EPTI'm sure Blizzard could figure some way to dis-incentivize intentional leavers. Or they could just do a big ban wave like people used to do in the good old days. LoL did a ban wave when they caught people using a certain summoner spell hack. IcCup did maphack ban waves. LoL did a small ban wave on bad users. A reporting system would also be nice, both for reporting bugs and for reporting players.
Hearthstone General Discussion - Page 23
| Forum Index > Hearthstone General |
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
I'm sure Blizzard could figure some way to dis-incentivize intentional leavers. Or they could just do a big ban wave like people used to do in the good old days. LoL did a ban wave when they caught people using a certain summoner spell hack. IcCup did maphack ban waves. LoL did a small ban wave on bad users. A reporting system would also be nice, both for reporting bugs and for reporting players. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 24 2014 03:40 Drazerk wrote: How do you even police that though? All that will change is that instead of pressing concede I'll go afk and multistack or play Dota while i lose games. And there are legitimate concedes on turn 2 as well. When do you cut off the low priority? No matter what system you put in people will find a way around it until you give them an incentive not to. AFK is even easier to detect than concede abuse. And while there are legitimate turn 2 concedes, they are rare enough anyone conceding turn 2 on such a large percentage of their games or in a large number of games in such a short time span, it's pretty obvious abuse. | ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 24 2014 04:39 TheYango wrote: AFK is even easier to detect than concede abuse. And while there are legitimate turn 2 concedes, they are rare enough anyone conceding turn 2 on such a large percentage of their games or in a large number of games in such a short time span, it's pretty obvious abuse. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/db6XeTG.png) This is one of my decks. It is cheesy and abusive and rather good fun. However all the games are decided within the first 3 turns. If blizzard policed turn 2 then they kill legitimate (ok I say that in the loosest sense of the word) decks such as this which limits the over all enjoyment of the game. Oh and I hit rank 16 this season with this deck before you say it is completely terrible  (That said I am now considering swapping out the Argent squires for some abusives...)On January 24 2014 04:33 obesechicken13 wrote: The amount of people who game LoL is low because it's a team game and you'd need your entire team to leave at 1 minute. Multiple leaves in LoL results in bans (loss of cards for us, loss of champions and skins for LoL). Bans on the Blizzard side are tied to a Blizz account. I'm sure Blizzard could figure some way to dis-incentivize intentional leavers. Or they could just do a big ban wave like people used to do in the good old days. LoL did a ban wave when they caught people using a certain summoner spell hack. IcCup did maphack ban waves. LoL did a small ban wave on bad users. A reporting system would also be nice, both for reporting bugs and for reporting players. I would like a report feature for bugs. Not sure how I'd feel about the ban wave. On the one hand I don't mind the constructed leave / quit thing because I hate arena and would like to grind gold outside of it but on the other hand it feels cheap and needs to be removed somehow. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 24 2014 04:50 Drazerk wrote: This is one of my decks. It is cheesy and abusive and rather good fun. However all the games are decided within the first 3 turns. If blizzard policed turn 2 then they kill legitimate (ok I say that in the loosest sense of the word) decks such as this which limits the over all enjoyment of the game. I don't see how forcing you to play out the game even though it's decided "kills" the deck. You have to play out a few extra turns for the game to actually finish rather than hitting the concede button. Having to do 30 or wait for the other guy to do 30 doesn't suddenly make the deck unplayable, it just means you can't concede abuse to end games faster. | ||
|
diehilde
Germany1596 Posts
| ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 24 2014 05:26 TheYango wrote: I don't see how forcing you to play out the game even though it's decided "kills" the deck. You have to play out a few extra turns for the game to actually finish rather than hitting the concede button. But if you are forcing decks such as this to play out longer than is needed then why bother with the concede button at all? Its just a awkward solution to a awkward problem and bar the mass ban wave solution I can't see an easy solution that can't be abused. On January 24 2014 05:37 diehilde wrote: I honestly dont get why people are angry about insta conceding or even talk about banning... I mean you get a super fast win for free if someone does it against you, whats not to like? It devalues the game and hurts people who play legitimately is the basic answer | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 24 2014 05:38 Drazerk wrote: But if you are forcing decks such as this to play out longer than is needed then why bother with the concede button at all? Because there might be someone who occasionally needs to leave a game due to extenuating circumstances? I don't see how you can argue that someone regularly leaving 50% of their games on the 2nd turn in a consistent manner can be considered a normal behavior. There might be those few guys that play decks like yours, but sadly, I don't really feel sorry for those guys having to play out a few extra turns on their games because honestly Hearthstone games are already pretty short. It's not really a big deal. It's like the "no XP gain for 5 minutes" rule for detecting AFKs in DotA. There will be edge cases where someone gets dinged in a legitimate game, but it should be rare enough and the punishment for specific instances mild enough that its not going to matter unless someone is already in a consistent pattern of abuse. | ||
|
misirlou
Portugal3238 Posts
It's like the crazy UTH talk, my hunter is level 8 :D edit: level 6, just checked | ||
|
mordek
United States12704 Posts
| ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 24 2014 06:17 TheYango wrote: Because there might be someone who occasionally needs to leave a game due to extenuating circumstances? I don't see how you can argue that someone regularly leaving 50% of their games on the 2nd turn in a consistent manner can be considered a normal behavior. There might be those few guys that play decks like yours, but sadly, I don't really feel sorry for those guys having to play out a few extra turns on their games because honestly Hearthstone games are already pretty short. It's not really a big deal. It's like the "no XP gain for 5 minutes" rule for detecting AFKs in DotA. There will be edge cases where someone gets dinged in a legitimate game, but it should be rare enough and the punishment for specific instances mild enough that its not going to matter unless someone is already in a consistent pattern of abuse. Thats fair but Alt F4 also exists for those cases (and yes alt f4 will be easy to detect as well) As far as I see it you should play a competitive game in the most optimal way possible and anything less than that is just joking about / having fun. If there is a better way to do something then you do it. While going Dagon 5 on every hero is amazing you wouldn't do it every game because it causes losses and won't net you nearly as many wins as actually playing seriously with wards / smoke and what not. As for the no EXP gain for 5 minutes in dota 2. How many times have you seen someone losing 0-30 and afking in the fountain with the enemies just dragging it on so they just pop into the jungle for XP before they get timed out. Same logic with this people will always find a way to play around the system. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 24 2014 06:49 Drazerk wrote: As for the no EXP gain for 5 minutes in dota 2. How many times have you seen someone losing 0-30 and afking in the fountain with the enemies just dragging it on so they just pop into the jungle for XP before they get timed out. Same logic with this people will always find a way to play around the system. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try to make the system better than it is. | ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 24 2014 06:53 TheYango wrote: That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try to make the system better than it is. I agree but I think you should always try to give incentives your player base first rather than deterrents | ||
|
misirlou
Portugal3238 Posts
On January 24 2014 06:24 mordek wrote: You know you get 100g for getting each class to 10 right? I do infinite arenas, just takes me like 2 weeks to get through each one xD | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13925 Posts
| ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
On January 24 2014 07:00 Drazerk wrote: I agree but I think you should always try to give incentives your player base first rather than deterrents What incentive could Blizzard possibly give you that would deter you from gaming the system? Then you're just gaming that system instead because it is marginally more profitable or still using the old one because it isn't. You're gaming the system because you want to make gold in the most efficient manner possible and nothing blizzard adds is going to change that. Deterrents like gold gain capping are used because incentives don't do anything. GGG_Chris Players interpret the game as expecting them to do anything that is marginally more profitable than another action. I would like to adjust the profitability of partying so that it's fairer, but it'll probably still feel like it's expected. Expectations about efficiency are antifun. | ||
|
trinxified
Canada7774 Posts
I guess same question against Rogue and Druid, although they take damage from pinging, so it's a bit better. | ||
|
Flakes
United States3125 Posts
On January 24 2014 12:19 trinxified wrote: Is it worth coining out a Loot Hoarder and have the Mage ping it? Slows down some of their tempo right? And usually they do that if their 2-drop will die to the Loot Hoarder. I guess same question against Rogue and Druid, although they take damage from pinging, so it's a bit better. Wouldn't it be better to save the coin and play it on turn 2 to make them use 2/3 mana for the ping? | ||
|
trinxified
Canada7774 Posts
On January 24 2014 12:29 Flakes wrote: Wouldn't it be better to save the coin and play it on turn 2 to make them use 2/3 mana for the ping? Well that means they get to drop their 2-drop, could be another Loot Hoarder or something. Then now you're behind on tempo. Actually I will only do that if I have another 2-drop answer. | ||
|
Kishin2
United States7534 Posts
On January 24 2014 12:19 trinxified wrote: Is it worth coining out a Loot Hoarder and have the Mage ping it? Slows down some of their tempo right? And usually they do that if their 2-drop will die to the Loot Hoarder. I guess same question against Rogue and Druid, although they take damage from pinging, so it's a bit better. Depends on your deck and hand. There's no one answer. | ||
|
Glacierz
United States1244 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/42O7XAP.jpg) | ||
| ||
