EPTOn October 12 2017 23:25 neozxa wrote:
Honestly a slight adjustment to the behavior score metric will fix every problem OP stated in this thread, and fix match finding times in the process.
I honestly think a more transparent system is better for making players realize their mistake and to let people know if they are not very fun to play with instead of a hidden "behavior score" metric that can only be accessed by people who did their research on the subject. Low priority accomplishes this to an extent but I feel that just winning x amount of games doesnt really force them to change how they act.
Honestly a slight adjustment to the behavior score metric will fix every problem OP stated in this thread, and fix match finding times in the process.
I honestly think a more transparent system is better for making players realize their mistake and to let people know if they are not very fun to play with instead of a hidden "behavior score" metric that can only be accessed by people who did their research on the subject. Low priority accomplishes this to an extent but I feel that just winning x amount of games doesnt really force them to change how they act.
Well it is kind of transparent because of the conduct summary, but you dont get to see your behavior score. So maybe they should make it visible only to ourselves somewhere in the conduct summary.
Based on posts here and on reddit, one of the problems people seem to have is once they get to low behavior score and see the type of people they are matched with, they quickly realize they've been asshats too and that's why they are in that pool of players. However, the problem is this: if some people truly want to get their act together and stop behaving like idiots, the system makes that very hard for them because one [or more] of the other 9 players will keep ruing the game. And if this keeps going for 5-10 games they will quickly loose all hope of getting out of that pool, which doesn't correct their behavior, it just tilts them more so they keep being asshats.
I think one way to solve this is how fiwi proposed. Let them know that after 5-10 games of low behavior score games they can go back to normal (C) games for 5-10 games. If they display a bad behavior again they'll be relegated to F score again and they'll have to play 20 games to be given a 2nd chance to C games. And so on and so forth.
Basically: punishing is ok as long as players have a chance to redeem themselves, but like you said in a more transparent way.
