Kicking

[AngryMasturbator]

The host could abuse it as well, I'm against that, not necessary.

Host can only veto, wether the player is kicked, he can not kick when he wants to.

[Vomitus]

The host could abuse it as well, I'm against that, not necessary.

Host can only veto, wether the player is kicked, he can not kick when he wants to.

Sorry for my bad French but this is bullshit. Everyone already has tools like CustomKick and host ALREADY has absolute ability to kick anyone. So why should we add any other 'abilities'?
YOU MUST deeply realize that you are nearly fully responsible for a game when you HOST.
YOU MUST deeply realize that HOST - is a Master of the game, he rules it and you should think twice when joining his game.

Such politics may sound scary and gloomy but when decision is hard to make for the masses(I do not deny their right to do), we must lay on host's wiseness. If he makes wrong(or makes wrong too often) - do not play with him/banlist him. If you did wrong in this case - be patient to listen other players' objections and make conclusions for yourself.

I hope a make myself clear.

[Tribulation]

I hope a make myself clear.

Not really. My point is that the host maybe somewhat more skilled than the average player, but that's it, he is as likely to be irresponsible and abusive as anybody else. The kicking system is fine as it is.

P.S. The situation would be fucked up if the whole point of hosting, in your opinion, was to have power over others and be the "master" of a game. In that case, the last thing such hosts should be given is more power through a veto.

[AngryMasturbator]

The host could abuse it as well, I'm against that, not necessary.

Host can only veto, wether the player is kicked, he can not kick when he wants to.

*Sorry for my bad French but this is bullshit.
**Everyone already has tools like CustomKick and host ALREADY has absolute ability to kick anyone.
***yOU MUST deeply realize that HOST - is a Master of the game, he rules it and you should think twice when joining his game.

*You are speaking in english not french
**Nope
*** you say that but you opose the veto?

[Tribulation]

Offtopic: "Sorry for my french" is an expression in English, meaning that you apologize for the kind of language you will use, knowing that you will be using swearwords.

I know that you do not want to give the host the possibility of kicking whoever he wants, but having a veto against (possibly all) other players can be abused as well, e.g. if the host vetoes the kicking of a feeder in the enemy-team because he wants to keep getting fed by the feeder.

[Vomitus]

Offtopic: "Sorry for my french" is an expression in English, meaning that you apologize for the kind of language you will use, knowing that you will be using swearwords.

Btw, not only in English:)

**Nope

That does not prevent host to have it. Silent and powerful, this ideal tool of retribution can save tonnes of nerves while playing public.
It also could be used against you by impious person. So it is up to you to decide: to be or not to be?

*** you say that but you opose the veto?

Yes, I do oppose the veto.
Host does not need even more power - he already has it in full that is enough.

[AngryMasturbator]

Picture a scenario, a jackass is trying to kick other players to get his money, everyone says yes, but the guy is a good player, so the host can say no and thats it, no kicking. He has no power to kick, only to prevent kicking.

[Vomitus]

Well, I actually have been never seen such situation on my server. Thou I think such jackass deserves the strongest punishment as we can bestow - immediate kick & banlist him. Fortunately, I had no such experience. This is a grave manifestation of vandalism.

[Tribulation]

I have never had such a situation either, and I believe that the other players would be smart & responsible enough not to kick their best player, as well as the enemy. This situation seems rather unlikely, so not giving anymore power to the host still remains the priority.

[Vomitus]

I fully agree.

[Frechheit]

The Kicking System is good as it is!

Yesterday i was playing with a Host called afk-gmbh and we were winning clearly. What happened?

Teammate and i were kicked with kick-tool. We played 40 minutes for nothing. Such a Crap.

Host shouldnt get the rights to kick.

mfg Frech

[AngryMasturbator]

The Kicking System is good as it is!

Yesterday i was playing with a Host called afk-gmbh and we were winning clearly. What happened?

Teammate and i were kicked with kick-tool. We played 40 minutes for nothing. Such a Crap.

Host shouldnt get the rights to kick.

mfg Frech

FOR FUCKS SAKE, ive been trying to explain over 7 posts, that i don't want the ability to kick, i wan't the ability to stop someone being kicked for the host, gosh!

[DerSatan]

yeah, you explained that.


and nobody else wants the host to have a veto right for kicking.

[Andibert]

You shouldnt make the kicking system too complicated

Its good as it is.

Veto and such things only reduce balance instead of increasing it.

Stupid arseholes keep stupid arseholes, altering the kicking system doesnt change. They will find a way to spoil the game if they want.

[horselance]

It should stay like this.

[jonjon]

so much commotion over a -kick command.
i think everyone can exercise some common sense when it comes to kicking.

noobs are not an excuse for kicking. it's luck of the draw. you get what you receive. don't be afraid to lose. don't be afraid of losing.

and of course you're always gonna get dick heads like:
- people literally telling you to fuck off because they want the mid lane alone.
- general nuisances such as ragers, chronic signallers and i even had opponents telling me off for backdooring when there's no such thing.
- people hurling abuse at others for no reason.

i'm sure there's more... and all of these which you can tell them off calmly and that there's no reason for them to be doing it.