This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Ripshaft
1
« on: May 08, 2010, 20:05 »
Same thing appears to have happened to me. Fucking stupid new bug, I've tried to leave during countdown only to load the game anyways many times in the past, but this time I tried to leave immediately after seeing start as the 2 players i had sd'd on my team did not look healthy and their team was quite stacked, but it still didnt let me leave, instead sending me to the 'end of game stat screen'. And to add insult to injury, this now gets shown as a leave and can be banned? That's just retarded.
2
« on: April 27, 2010, 22:43 »
Please,it would be great if your bot could kick some players...
Mute players...And things like that...
I assume you mean it would be great if the bot could get up, walk over to people and kick them, in which case, I agree, that would be great, maybe even awesome. Otherwise your post is closer to nonsense. Now a roundhouse kicking bot with a beard, that's not nonsense, that's fucking hard.
3
« on: April 25, 2010, 02:28 »
..... that's a horrible idea. That's already how most people stack, fill your team with stackers and ignore the other team's stats.
4
« on: April 22, 2010, 23:01 »
Randomly checked this thread, this post caught my eye... I found a user named rocknrolla with a 30% win percentage, I'm guessing that's not you. Mabye you're talking about last season, where the personal stats are unfortunately not searchable for some reason, but considering how much the score is weighted towards w/l, you should still be in the top players that are listed in the history, at least in the first few pages, I didnt see anyone there except rock_on who had a remotely similar name. Additionaly, like pretty much every high score player rock_on is clearly a stats abuser, with most games being stacks, and occasional noob games =p
So yeah, i'm curious, who are you? =)
Name rapboy rings a bell ?
Ah that it does, played with you a bunch of times, good player I seem to remember. Stat output seems to be borked right now, so I doubt I'm looking at your real stat overview, but browsing through the first page of your game history, almost all of your wins are in games where you are the only good player among average players, or you are with at least one player who is a clear stack/stomper/organized team with the rest of the players average/below average+random. I'm not at all trying to say this is a shot against you or your ability as a player, or that you intentionally set things up this way, I don't believe this to be the case at all (with the exception of games where you were specifically invited, which are numerous =p), merely that at first glance the games you tend to win are already weighted in your favor, regardless of you putting effort in or not. There are a few games where the odds are against you and you still shine(but generally don't win =/), and there's alot to be said for that. Of course there's also a few games where you're in the stacked side of a very clear stack =p. So yeah, basically it's the same old thing, w/l is irrelevant as a measure of player skill, merely a measure of player depravity at best, though there's always the unusual ones where it doesn't apply quite as much. Which brings me back to my point about the current score system not working for much of anything, let alone a basis for a level system, primarily due to it's weight on w/l.
5
« on: April 22, 2010, 13:12 »
nope score says exactly nothing. end of discussion
i got score on - cause of Many losses cause of bootsofspeedstartbuyers,feederz,nabs on my team and i can easily outplay almost all of the top 50
so no, score says nothing. its impossible for a guy to have 90/10 w/l without playing with friends, or kicking nabs on his side and allowing nabs on the other side. and because he does that, that doesnt mean he is pro at all
thats just the way it is, and then, when he wins, that doesnt mean he is better than the guy on the other side who has killed him 6 times in that game and he didnt at all.
i dont care if you get my point, am just saying.
PS . I only say this because I like to brag and I am very modest 
Of course I can. I'm the living proof you can go 85% win, even after 200 games. And no, friends are not included. And most of the games played vs stacked teams/friends/PRO players m3nj.
Randomly checked this thread, this post caught my eye... I found a user named rocknrolla with a 30% win percentage, I'm guessing that's not you. Mabye you're talking about last season, where the personal stats are unfortunately not searchable for some reason, but considering how much the score is weighted towards w/l, you should still be in the top players that are listed in the history, at least in the first few pages, I didnt see anyone there except rock_on who had a remotely similar name. Additionaly, like pretty much every high score player rock_on is clearly a stats abuser, with most games being stacks, and occasional noob games =p So yeah, i'm curious, who are you? =) Edit: sorry just realized this has absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic, my appologies, so to at least stay somewhat on focus... umm... I think the idea behind what is being suggested would be nice to have as an available command, however I doubt it would be used much/at all, and when used might have some nasty effects. The criteria for analyzing statistical data to determine good players is a very tricky thing, as I discovered in my somewhat in-depth study of stacks and analyzing statistical trends. The end result of the proposed idea that i see is not having games that are all that different from just picking any random sample of people in dota, at least without a much more complex level test criteria. So yeah, long complex bullshit made short: The idea of leveled games is a good one, but not something easily implemented. If the scoring system was overhauled to be something that realistically represents a players approximate or relative skill level, then sure that could be used, but I think the end result would be inconsistent. If the current scoring system were used, it would not work at all, because people with high scores only get it from abusing the stat system, and they would never want to play a fair/leveled game. As for the lower levels, it's random as hell. The current scoring system is horrid, that's about it.
6
« on: April 15, 2010, 01:33 »
I think something harsher than 15min would be needed to really get the point across, 1 day seems reasonable. A warning message to this extent when people join and start d/ling would probabably even out the negative effect.
As has been mentioned, the bot does auto spoofcheck, it only asks for manual when this fails. If the bot didn't auto spoofcheck, EVEYRONE would have to spoofcheck. I also am fairmly of the stance that language has no place in being blamed for people not spoofchecking, no matter what language you speak, when people are constantly saying your name and repeating what to type, you should understand what is going on, unless you're not paying attention, or mentally handicapped. Both of these conditions affect most of the dota population, so this is the main reason we have so many losers who just sit around stunned when asked to sc, over and over.
Perhaps it would be nice to have an auto pubbing system or command available... but as for reasoning, 'to go browse interwebs' is not a good reason for this feature, it's an excellent reason against it. Ek0's response of it causing flood once again confuses me, I cant see any potential way this could cause flood if it's programmed even remotely competently. A simple !autopub on/off/toggle command that auto !pub's every say 30 sec seems perfectly reasonable (obviously disabling use of !pub while enabled). All this said, I don't personally think this feature is really needed, or does it take priority over some of the more immediate issues with the bot, but it would be something easy enough to add, and some would find it useful.
7
« on: April 07, 2010, 23:07 »
Remove !banlast and !ban, auto ban all volountary leavers, except those who are leaving under reasons justified in the rules.
I like the idea of auto ban but need to think some more on when to/not to auto ban a player, i see this very likely to be implemented in the future.
I don't agree, what about games like this?
All players should be banned?
Once 4 players vote for !rmk in a 5v5 in the first 10min, leaving is apparently ok. So obviously this would be coded in and nobody would get banned.
rofl did you read what you said ? lets say sentinel is getting kills, 4 or 5 of scourge say !rmk, in a pathetic attempt to save their asses, they wont get banned if they leave ?
I never said I like it, i think it's pretty retarded, but those are the rules. I've been banned for banning someone who left under these conditions, when it was obvious they only left to save themselves.
8
« on: April 07, 2010, 01:49 »
Remove !banlast and !ban, auto ban all volountary leavers, except those who are leaving under reasons justified in the rules.
I like the idea of auto ban but need to think some more on when to/not to auto ban a player, i see this very likely to be implemented in the future.
I don't agree, what about games like this?
All players should be banned?
Once 4 players vote for !rmk in a 5v5 in the first 10min, leaving is apparently ok. So obviously this would be coded in and nobody would get banned.
9
« on: April 06, 2010, 05:08 »
Votekick's abuse potential is always a problem as long as there is a vote, given the nature of the average dota player. To reduce this signifigantly, have only the host/owner able to call !votekick, paired with a signifigant ban for votekick abuse, and a message broadcasting this much to the players whenever a !votekick is called, with information on how to reach the forum.
Something like this already exists in a different way, it's called !votecancel. It's a command available only to the host, he can use it to cancel the !votekick instantly.
Wow I didn't know about that, that's very useful, ty!
10
« on: April 03, 2010, 05:59 »
Intro
My suggestions so far deal with either optional commands that many will find useful - or that are too controversial to be made default - and general changes that would have little to no notable negative impact to the competitive player while providing large potential bonuses to all players.
... but that's not because that's just what I want... I just think that kind of stuff is needed. What I'd actually like to see done, what I'd do if I controlled the bots, is much more dramatic, and figured I'd get it off my chest, because it bugs the shit out of me almost every game.
The Changes:
First, remove !ping and !from completely.
Remove !banlast and !ban, auto ban all volountary leavers, except those who are leaving under reasons justified in the rules.
Remove !synclimit, !setlatency, add a 20 second delay after connection window pops up until host can use !drop.
Add a !voteteamunmute (only the player's team has to vote, only unmutes for team speak)
In the same way, have a !votemute and !voteteammute that work in the same way as above, but with muting. Also add a signifigant ban for teams of friends muting the odd man out, or just anyone muting without due cause, and broadcast this when !voteteammute is used.
Remove !muteall, or modify it so that it actually does mute ALL, and make it enterable only within the first 3 min or so. Add an equivalent vote function called !votemuteall which would be the same as the old !muteall, but requiring 60-80% vote.
[rev 6]With personal muting (see below) in place, there's really no need for the host or anyone to have muting power. Remove all mute commands other than the personal muting.
Votekick's abuse potential is always a problem as long as there is a vote, given the nature of the average dota player. To reduce this signifigantly, have only the host/owner able to call !votekick, paired with a signifigant ban for votekick abuse, and a message broadcasting this much to the players whenever a !votekick is called, with information on how to reach the forum.
Change the current scoring algorithm to remove the w/l ratio entirely, then apply the w/l ratio to adjust the score: 50% w/l no change, >50% w/l = reduction in score proportional to amount, <50% w/l increase in score proportional to amount. This is only a temporary change until a real scoring system is in place. This heavily normalize the scores and significantly reduce the score inflation caused by stackers. Obviously the goal of this is to reduce stacking, resulting in a higher amount of actual balanced good games.
Change the backdoor rule from 'there is not backdoor rule' to 'clear and plain backdoor rule' - there must be a uninterrupted line of creeps leading to the building, and creeps at the building, to attack it. An alternative would be to allow the host to declare and enforce the backdoor rule with cooperation from ban forum admins.
To deal with stacking in the shortterm, add !votescramble, requiring 50% votes to pass. While the vote is in progress, the game cannot be started. Think of it as waiting for spoofcheck but more like a stackcheck. The votescramble will not change the position of the player in slot 1/0 (blue). If the vote passes, another vote may not be made until the host uses !swap or another slot manipulation tool. Not perfect, just a damn good option.
[rev 2] Allow !hold to only be used if there is a slot open or closed (and not being held for someone), if there isnt one, display message saying to close a slot. When !hold is used, it will automatically close a slot. If the slot is opened, it will auto-re-close, displaying a message saying 'slot x currently held for player [playername]', after 5 seconds if the slot's attempted to be opened again the slot will open and the player will no longer be on !hold, and a message displaying this will be displayed. !unhold [playername] would also be an added command, who's use should be obvious. The above is easy enough to code in, for a slightly more advanced implementation, a dummy player, called 'HELD' or something similar, with a coloured name, could be used to hold the slot, to make it even more obvious that the slot is held for a player.
[rev 2] Add auto suppression text filters. Ie when the filter conditions are satisfied, the text is suppressed (does not get seen by anyone other than person typing it). I'm sure there's many that people can think of, but for absolute certainty in my mind... Any sentence containing: 'gg' at any point before end of game, 'finish' at any point. 'don't def/stop def' at any point, 'balance' at any point in a game with -so. Obviously case insenitive, bad grammar assumed, multiple permutations of the text .etc; just giving examples.
[rev 2] Add logging of !swap use in lobby, make intentional stacking a bannable offence.
[rev 2] Add personal mute options, ie !pmute [playername], mutes that player for you personally, does not echo the message, nobody will know you typed it. No vote, obviously. Also a !mutescourge !mutesent and !muteall available to all players not requiring vote and not echoing.
[rev 3] Suppress !sd messages, ie when someone types !sd [whatever], nobody else sees it.
[rev 3] Once the game is full (all slots occupied/closed) for 6 seconds, a full listing of players in order by slot and their abbreviated stats is echo'ed out for all to see. Should make it easy to identify stacks or just poorly balanced games. It would make sence to tack this at the beginning of the game log along with the other info (swap log etc) stated above as well.
[rev 4] if !shuffleplayers is used, disallow it to be used again until there has been significant disruption in the slots, ie 2-3 swaps/player leavings/joinings.
[rev 5] If a player 'loses connection' for any reason within one minute of dying, the host can ban. The host is obviously held responsible and banned if there's insufficient reason to believe the player plugged.
Some Reasoning:
Now, to explain some of my reasoning;
The removal of !ping and !from, is simply because these are completely useless commands. The bot auto pings, auto checks connection stability, the bot is better at this than any player will ever be, the average player has absolutely no concept of what a ping is or it's correlation with connection stability, if any. Also, where a player is from has as much correlation with their game performance as their colour of skin, it's an absurd discrimination that should not be made available.
The removal and automation of !banlast/!ban is fairly self explanatory, it's pretty silly that it's not allready automated.
The removal of !synclimit, !setlatency if for basically the same reason as removal of !ping, the people using these commands have no idea what they're actually doing, and they're used in completely unnecessary and damaging ways, !synclimit is really only ever used to !drop people, and it's effect on the player who is lagging means that now their hero can be killed while they lag, where without intervention they'd be safe. !setlatency is either never used or used only to show how 'pro' the host is by spamming commands available, I'm not sure if the bot auto corrects latency issues, but regardless, this is not something that should be controlled by a player, ever.
The !votemutes and !voteunmutes all deal with the current issue of the host having the only control over this very important function. If a person on your team is being a flaming jackass, and you're not on the host's team, you often will not be able to get him muted. This results in a signifigant negative impact on enjoyment of the game. Poor morale is responsible for 70-90% of fail in my experience, losers who are crying in the team about the team are responsible for most of this.
The removal of !muteall is fairly straightforward, communication between the teams and players on the teams is an important feature, to have it taken away without requiring a reason is absurd. If it's something everyone wants, then sure, you can vote for it with !votemuteall. Keep in mind many players are disconnected from bnet shortly after the game starts, most people don't know about the !private commands, meaning they have no known way to communicate with the host to indicate there's any problem if !muteall is used (something they never consented to).
The reasoning behind the votekick change is pretty much explained in the change notes. This of course doesn't prevent abuse, just reduces the accountability for it to one person, the host. The host would have to at least know about the playdota.eu channel, which already makes them a more aware player than most of the people who play on the bot, so they'd probably be more wary about getting banned for abuse as well. This combined with the notification of penalty for abuse of the system I believe would have a significant effect on reducing the current level of abuse of this command, which is more or less restricted only to !ragekick. This is a command that should be used incredibly rarely, only to boot players that are in clear violation of the rules and wanting to ruin the game.
The backdoor rule I just think is needed for proper sporstmanship. Almost every player understands the backdoor rule and why it's in, though they may not be able to explain it. I mean alot of people know that there's no backdoor rule on playdota, and we very rarely see it, that should say something. Most players will honor the backdoor rule without ever knowing about it or being told about it, they will however blatantly backdoor when they fear that they are going to lose, or when they're short on time. This is absolute bullshit in my opinion, which is why I advocate the change. I do not want to win due to backdoor. Ever. It's garbage.
[rev 2] Fairly self explanatory, should stop some of the abuse from bad hosts who don't know how to use !hold. This of course wont stop the people who don't even bother to use !hold, but it should stop the people who do from abusing it due to lack of knowledge.
[rev 2] The auto suppression is fairly self explanatory, it's meant to stop messages that provide absolutely no benefit but have great potential to piss off or demoralize players, thereby ruining a game. As I've said before, demoralization is responsible for 90+% of fail in dota that I've seen. Whining in text for contributes alot to this.
[rev 2] The swap logging and stack ban changes are very straightforward, they are meant to help stop or greatly reduce stacking. Ideally the swap logging can be present at the start of the chat log that's posted after a match. With a simple record of who was swapped with who to what slots, ignoring players who were not present for game start, and a listing of the slots with what players are in them at game start.
[rev 2] The personal mute options I had thought of many times before, but it's one of those things that's so obvious you forget about, so it missed the first posting. Very simple straightforward option, I would use it heavily, and I know many others would if they knew about it. Even with all the other votemute functions in place, this can be a faster and more elegant solution to your flaming/whining jackass problems.
[rev 3] Another painfully obvious thing, alot of people whine about !sd 'spam' now, simple solution is to suppress it, since all text handling is mediated by the bot.
[rev 3] I've made a suggestion like this before, and the reply I got was that it would cause flood, I asked what they meant and they did not reply, any form of flooding can be overcome with proper coding. I know that this type of function is possible as I've seen similar implementations on other bots, and there's no technical limitation that I am aware of.
[rev 4]This is something I just ran into today, a host repeatedly !sp'd - I'm not sure if he intentionally !sp'd until all the players on sent were good except the player in slot 1, but that's definately how it worked out. There's no reason to shuffle more than once when all the players are the same, and the type of abuse i just described is more than possible, so makes sense to stop that, this does that.
[rev 5]Pretty self explanatory, this should cover most rageplugs. It wont cover the 'cry/i give up/no chance plugs', but it should take some heat off the ban admins and help reduce the overall number of rageplugs.
[rev 6]Put the power to mute asshats where it belongs, in the hands of every player. If you dont want to hear someone, for any reason, you should be able to mute them. You also shouldn't have to deal with people muting other players to you without your consent. This solves all those problems and more. Zero chance of mute abuse, full responsibility on each player who uses it.
So yeah, I'll probably add more when I remember, but those are most of the main ones I think. Mabye you'll find some of them of interest.
Edit: added some formatting... might make it easier to read, who knows.
Edit: added a revision number to the title.
[rev 2] Edit: added revision notes for the added stuff.
[rev 3] I should also mention again, I am quite a capable codemonkey, I am certain I can code any of these suggestions I have mentioned, and would gladly do so if asked.
11
« on: February 24, 2010, 22:57 »
Reading fail =/ My suggestion does not categorize or seperate people as noob or pro, it only creates easily useable safeguards for extreme noobs from pro games and likely pros from noob games. Not the other way around. The commands are to tell who is definately not noob or pro, not to determine or descriminate who is noob or pro, everything applies in the lobby only, no distinctions are made that reflect on the user anywhere else.
As for the other comments...
complexity; there's 3 general categories of people who this applies to, the programmers, end hosts, and end user/client. The !noob and !pro commands should be relatively easy to program and apply to anyone familiar with the bot code, and is excessively simple as far as programming jobs go. To the hosts, all they need to do is type the command once per game if wanted, and that's it, for clients, if they care they can see if it's enabled, no other involvement is required. I'm not sure what part of that is more complex than putting on your socks in the morning.
transparency; how transparent the system is depends on the end program, if the programmer feels like it they can very easily echo out the logic for the resulting actions (ie when someone's kicked/denied), if not, it's still not really a big deal to most people, they'll really only complain if it does not work very well or not at all.
And my previous general suggestion about the teamstack is also present in this one. They're all meant to work in tandem, each addressing different issues of the greater problem of finding consistent good games.
12
« on: February 24, 2010, 01:09 »
Not going to bog down with a big intro, just gonna get right to it.
Things that are needed for playdota.eu bots
A way to quickly know if the game you've just joined is stacked for one team (pub stomp)
A way to quickly know if one team is a group of friends who almost always plays together (pub stomp)
A way to quickly drop or otherwise avoid noobs in a pro game.
A way to quickly drop or otherwise avoid pros in a noob game.
A realistic scoring system.
Now, for some more detail. Basically, almost every game I join that I'm not hosting myself is victim to one of those problems. When I do host myself, it's a very tedious duty to check every player that joins, knowing that about 40 will join and leave before the game even gets started. The bot can easily have the functionality to prevent these problems. It is highly unrealistic for players joining a game to be able to check about the above problems properly. You can join and start !sd'ing every player, but chances are the game will start before you get through more than 5 of them, and even if you discover the teams are stacked, there's nothing you can do about it unless the host cares, which is unlikely since it's near impossible to stack without the host's consent. Additionally it's not realistically possible to check for teams of friends in game, you can alt tab and look at their stats, and see if they share a ton of games together, but by the time you alt tab back, the game will most likely have started and the noobs on your team will be typing in -afk before you've got your hero, and then you have to sit through a steamroll.
****
Edit: Just fyi, awhile back I started intentionally joining stacks to discover the clearest criteria for how to identify what makes a stack. Now what it really comes down to is the following: A mega stacker will always have an incredibly unrealistic w/l ratio, due to the current score system strongly favoring w/l over all else, this also results in an incredibly inflated score.
Bottom line: Fastest way to avoid a stack currently is to first identify the owner of the game you've joined, and then check his stats, if his w/l ratio is completely impossible for a pubber, you're probably in a stack. To confirm, check the other players on the owner's team, chances are they will all/mostly have a impossible w/l ratio as well.
If you want to be extra sure, ask the host to shuffle and see the reaction =p or check the players on your team, they usually have severely negative k/d ratios.
However, it does seem from the results of my tests that there's not always an easy way to verify a definitive stack. Checking for a cumulative score difference of 100 between the teams generally means stack if it goes through, though I have had normal, and even good games where this is the case, the inflated stats of a few players can really throw off these numbers. Also alot of really good players have terrible scores, due to the scoring system explicitly favoring stackers. If the score is ignored, alot of stackers still have garbage k/d ratios despite how much they win. So yeah, like i said, not easy to properly define based purely on the score stats. In the end the w/l ratio is the best way I can see to properly identify them. A simple check like seeing if 2 or more players on the team have a win percentage of 70%+ would probably do the best to identify stacking.
Of course true stackers, who only stack to stomp noobs would have no real problem getting around this by intentionally reducing their w/l ratio. Ah well like i said, no perfect solution but I'm still thinking on it.
****
So... Now that the needs are somewhat clear, solutions;
As for the scoring system, I've read that they're currently working on it. The current system places a massive emphasis on w/l ratio, which is completely irrelevant, and influenced most by abuse of the system rather than any form of player skill. People with the highest w/l ratios tend to be the most unskilled of players, only playing noob stomps or otherwise arranged games. With a new realistic scoring system in place, it can be applied as a single stat of reference in many of the features I will suggest from this point in.
A way to quickly know if the game you've just joined is stacked for one team (pub stomp)
An average of the player scores for both teams should be compared when the host submits !start, or just periodically, if the ratios are all out of whack, the lower team should ALL have to consent for the game to start. All are required because in a noob stomp situation, most noobs just want to play and get experience, not realizing what it means to be in a noob stomp, 4/5 noobs would just agree regardless of what comes up just to get playing. It might be an idea to disable stats on these games regardless of the outcome, at least until the new scoring system is in place.
A way to quickly know if one team is a group of friends who almost always plays together (pub stomp)
This is an ideal function for a bot to handle if it can. I don't think game specific information is stored in the bot's dbs, if it could perform a remote lookup, it could check the past 10 games of each player, checking for other players on their team who are also commonly present on their team in the past. If this level of functionality is not available in the bot, it might be a good idea to add it in, it should be possible with minimal overhead, I'm not sure on the current structure of the db that ghost/pd.eu bots use, as I havent looked at it in awhile, but it shouldn't be too difficult to add in a listing of the players each player has played with on their team for 5-10 previous games. Then a simple compare could be done either at !start or periodically, and the opposing team warned. This one wouldn't necessarily require full consent from the other team to continue, as simply knowing that the opposing team has players that frequently play together is enough for most players to be more aware and play better, and be more motivated to kick their ass, knowing that the other team will expect to win.
A way to quickly drop or otherwise avoid noobs in a pro game.
A simple !pro command, available to the host would be ideal for this. Once typed in, the game will either block or boot any players who do not satisfy a 'pro' condition. If the scoring system is redone and works, this would probably be sufficient a check, simply disallowing anyone with a score below a certain threshold. Before that, or if the scoring system just doesn't work very well, then a k/d/a ratio check should work fine, for example a good check would be (k+a*0.5)/d > 1.25 or so. It's unlikely that anyone who doesn't satisfy that condition is any good. This of course doesn't guarantee the players joining will be pro, it just eliminates most of the noobs.
When a new player joins the game while !pro is enabled, they are notified in the join message. If the game is supposed to be pro, the new player can simply request it, if the host wont enable it, they can leave. Not a perfect solution, but it's quick and easy. It wouldn't take long before most players demand it, noobpros tend to take pride in how 'pro' they are, so they'd probably want it, resulting in pro games which do not use !pro commonly failing to start due to lack of interest over games that do have it enabled. Players that have either no games or a very small amount of games will be allowed, but a message will be broadcast informing the host or everyone that this is the case, at which point it's at the host's discression.
A way to quickly drop or otherwise avoid pros in a noob game.
My solution to this is basically the exact same as the !pro solution, except it's !noob instead, and instead of having to be above a certain threshold, now it's below. Additionally there'd have to be an emphasis on amount of games played, which is compared to their stats in those games. A player who has an ok score in noob games shouldn't be denied their ability to continue playing noob games until they've played a certain amount (10,20?), however, someone with an absolutely stomp score should be barred from noob games provided they have a few of these games under their belt (like 3 or so). So basically number of games is the primary check, with score being a secondary, if they pass the initial check, their score is checked, if it's far too high, they're denied. If their fail the initial check (the number of games), but their score is utter crap, they would also be allowed.
To put it into a pseudocode type format, to make it clear to anyone who can read that:
if (number_of_games < threshhold)
{
if (Score >= CrazyHighScore && number_of_games > 3orso)
{
DENIED! boot/block
}
else
{
OK!
}
}
elseif (score == crap)
{
OK!
}
else
{
Boot, deny.
}
I am sure that the !noob, !pro, and team stat check options are feasible and easily added, the others I'm not so sure about. I have an idea on a realistic scoring algorithm, but I need to run atm so cant write that in, might add it later if I remember. Just need to post this before I forget again =/
13
« on: February 23, 2010, 02:11 »
You haven't been able to ban people who are votekicked for a long time, now, the reason is obvious, it was frequently abused. To the general noob population that plays dota, kicks and bans are all just weapons in their arsenal, if they can use them they will use them, and will have their epeen grow for doing so. Giving these people any real power is never a good idea.
There's 2 scenarios.
1. The player genuinely deserves a ban
2. The player does not and there's just an angry noob trying to 'get them'
90% of the time, it will be 2. The other 10% the chances of everyone or near everyone supporting the ban are slim, it would take 2-3 times before any chance of being passed. Now if this many chances are allowed, then in all cases of 2, the majority players can just constantly spam !votebans until everyone agrees, which is what happened with !votekick before they disabled banning from it.
Simply put, it's a bad idea. A very bad idea.
14
« on: February 21, 2010, 03:15 »
How so? It's less text and sql lookups than a normal !sd of every player, additionally you could easily put in a timer on it's usage to prevent spam or hammering of db.
Edit: additionally it would make sence to have this available only to the host, in which case it could be whispered instead of displayed for all.
Edit: actually scratch that, it's equally useful to other players who need to check quickly if the teams are extremely unbalanced, though I suppose there could be a simpler command for that, like one that checks the average scores or average k/d/a ratios of both teams and displays them.
15
« on: February 19, 2010, 00:06 »
Oh god I couldnt imagine if !ff worked, that's a horrible command idea.
99.9999999% of the time I see !votekick invoked, it's because some loser is whining because they died, and they blame someone for it, they attempt to !votekick that player, other players on the team go 'hey i need someone other than myself to blame too!' and jump on the bandwagon. If it only took the team to votekick someone off, it'd happen very often, and when it does happen know what happens? 99.999934% of the time, they keep sucking, then give up, and complain that it's because they're down a man!
I think forum bans are a much better alternative to any form of kick. The only thing I'd like to see a easier kick for is excessive feeding, if your k+a/d ratio is absolutely atrocious, like 1/10/0 then you should be easily kicked. Otherwise it's allready too easy and easily abused by rage-ers. There should at least be a cap on how many times each player can !votekick... but I've said all this before.
|
WiKi
How To
Rules
Ban
Unban
LA Staff
Maps
Streams
Show Posts
