How should the kicksystem work?

[gozo1985]

Unified Doom started a poll for -giveup votes. I will do it for -kick here

System 1:
A player should be kickable the whole time/game with the only requirement of a reason (written by the kickvoter) - voted by ALL players.

System 2:
A player should be kickable the whole time/game with the only requirement of a reason (written by the kickvoter) - voted by the TEAM players.

System 3:
A player should only be kickable if the "system" or better the script says he is kickable (feeding, AFK,...).

Remember its possible to abuse ALL these three systems for example by starting kickvotes with "a lie" and different opinions or the fact that many game-sabotage actions are not efficient to detect by scripts.

---

Sorry, i forgot the option of removing the -kick command or just tell if you think another system may work with a reply here.

[eSVau]

How about:

• the "system" decides wether someone is kickable or not
  
• only the team can initiate a kick
  
• both teams can vote
  

or simple remove this feature

[Prog]

The current one is the best kick option i can think of. The only better way would be to remove it completely again.

[gozo1985]

The current one is the best kick option i can think of. The only better way would be to remove it completely again.

i dont think so. right now you cant kick someone if hes not feeding or afk - he can continue with his "evil plan" until the end of the game.

[griffin1987]

How about:

• the "system" decides wether someone is kickable or not
  
• only the team can initiate a kick
  
• both teams can vote
  

or simple remove this feature

I'd propose the same, with one small change to the first point:
[*]the "system" decides how many votes are needed to kick someon

(-> everyone is always kickable given enough votes)

Don't know if it's possible, but there have also been some suggestions (and I support them) to have the kick algorithm for the qualify bot work differently, so that more votes are needed (up to 9 at max of course)

Edit: P.S.: Removing the -kick function would be okay with me as well if you find a way to tell people that their penalty doesn't matter for qualify games (many people seem to think that it matters, though they only ever play qualify ...)

[Prog]

The current one is the best kick option i can think of. The only better way would be to remove it completely again.

i dont think so. right now you cant kick someone if hes not feeding or afk - he can continue with his "evil plan" until the end of the game.

I'd rather have a toxic player in there once in a while, than people kicking for terrible reasons.

[UnifiedDoom]

How about:

• the "system" decides wether someone is kickable or not
  
• only the team can initiate a kick
  
• both teams can vote
  

or simple remove this feature

When you say only the team can initiate a kick, do you mean one player on said team, or the votes of that entire team?

Personally I'm against any system that allows the enemy team to vote. It sounds good on paper that the enemy team would act "honorably" making a kick more impartial, but it's way to easy to abuse. You'll have tons of cases of purposefully feeding people and afkers not being kicked because the enemy wants their gold/win.

My only real problem with the current system is that it's too hard initiate a kick, but too easy for kick penalties to accumulate in rapid succession once a player has reached a kick-able point leading to votes requiring only 1-2 people. Personally I'd like to keep it at 3-4 votes all the time, otherwise ragers would just kick their whole team when they can. I can't really see a situation where lowering the votes required for a kick is necessary, except in the extremely rare situation in which multiple people afk or purposefully feed.

The system can't recognize some offenses like "excessive flaming/lagging" which would be nice to have kick-able, but that can't really be helped.

[gozo1985]

The current one is the best kick option i can think of. The only better way would be to remove it completely again.

i dont think so. right now you cant kick someone if hes not feeding or afk - he can continue with his "evil plan" until the end of the game.

I'd rather have a toxic player in there once in a while, than people kicking for terrible reasons.

both horrible daily scenarios

[griffin1987]

How about:

• the "system" decides wether someone is kickable or not
  
• only the team can initiate a kick
  
• both teams can vote
  

or simple remove this feature

When you say only the team can initiate a kick, do you mean one player on said team, or the votes of that entire team?

Personally I'm against any system that allows the enemy team to vote. It sounds good on paper that the enemy team would act "honorably" making a kick more impartial, but it's way to easy to abuse. You'll have tons of cases of purposefully feeding people and afkers not being kicked because the enemy wants their gold/win.

My only real problem with the current system is that it's too hard initiate a kick, but too easy for kick penalties to accumulate in rapid succession once a player has reached a kick-able point leading to votes requiring only 1-2 people. Personally I'd like to keep it at 3-4 votes all the time, otherwise ragers would just kick their whole team when they can. I can't really see a situation where lowering the votes required for a kick is necessary, except in the extremely rare situation in which multiple people afk or purposefully feed.

The system can't recognize some offenses like "excessive flaming/lagging" which would be nice to have kick-able, but that can't really be helped.

It's not on paper - it used to work that way before the current kick system and imho there were way less problems, because at the moment people are just like "haha you can't kick me anyway if I move in the base once in a while" or "I'm just gonna continue flaming you because you can't kick me" or "I'll just stay in the corner of the base to not get bad score, that way I won't be kickable" or they just buy a guard and won't be kickable for being afk after being rooted no matter what you do. And there's a whole lot of other situations.

In qualify games, there are at least 2-3 "toxic players" per game. In ranked it's about 1-2 every game. And in reality you have to double those numbers, because they normally only show their real colors if they think they won't win anymore, which can happen after 5 minutes in game.

[BENNIE.FM]

Relating to ranked how about keeping the current kicking system but in addition to that we introduce a master kick system for "Toxic Players who denying to play,buying selling items or game sabotage in this case it lets players from both team attempt to kick the player.
You could only use the master kick for certain reasons that would trigger a votekick.

For Example MK 1 (Sabotage)
or MK 1 (Denial of play)

MK=Master Kick in this case

While still having the current kick system.

The only downside to this is masterkick might get used for players attempting to still play when both teams want the game over and done with.

Having the master for certain reasons could work.

[El_Polacco]

Description of System1 should be remade , allowing vote to enemy players is a bit improper . Back to the topic making kickable of everyone is the best one .
I think the one way to abuse such system is kicking 1 or a few people just to give them penalty in a case when the game is done then those guys should be ban requested .
Let's see an example tinker lane playing mines have 2 times lower level than his lane enemy he is not kickable for a whole game and no giving up as well .

[BENNIE.FM]

My example would only work if there was a majority of fair players in the community of players i suppose ^^ or it wouldn't be needed in the first place i can see now there are a few other flaws i never thought of but it could supposedly work with the addition of the current kick system.

[gozo1985]

Description of System1 should be remade , allowing vote to enemy players is a bit improper .

why? just choose system2 then or if you have other opinions or suggestions post here. im looking forward to good ideas concerning the kicksystem.

[RaptorXI]

By not assuming fairplay (15 years of online-gaming and 10.000+ games played at btanks only) I voted for option 3 as the best way to achieve any fairplay: with only a system/algorithm able to decide if someone is kickable or not, and not on instinct or "inferior feelings". Furthermore the rest of the team (without the proposed player) should exclusivly be able to confirm or decline thekick.

[EarthR]

just a suggestion to add on the current kick system to prevent ppl from staying in base and avoiding fights.

how about giving a penalty point for every lets say 5 min that a player doesnt get a kill/death or a certain number of assists after min 20-30.

[BENNIE.FM]

just a suggestion to add on the current kick system to prevent ppl from staying in base and avoiding fights.

how about giving a penalty point for every lets say 5 min that a player doesnt get a kill/death or a certain number of assists after min 20-30.

I like this is this should be considered i was going to argue but you clearly stated after 20-30min which is great and valid response due to early game i been 0-0-0 for first 20 minutes usually thinks start happening just after 20.

[RaptorXI]

i am really speechless

[Exodus]

I might have to think about a different afk detection algorithm (and then keep quite about the workings, so people can't actively abuse it!). I'll think about it, but it won't be in the next version yet.

[El_Polacco]

As you play ranked you should notice player guanghzou263 . He always have so few deaths while his mid mates need to play 2v3 . His passive creeping as well as lack of teamplay is making him hardcore feeder in late game . Back to the topic he's focusing on his own overall death ratio instead of helping team . Are you going to set creepkills ratio in further votekick system ? Is there any other solution in that case ?

[BENNIE.FM]

i am really speechless

what is this referring to