we use karma? The core of the slashdot system is that good karma people are selected as moderators from time to time. We should work from there and build the rest of the system around it.

What should moderators be able to do? Key concern is to avoid moderator abuse. The /. system, giving the moderator a limited set of tokens, looks nice. We could give a moderator some tokens, and he can use them up for various moderation tasks of various token cost. Possibilities:
- silence, kill, kick and kickban players
- any selection remote admin commands the server admin explicitly unlocks
- raise/lower other players karma values
The player's karma value should determine the lenght of the ban. The token cost of first killing, then kicking, then banning someone should be lower than that of an immediate kickban.

Should moderators be allowed to play while they moderate? On /., you can't moderate and talk in the same discussion, I think that's wise. However, not being able to play would be a major letdown; nobody would want to be moderator then. We need to think of something else, maybe a way to detect and punish bad moderators.

How do we determine the karma? Key point here is to avoid self sustaining ruling classes. If moderators determine karma values and karma values determine moderators, I could, once moderator for the first time, just raise the karma of my cronies, and when they get to be moderators, they raise mine.

Two problems already. Maybe we can solve them at once, borrowing another slashdot concept? Keep the logfiles of moderation and put them up on a website. Everyone who was not online during that time could be allowed to read the logs and metamoderate. They could rate the moderators. Blattant abuses of moderator power, like karmaing up your cronies, lowering the karma of your enemies for no immediate reason, or kicking everyone who plays better than you, would get detected and punished by massive karma loss. The system must avoid that a player metamoderates his enemy down every time; perhaps the metamoderation site would just list one selected moderation try to avoid pairing up a certain moderator and a certain metamoderator as much as possible.

There also are statistical methods to detect abuse in the long run. Say a player is usually not rated by moderators, occasionally gets karma bonus, but everytime moderator x is in power, he gets kicked. That stuff is easy to detect by comparing global averages (moderation actions by all moderators concerning the player) with local averages (moderation ations by one moderator). The findings shouldn't be punished automatically, of course, but they could receive extra metamoderation.

Should there always be a moderator on a server? I'd say no. Moderators should be summoned by the players. Everyone should be able to say "darn, I want a moderator here", and one should get selected according to a formula involving the karma and the time since the players last moderated (the player with the highest product of the two, maybe?), and of course not choosing the summoner himself. Server admins should be able to control the amount of moderation allowed by limiting the amount of moderation tokens to give out depending on the server activity.

Last issue: balance. How do we avoid the average karma from drifting either up or down? Down would be the more probalbe direction: there are plenty of possible reasons to punish players, but what whould be worth an award? On slashdot, that's articles and meaningful contribution to the discussion. For us, it should be fair play or whatever, but that should be the norm. Maybe we should just make it a zero sum thing, everytime I lower someone's karma, everyone else (currently online, excluding myself) gets lifted up? Moderators could also be given a cheap "everyone has been nice, keep it up, here's some karma for everyone" action. Maybe that should be the only way to increase karma.

End of line, err, rambling.

meriton
Round Winner
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:33 am

Post by meriton »

z-man wrote:Simple: new players often don't realize they are new players and may run into problems because of that. They just see a server with many players and jump at it no matter what, because it must be fun there, right? Now, hiding "advanced" servers until the player finds out how to disable the filter may work. It's only slightly evil :)
Hey, I never said I was Good ;)

Seriously, I think a player can't help noticing whether he has already played online. I agree calling the category "beginner" invites a subjective judgement, but what about calling it "new players" and displaying the clarification "for players new to online play" as help text?

Personally, I'd consider this entirely sufficient.

I agree ArmaKarma would be nice, still, it violates KISS.

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

Yeah, I should point out I'm not behind this karma thing, but talking about it should come up with lots of interesting stuff at least, and might lead to a simpler system, and I'd really like to see something we can reasonably fit into 0.2.8 to give some relief now.

You bring up an interesting possibility I hadn't even considered, z-man, that the system should allow quite nicely. Players asking the server for a moderator and the server picks one randomly and assigns him to fix the problem.

I was thinking that certain actions shouldn't be tied into the karma system. Having vote polls tie into the karma system would probably be nice, but ingame admin actions shouldn't. I don't think the system should give admins any sort of advantage, I could set up a server and call it something like "Titties and beer", which would immediately get half the community in there to see it, and kick everyone. Now I've lured everyone into a karma trap. We could have polls for rewarding players by gifting their karma, though, for when someone does something exceptional.

I think one of the keys is in metamoderation. It would be possible for me to setup a server, get all my cronies in there, and go through a series of polls gifting ourselves until we're gods, and then go trash the world. So servers have to be subject to karma on their own, and players need to be able to metamoderate the servers themselves.

So you bring up the idea of having the system local to a server, and I'm thinking that should not only be possible, but it should be opt-in anyway, like anything else. Karma has no effect on your server by default, although it is tracked, and you have to enable it to get any use out of it, then you have to enable it to tie into any sort of global network. It would be nice if it were possible for folks to subdivide, so when someone winds up with a community that really dislikes ours and doesn't want to participate here, they should be able to set up the system for themselves, and we can then metamoderate them amongst ourselves (without giving them a global penalty, of course), and they can do the same right back at us. I wouldn't like to see this happen, but I'd like people to be able to do it.

Ok, that's what I thought up reading your post, now to specific points. :)

@behaving differently on different servers
I consider this a problem to be solved. Think of it like the old "you're always nice to me when he's here, but when he's not here you're a dick to me". A large network that everyone's more or less tied into would allow a community standard to evolve that would see enforcement of sorts everywhere, obviously stronger on some servers than on others. I think that would be a Good Thing. :) Obviously it should be configurable enough to a server admin that he can pick and choose the parts he wants so his server will run the way he wants it, and he can get benefits from the system even if he doesn't use all of it. That's where it's possible for people to behave differently, they might take a karma penalty on other servers, but you expect that when you go to the red light district.

It might be useful to just collect karma values from servers and not keep a master value anywhere, and to cut the forums into it we'd just setup the forums with their own karma server. That way when I metamoderate some dumb clan server for myself, I can also see karma ratings for players that play there and have their own karma ratings. For example, I hate clan FUK, those guys are jerks, and I figure I want any of those players to see a karma penalty that's inversely proportional to their karma on the FUK server. That at least gives us a distributed system.... ;)

@moderator tasks
I was personally thinking moderators can only give karma to people and take it away, but they can give more than they can take. So it's easier to reward people than to penalize them. Unless you want a karma mode of 0, or at least a median near 0. And also certain things should never be affected by karma, like vote-kicking. Even now we see without a real karma system the problem, and karma would exacerbate it. A good example was somewhere around 6-8 months ago, I was on Swampland and behaving like an ass (yes, even I misbehave sometimes). The poor victim of my behavior tried to kick me, but *couldn't* because with a certain set of players I am virtually unkickable. And I have to say I'm flattered by this, but somewhat disappointed. Karma should never make it impossible to take action against a player. Maybe it could raise the bar against certain players. Like FUK shouldn't be able to fill up a server with their players and kick someone they hate and then leave. I would probably be against karma giving someone any kind of bonus or penalty in polls. I like the idea of asking the server for a moderator to resolve a problem and the server picks based on its own metamoderation scheme and stuff, but maybe we should consider that all he can do is kick a player without penalty, if that.

I would rather see a server admin use metamoderation to give moderators privileges. So I could metamoderate my own server to give Lobsters and Swamplanders bonuses, and then say "anybody with a karma of 30 can kick/silence players", and as long as Lobsters and Swamplanders keep their own servers pretty clean, my server will benefit from this. I could also make the FUK guys into virtual pariahs on my server and only my server.

@ playing while moderating
Depends on what 'moderating' winds up being. I don't really have an answer other than acknowledging that the usefulness of the system decreases dramatically if you can't moderate while playing.

@ balancing
I don't really have an answer. :) I've been trying to figure out what the function should look like, and trying to avoid the bell curve. I was thinking about using a decay system like the ladder already has, but a tad better (decaying at other times besides when the server restarts :) ). That would require players to make regular contributions, so you couldn't just save up a bunch of karma and become a god. I think that if people are more likely to punish than reward, we could find some balance by making it harder to punish than reward.

I'm pretty stumped on how to balance it. :) There are probably lots of ways to work the algorithm, but we probably need to know what the function looks like before we know how to force it to the shape we want, and then we have to determine the best shape to force it into.
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

User avatar
Canada
Average Program
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:17 am
Location: Hmm?

Post by Canada »

im sure what ever Lucifer is blabbing on about is very important... :P



No but really, at first this was just a whine, and now it actualy has a point, respect is very important, and controls the destiny of the game, always remember that there is a real person on the other end on the game, playing just like you.
Image

whatup
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 9:08 pm

Post by whatup »

ok, buddy, first of all, that was obviously edited because my name was never "WhatUp", it was always "~*wHaTuP*~" Although i believe you did get what i said right, pretty much..

Ok, first, some of us do take this game seriously (i do some of the time, and right then i was) and you not grinding, similarly to how earlier, jose, the middle guy, kept turning around, was screwing up the entire team and kept making us lose. and, you, being an idiot, say you know how to grind but then decide not to. i ask you to grind repeatedly and you deny my requests. then one time you finally oblige and agree to grind. however, halfway to the sumo in the middle, you double bind, trapping the entire team in an small area... you proceeded to do this on two other occaisions, which shows why you deserved to be kicked.. if you want to have fun playing tron (or whatever you consider to be fun, i.e. not playing by the rules, ******* around, wahtever.. cause personally i enjoy the team aspect of the game, working together, etc..) then don't go to a team server.. go to swampland or something where you can do whatever you want and not get kicked for pissing off your team..

now keep in mind i didn't read any posts on this thread except the first one..

User avatar
Canada
Average Program
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:17 am
Location: Hmm?

Post by Canada »

First of all i do not want to take it in the way where 'i hate you and nothing's going to tell me otherwise' its completely the opposite of that, i just want to clarify it.

[Quote] or whatever you consider to be fun, i.e. not playing by the rules, ****ing around, wahtever.. cause personally i enjoy the team aspect of the game, working together, etc..) [end Quote] i found this sectence, or run on sentence, what ever you want to call it quite funny, not in a mean way, but in a logical way, everyone labels fun under different categorys and no, lets not assume stuff, i dont not think killing my own team is 'fun'
Image

Post Reply