Feedback Desired: The Report System

Anet is on the right track here. Like they said, they're continuing to review and tune the system.

Anet has heard of the potential problems with /report abuse and was probably already aware of them before today. They'll get it worked out.

So this time, either I don't debate which means you win, or I do...in which case I fall right into your trap, since you've already tried to out me as a pointless debater. Oooooo, you're clever.

I'll be clearer this time. I don't support a person's right to offend another person. A good free speech law prevents exactly that. But...offending another person means intent. Are you judging SotiCoto's choice of name by the name itself or the reasoning he used to make it? Based only on what you've quoted from him, it's the latter. I could ask you what you'd say if he gave a different reasoning (say a non-offensive one) but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't back peddle your assertion. Hell, I'm pretty sure you won't reply at all if you truly believe this is pointless. (lol, prove me wrong!)

Lets get off the subject of SotiCoto for a minute. This one example is muddying the waters. What about the other people he mentioned...say...people who's names suggest some kind of sexual innuendo? That's fairly ambiguous, and a little crass, but is it as boldly offensive? I say not...but other people might not agree, and as I said before - offense is based on intent. We know Soti's intent...what about everyone else on the fence?

In the meantime, I think I'll reread the EULA like you suggested.

The main issue here is in the inappropriate behavior area, and maybe the bot area.

Griefing has no definable terms really. If I pug with you and do not rez you fast enough and I griefing? Or if I heal a bit too slow and you die? Or if I accidentally aggro a mob. Or dear lord if I do not play to the standards imposed by people who "beat the game already."

As for botting we all know there are plenty of bot watchers. However when I mega farm, I adds are will mimic a bot. Click sign, click gate. Do quick kills remap. Repeat. Now suddenly I am a bot. To make issues more complex recently I been farming for faction, but am lazy so I just flag henchies while on aim. They kill said groups, I get drops, map back.

weeee censorship =D

Ra>Ab
I got about 40 glad points in RA today because of no-monk and all assasin teams ^^

Dude you have some serious issues...
you sure dont help this thread..except prove /report is required

Well I popped into Kamadan today and guess what. No spam!

I'm for the /report system. I'm sure it will be abused, mostly by the generation that requires parental permission to play (and one wonders whether some of them have it) and I'm equally sure that Anet aren't going to jump to attention for every single /report sent it. It would be too much work. I think there would need to be a substantial body of /report against an individual before Anet even starts its review procedure.

So far the moans I've seen are all from people who have suddenly discovered they're expected to behave like socialised adults in a social situation. Just like having a drunkard throw up all over your shoes while complaining he was thrown out of the pub for drinking too much.

I view the in-game /report system as a phenomenal step toward making Guild Wars a real MMORPG, and a more fun place to play in. Abusing players can get you locked out of PvP. Abusing the /report system can get you banned. So its play nice or don't play, and this is something Anet should have been doing from the getgo.

Every successful Online RPG I've played had an in-game feature to report players for bad behavior. GW was the only one that required civic minded players to log out. the old system felt like it was penalizing players for reporting abusers and griefers. the new system is quick, simple and--fromt he sounds of things--effective.

Some people will get reported that shouldn't be. Thats the nature of the beast (letting players police themselves is a recipe for trouble). Some of those people will see penalties for the reports they incur. But if (and its a big "if" right now) the new report system acts the way its supposed to and Anet does monitor it so that a few bad eggs won't /report spam innocent players and get away with it, this could be the answer casula PvPers have been looking for.

GGs

People kept asking for a way to punish leavers, so now you have an system in place to try police players. However, this is a case where the cure is worse than the disease. Leavers were only really an issue in three formats (AB, Competitive Missions, and RA.) Furthermore the leaving problems in AB and CMs are directly aggravated by a number of changes made by arena.net and could have been fixed without these measures. The best way to get this system fixed it to break it.

The first problem is the low barrier of 33% combined with the relative freedom of reports. 50 per day is quite a few. Did you used to grief people by running around in RA for 15 minutes? Well, A.net was nice enough to hand you a new way to grief people on a silver plater and all it requires is 1-2 like minded friends. 33% is only 3 people in a CM and 2 people in your AB team. Due to the low population of CMs it is very probable to get 3 friends in the same AB. Once you have 3 people in, you have the 33% required to give any player you want 6 dishonor points. That's enough to stop him from continuing to CM as long as you and your team of griefers are around. Simply pick a target and have all three of your members report him. If you accompany this with accusations that he is trying to sabotage the team (like "OMG Player X keeps opening the gates for them") you can probably convince a few other players to unwittingly report him also. In RA and ABs you need 2 players to meet 33% and report with impunity. That means synching 2 players in international districts (if you hate synched teams you can do this to scare players away from synching RA) or picking up 1-2 hapless players in AB.

Another problem is that once you report the player he has little recourse. If he attempts to report you back he will just accumulate more dishonor points as you have a large portion of the team in collusion. If you are verbally abusive to the player he cannot leave, he already accrued 4-6 dishonor points from your report spike. If he leaves he will now have 9-11 dishonor points and get dishonorable status. If you have 33% of the team working together, you control things. The rest of the team will rarely be organized enough to do anything about it.

Furthermore, outside of pure malicious abuse people are going to extend this system greater than it is intended. You may not be leeching, but it turns out your build is bad or you are a bad player. People are going to report you. If one reports you in an RA team it only take one other player thinking it is a good idea also. In fact now that good players can't leave when they have bad players on their team, they are more encouraged to abuse the report system. How many of you went into RA with a Mo/W with swordsmanship or an x/Mo who tries to heal when you were a newbie? If you do that now you are going to accumulate dishonor points so fast your head will spin (try it and see.) In fact going in with a monk that does anything other than healing will get you reported quite a bit.

On top of this, the system it going to make actual reporting of players (for spamming ect, not reporting for dishonor points) far less effective. People are going to be reporting players for trivial matters. People will attempt to get players mass reported. Every quasi offensive utterance will be reported using the new /report. This will deluge the system with a lot of false reports and significantly increase the error in their player review system.

The people whining about thing probably deserve this flawed system and all the bad that is coming with it. However, for the rest of is this thing is going to be a colossal pain in the butt. A.net doesn't listen very well either. Reasonable explanations about this system may get it changed, but it will happen very slowly if at all. Honestly, throw all concept of honor out the window this weekend. Abuse the living daylights out of this system. Grief, ruin things for other players, it needs to be thoroughly demonstrated that this system is a terrible idea. Demonstrate the collateral damage that will be inflicted and prevent this thing from becoming a permanent mainstay. You may thing it is cruel, but there are players out there who will abuse this system in every way possible. If it isn't clearly shown that the system is flawed you will have to deal with people abusing this system for at least 3 months once it gets implemented.

In addition post every single loop hole and flaw you can find in the system here. If you want things fixed wave the red flag for all to see.

Remember:
-3 people synching into CMs can report whoever they like
-2 people synching into RA can report whoever they like
-2 people forming an AB team together can report their teammates for whatever they like

I was actually thinking that the immediate, automated punishment system was a bit excessive. I think there should be a push from the automated, 'objective' element, to the human review element.

Say, for instance;

• Raising the threshold for dishonor status to 20 points.
• Reducing the report limit to 20 on accounts by default.
• Reducing point gain for leaving to 4.
• Giving individuals who report other individuals 2 points for a solo report, and 1 point for a multiple report; That is, no report made is completely without penalty.
• Scaling point decay based on amount of current points; Less points decay faster, while more points decay more slowly. People who are consistently receiving points must either sit out more, or they'll end up receiving dishonor status, while people occasionally grief-pointed should not usually accrue the requisite 20.
• Removing the temporary mission/match dishonor status.
• Removing GvG and HA from being affected by dishonor status.
• Reducing duration of Dishonor status to ~30 minutes.
• Automatically generating a support team ticket to be reviewed upon reaching dishonor status. At this point, the validity of reports should be checked, and penalties meted out as appropriate, including, but not limited to; Extended dishonor status, temporary disabling of the reporting system... no clue what else? Individuals with a history of this may receive stiffer penalties.
• Perhaps automatically generating a support team ticket to be reviewed upon reaching X amount of reports, clearing over Y time period?

Ideally, around these numbers, the level of abuse declines, while individuals who consistently cause problems, such as repetitive leechers, are taken out for a period, and brought to the attention of the support team.
Whether or not a leecher gets to go a few rounds before being restricted doesn't really matter as long as they're eventually taken out of circulation.

It sucks how I have to wait the full duration against a team of 4 ZB/Prot monks who will stand and grief for the duration. Beforehand I had the freedom to leave which I feel I deserve.

You can ask your team to type resign but you can't make them and poor design means that if you're European, you are put on mixed-language teams who don't understand what you're saying (and vice-versa). As a result I am forced to stay there or face punishment which I do not feel is fair.

Wrong.
As I have already explained in no shortage of detail.
... Do you know, there is a word used for people who insist on being deliberately wrong. I'll leave you to figure that one out for yourself.

So... in fact... you're just attacking me out of spite.
Well good for you.
If I had an ignore list here, I'd now be putting you on it.


When the cause of the problems you want to escape from is other people.... then running to somewhere full of other people isn't the solution. There is no other way to put it. Anyone who plays Guild Wars to escape from people being immature has quite clearly got the wrong idea about the game entirely, and should try something like Oblivion instead.... Equally entertaining... but without the possibility of being offended on the fly by other people.
Simple... no?


Whoever told you that only did so because they want respect handed to them on a silver platter for no additional cost.
Respect, if wanted, must be earned.
If it isn't wanted.... no problem.
It certainly is NOT mandatory.


What do you think Lawyers exist for?
One person's screw-up is another person's benefit.... and vice versa.


Who died and made you President of the Universe?
Who made your opinion the be-all and end-all of existence?

Oh yeah... that's right. Nobody.

Well just to take a break from the arguments and such.. I'm glad that this has been cinluded as I have used it a couple of times today in AB, though I'm not really much of a PvP player. It's easy to use and if you get a group of people at the same time, it's more than a case of the leechers getting banned.

One of my concerns is though, that if you have a 'leecher' who stands there for the whole match and notices he/she has been reported 2 or 3 times and begins moving right near the end.. will that still count to the Dishonour System/Banning List or not :/ It happened to me today and I've gotten a little worride that my account may be banned, even though it's once it's really happened.

~The Goldenwolf~

These are legitimate concerns. However, I think they can be addressed without scrapping the system altogether.

Essentially the problems you see boil down to:
1. Synchers can issue false reports without getting dishonor points themselves, and
2. The system will quickly become overloaded with trivial stuff.

To deal with the synchers, a-net could:
1. Raise the number of players needed to report without getting a point yourself. (Even if honest players simply got 1 point for every report, unavoidably, they shouldn't be reporting enough to ever get dishonorable through those points alone.)
2. Limit the number of points Player A can receive in a given time period based on reports from Player B. ie If Player B in (collusion with Player C) reports Player A every match in a string of AB matches, only the first report by B causes A to get a point; later reports only serve to "verify" reports from other teammates who have not reported A before.
3. Simply scan the logs for synchronized reporting activity. If Player A and Player B both report Players T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z during the same match as each other, kick out a flag that a real human needs to review the logs, and then ban A and B if their reports where phony.

To deal with the flood of trivial stuff:
1. Start with an automated verification before a human being has to look at it. For example, if you get a foul language report: Run an automated scan of the chat log with your dirty-word-dictionary bot. If the automated scan finds nothing, log the report, but don't send it to a human being (but see below). If the automated scan finds something, it can "highlight" the relevant parts of the logs to eliminate the need for the human being to do any search -- they can just read and ban.
2. Investigate an account when a large number of reports that failed automated verification, form different users, pile up. 25 or 50 reports of bad language that fail the automated verification probably means you left a word out of your dictionary.

Two points:
- Just because you can doesn't mean you should. That's exactly why this argument is even taking place. Clearly Anet can put whatever they want in the EULA; that's not even worth discussing.

- Botting is not subjective, because it has real and measurable in-game effects. For instance, bot farmers (and associated eBaying) causes market inflation and disadvantage normal players through third-party means (see: fairness). In contrast, offending someone has no real or measurable effect on the game, and everyone will take something differently.

I just had to strongly disagree with this statement, if you ban offensive speech you do not have free speech, furthermore if you want to ban offensive speech you do not even believe in free speech. Free speech means just that, the freedom to speak what you wish. Most western societies limit free speech to prevent inciting violence (and Canada has a 'hate speech" law) but I'd hate to live anywhere that banned offensive speech.

Of course that was pretty much off topic, because, as has been frequently pointed out ANet has a right to ban whatever they feel like, and we have no right to demand "free speech" on their private servers.

Well, as anticipated, this system of punishment and the reporting function each have their own significant flaws, and I had the unfortunate pleasure of experiencing both of them first-hand today.

Let us begin with the RA match from hell, where I was a monk attempting to keep an extremely incompetent rambo warrior alive. The rest of the team consisted of a stoneflesh elementalist, and what appeared to be another warrior with the default skills. As much as I enjoy having "Charge!" on me as often as possible, I had to admit that this team was pure trash from the get-go. Ultimately, I had no choice but to play until we got obliterated, and that's exactly what I did.

And obliterated we were. Naturally, the rambo stance warrior who believed my energy was unlimited started complaining about how I was terrible at the game and sucked at life - you know, typical RA banter. After all of the res sigs were used and the team died a slow, painful death, he managed to convince the other two numbskulls to report me for leeching. He described it as means to stop "people like him (me)" from playing the game. During the entire incident, I didn't even bother dignifying this imbecile with a response, which is really my only regret. Shortly after his tirade, I was slapped with a punishment for leeching. It would have at least made me feel better if I gave them a reason to abuse the tool. Anyway, that's 6 points.

But the fun doesn't stop there. I ultimately decided to stop playing RA from that point on, which was no big deal, because I was only trying it out for test purposes anyway. I had a few fond memories of playing Fort Aspenwood back in the day and decided to give that a try instead. I went Luxon and after a disgustingly delayed group-up time, the game began. Right off the bat, we had an immediate leaver, which I guess was an omen for things to come. The Kurzick had at least 2 bonders this game, and we were unable to penetrate either outer gate. I was once again playing monk, so there was nothing I could personally do either. About 1/3 into the game, most of the Luxons left, leaving myself and 2 others to suffer the remainder of the match. The Kurzick we're equally retarded and none of them left the base to run amber, which added to the time it took to end. I couldn't even leave the match because the previous abuse of the report tool would have resulted in my being unable to playing PvP for an even longer period of time.

Now, if this doesn’t scream completely and utterly broken to everyone else, then I don’t know what will. In the 25-minute time frame this took place, it was among one of the worst gaming experiences I’ve ever had. This system is fatally flawed and needs a significant change that doesn’t grant overzealous 12-year-olds the ability to directly affect one's capacity to play the game. Furthermore, the punishment for leaving games is quite excessive, as two quits within a one hour time period will prevent you from playing for an additional hour. That’s just overkill, and in combination with the report abuse, unfairly required me to endure tedium of the highest level. No game should do that, ever.

Flu, I understand your concerns. I even appreciate what you're saying. But in the end, the /report system is necessary to make the game a better place for everyone. In general, if you're reported a few times, you're not likely to get any action on your account. If you're reported a lot, but it's clear from the reports that it's a concerted effort (harassment) by a group, again, I feel sure you'll be safe. You can always appeal an account action to Support. But in the end, honestly, the system will be good for the game, and the game will be better for the system.

May I ask that you give it a few days, even a week, and see how things shake out? First of all, we'll like make some small modifications, based on player feedback. Secondly, a few days or a week will give players a better view of how the system works and how much it improves the game. If it is found that people are getting blocked unjustly, we'll definitely change it. I say we all take a look in a few days, and thanks to everyone for your feedback.

Wheeew! Go-go Big Brother, go!

So when will you be making the appeal process as easy to use as reporting now? Or will we continue to have to jump through hoops to appeal something that took another person five minutes to cause?

All I can say is: Sweet. I have a whole list of names that could use a re-portin' : )

Nice to hear something Gaile And well puts everyones minds at rest a little bit. The system has been abused already by some people though. I've got reported for leeching for reporting someone else for leeching when someone else reported the same person as I. I also doubt saying 'oh so now you decide to move' is abusive or anything like that either so I dunno. Just hope that the logs are clearly explained and stuff like that

~The Goldenwolf~

It's a context issue.

And a game is not the right context for some topics - particularly those completely outside the scope of that game.

If you don't have time to discuss the election or the inner workings of criminal law or the Pope or the war in wherever or you and your significant other's intimate activities elsewhere, that does not make this game the proper forum for it. Make the time for discussing those issues in the places where their discussion is proper.

This is game, yes it is a social atmosphere, but it is still a game. And the people in it are there to play that game, and discuss commonalities they have with each other which fit the context of that game.

I love to talk politics, religion, law, art, and so on as well myself - but I don't choose Kamedan or Lion's Arch as the place to do it. If I could only find the time to do one or the other, talk those subject or play this game, then I would re-budget my time and pick which of the two I wanted to do more.

I recall the same thing being said about Observer mode. The first change was adding Hall of Heroes as a permanent observable match, which took over 6 months to add.

Could I please have your concise feedback on the new report system? As you're aware, this is the first of what we believe will be a few versions of the system, and we're eager to hear from you. The design team will be getting your feedback by reading and through the Community Summary. But in order to give them the best possible level of detail, could you please keep the comments positive and as brief as possible, while not leaving off details, of course.

Incidentally, thanks for your reports of gold sellers through the system. We've been able to block a significant number of those non-contributors, and we appreciate the help.

We look forward to your input on the system as a whole. Thanks.

System works well in AB, I have had to report one person for suspected leeching, for about 4 mins they did not move. once reported by myself and a few others they moved sporadically out the main gate, but continued to stand for extended periods of time.

My worry with this is that they may have had connectivity problems and were rubberbanding, as in the previous fight myself and my wife suffered it for 3 or 4 mins. The difference is we informed the other players, while this player was totally noncommunicative. The worry is if you are innocent but still get dishonour will you be blocked from playing?

I too had an incident where I was reported as a leecher when I was actually experiencing the so-called "rubberbanding" bug that sometimes occurs at the opening of an AB match. When I expressed my indignation and tried to explain what happened I was threatened by another player, "careful or we'll report you again for abuse." Needless to say, I felted just a little violated. Furthermore, the number of other threats like this that I witnessed in chat over the span of four AB rounds was staggering. No doubt, I would have witnessed many more but I logged off in disgust after the conclusion of the fourth round. After witness such rampant threats by people who clearly know that they can abuse this system, I cannot help but feel that I have to watch every move I make in the game now.

The element of paranoia that DCS has introduced to the game is undeniable as even my guild leader is asking us to please refrain from reporting fellow guild mates for silly infractions. Moreover, I find the fact that Anet has deemed it necessary to introduce a tattle-tail system to the game just plain embarrassing. I realize that the rationale for creating the DCS was prevent to some of the bad apples from preventing others from having fun. The trouble with it is that there is a different crop of bad apples out there who can, have, and will continue to abuse this system by making silly reports against honest players similar to the ones mentions throughout this threat. While leeching is not fair to the other players in the match, it is more unfair when honest players are punished by because a few impatient or easily influenced players now have the power.

**** By the way, in my guild reporting guild mates is from today on considered a kickable offense. For the good to the community and in the interest of good sportsmanship and discouraging abusive behavior I urge all of you guild leaders and officers reading this to effect similar rules and I would further I would urge you all to discourage you members (without being abusive yourselves, of course) from stooping to the level of tattle-tailing on anyone except to report infractions that are also against the law (harassment, racism, etc.) Keep the stupid stuff in the guild. ****

In my opinion, it is infantile behavior when PLAYERS (I'm not talking about Anet now) may now invoke a mob mentality in order to rat on other players for ruining their day (or just making them mildly irritated as the case probably is). People don't always act honorably and YES it's not fair, but it's life. So perhaps there are some players out there who leech in PvP arenas and some players who quit rather than play out a losing match and maybe there's some competitive jawing taking place amongst some sore winners and sore losers. BIG DEAL. Personally, I find it interesting that that of all the offenses it is possible to commit in GW the ones I just mentioned are among the least harmful but seem to cause the most upset. The grown up thing to do when one crosses paths with another player who beyond any doubt commits one of the afore mentioned infractions is to just LET IT GO and keep playing. Guild Wars IS only a game, after all.

The game is no longer as much fun to play now that the DCS is in place because the most immature and impatient people playing the game now hold sway. Is is possible for the victim of a bogus report to counter-report the players who reported him/her for abusing the system before any inconvenience takes place? Unless I've missed something the answer is "no" because allowing players such a recourse would likely create an endless spiral of counter-reporting and counter-counter-reporting. The bottom line is that this system ultimately has had a detrimental effect on the community, not only because of the rampant abuse that it permits, but also because it encourages a behavior that is infantile and ultimately is different brand of anti-social behavior. The very existence of the DCS is insulting to us the players, but based on Gaile Gray and Andrew Patrick's testimony I suspect that Anet will stick to their guns on this and not reverse this mistake. Clearly, Anet has inadvertently given the impression that they value the bad apple players over the honest ones. Therefore, I will hold off on purchasing any more installments of the GW saga until it has been proven that the DCS is good for the game and I am proven wrong. If you think I'm over reacting, consider this. There was already a avenue for reporting dishonorable players before now and honest players could be reasonable certain of never being victimized by it. Not so anymore. It makes no difference if even one false report is made against an honest player. Honest players should not be falsely branded as anything else under any circumstances as they may now be. Period.

***I would really appreciate it if any respondents to this thread do so in civil and suitable manner rather than the immature mudslinging and pointedly insulting speech that I see so often on forums. Examples of suitable responses may be found in a few of the postings of SotiCoto, The Raven, GovernmentFlu, and Gaile Gray just to name a few***

To contribute, I haven't tested it too much, myself--I've merely done a few sessions of RA, and I've neither had to report someone nor been reported, though people threatened it. I'm not sure why people hate Monks so much.

i think the system has been working well at the moment, but i was reported for being a "leech" in one AB, i was experiiencing a connection problem. i havent used it yet, but i truly believe alot of people are just "trigger" happy and you better hope you dont have a "lag" moment when entering AB or you will be reported.

i think reporting system in AB and TA/RA is great. i actually said "yes!" when i read the update from thursday. i see myself as an "honorable player" and don't give up until the party gets sent back to town. then go in again! those who intentionally leave games to "find better ones because they are on an underdog or losing team" or just sit around waiting for the rest of the team to do the work should be punished, in a way, for making it harder on others to try to win. those who are newer to AB/TA/RA can find it difficult to move to the next area such as TA/HA (i remember having to help guildies a long time ago in TA having to win 5 straight so they could play HA--and them having a REAL hard time getting past RA to go to TA because everyone was just LEAVING!--frustrating, if you ask them). intentionally making life worse for others, is classified as punishable.

there could be the occasional team that could gang up on someone and /report a player for any random petty reason (not liking someone's play style for instance) or lagging out. hopefully, these types of things will be thrown out if the logs read that [said person] whispers a former teammate saying they lagged out due to some sort of internet failure. sometimes where internet failure is present, former teammates put that person on ignore, just assuming that person is a rager and won't take time to listen to that player's side of the story.

but then again, it takes half the team to report someone, and even so if one person can convince an entire team to report someone, dishonor points affect for a certain amount of pvp time, not permanent marks against account as an "account ban." which is understandable. as long as one is not banned for having internet failure, it's fine.

but i do have a couple valid questions, as i play all types of pve and pvp:

the website claims this /report teammate system is going on throughout AB/TA/RA because that is where the highest priority is with leechers and leavers---but can it also affect opposing teams in HA/GvG? such as "rank spiking"--"playing dirty" (such as possible hacking)? in all actuality, those who are playing "dishonorably" in HA/GvG should not keep playing and setting examples as if their behavior is acceptable, as this would put a huge dent in the "friendly but fair" atmosphere.

and PvE as well?--reporting spammers, bots, etc. in districts (takes x amount players for this to work?) and takes half the team to /report any nonsense (such as highly offensive racist language) during any party-related PvEing (missions/quest pug teams).

if the system is only available in AB/TA/RA it would seem that only the treatment is handled in one part, not all. if all are treated equally, then the whole game has been /report balanced.

thus creating some more keywords for reporting, such as "suspected hacking" or "botting" or whatnot. not just leeching or leaving...?

if there are more keywords required to report, let us know what the "extended list" or "master list" contains so we are able to hit these targets faster without having to create words that might not exist in /report database.

as a plus, this could also save time for all the people who have to take screenshots, and prepare a nice, precise, lengthy report on "ask a question" portion of the site. lol. i admit sometimes i have reported people and had to include so many details and screenshots, and found myself 15 minutes out of my game or real life duties...just to make sure our players are in-line...

if this was an all-around game /report system, this would save time trying to jump on a different computer to be able to send a screenshot thru my darn firewall too

but yes, to conclude: nice idea to start with! now keep goin! let us know what is changed in the end though, where in the game it has ended up affecting, and what master list of /report [name] (phrases) are in the end besides leech, leave

The system works well in AB and Factions areas. The Anet Staff shouldn’t listen to the whinges and flamers on these forums. People have been asking for this for ages and when Anet decides to bring in the system the whinges have been wanting they decide to whinge again. It’s a never ending circle with 80% of the idiots here.

I think they should have a report button in the menu instead of typing out /report all the time or have both. More report features can be implemented here is a good example from Runescape.




Keep up the good work and expand on the current system!

Meh i think the report system is an awesome idea but i know myself one of my guildies got reported for leeching the other day while running around an ab. My concern is just how much abuse people will get as a result of being wrongly reported. Call me paranoid but often guild teams go into ab, these are four people with good communication routes, say they spot someone the guild dislikes, would be easy for all four to report them. Howeever i do feel at the moment people are just getting a feel for the system, it's certainly a huge leap in the right direction and from what i've seen will act as an awesome deterrant toward anti social behaviour.

People will get over-zealous when it comes to reporting people. I think it would be good that, for leechers, you report them and then you guys send the leecher a random automated message, like "type '/noreport 1234' within the next ten seconds to stand down the reports of leeching you have against you" and then let everyone on their team know that the person stood down the accusation. The 1234 could be randomized to hinder the effect of automated bots. If they try to make a program to counter it they'd have to hack the client, which would be easier for Anet to detect... hopefully. :S

If you have someone purposely grieving this particular system (such as leeching but taking the time to type in the /noreport), then you could report them for grieving instead. But with this suggestion, there would be less mistaken occurrences.

Other than that, I think that the system is fine. You'll hear a few complaints on how unnecessary it is to have to stay if you have four monks on your team - for example. I read someones suggestion that if 3 of 4 people /resign, (or 7 of 8), then any of the party could leave without penalty. This would work nicely against possible leechers in HA, as well as the odd runner in RA also.

What does everyone else think?

Oh and the paranoia should be nothing, ellandra. You can only report people on your team. (says the update)

Pretty good, but this made people really dumb. Some people enjoyed going to RA just to leech/quit, so other people are mad. Guess what they do now? They play stupid builds, that are super-retarded, so either you quit, or you waste time playing with them. E/N Minion Master? Sure. W/Mo with Mending and (sic!) Balthazar's Spirit? Why not. I know, it's RANDOM arena. But if someone is on purpose bringing sucky build and he knows about it (like if he has 500k+ fb), it should be punished too...

I love the new system. I would make one addition to the choices given, EULA violation. For example, I saw a person in LA trying to sell their account in Local Chat last night. I was about to report them, but EULA violation was not an option. I almost chose Spamming, but they really weren't.

Now that I think about it, EULA violation may be too broad, but you get my idea I hope.

Being accuser, judge and executioner at the same time? Major Fail.
There is a reason why modern society has abandoned that idea. Read up on it. Besides if you make it easier to get thrown out of the game, while being innocent, you have to make it easier to appeal for getting back in, which would increase your costs, and therefore you are not doing it, because the only reason to have an automated system, is to save money. Major Failure.

I haven't used the report system but one thing is sure, there are no leachers in AB. Maybe there are few sometimes but very rarely. I don't know about RA but ABs are a lot better.

So keep the system, don't remove it.

And this: Information how the report function works would be useful. So there's automatical filter what messages get to human support team, which then decides what kind of action is taken. What kind of bans can automatical filter give and what are the conditions?

A little tip: Don´t listen to stupid people. Normaly stupid people want harder punishments for people they don´t like.

From: http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...1&postcount=30

Interesting message, but it can be summed in the point above. Collusion is and always will be a problem for this kind of system. But thankfully and as someone mentioned before, Anet gave control to the community of the input system (reports) but the output is, at least partially, still under the control of Anet people (like GMs). So collusion can be detected. Same as harassing. As someone said before, this is not a fuly automated system (which would fail, human beings being good at bypassing mecanic rules ...).

But if, in the end, all reports come from this kind of person (may be because they're the only who think that the system is worth it, and in their case "fun"), then the system will simply collapse by himself and will have to be removed. Only if it positively contributes to the community, thanks for "normal" players reporting leavers and other bots, will the system stay (I guess).

Or maybe they should explain to "bad" players how to become "good" players? (from my understanding of it, it used to be the case when GW was still a "small" game ...)

I think you're speculating here, if Anet introduced such a system, I believe (don't know for sure though) that they have some hints that it could work. Describing such horrible scenarios does not help at all (it may even become true because people start believing in it, self-fulfilling prophecies ...). As I said before about my tale of slashdot.org, people sometimes fear what they don't fully understand. (and who does fully understand the GW community, and by that I don't mean the thousands of people you may know ...)

First step towards the self-fulfilling prophecies: I have to modify my behavior to prove my point. My friends will soon do the same. And their friends too. And thus the conclusion of your reasoning will become true! But what if you hadn't modified your behavior in the first place? And if you hadn't tried to "influence" (for a lack of a better word) the community? Maybe it could have been a success...

It's so sad when a certain part of the community turns against the game. It's a game in the game, to try to "force" Anet into what the certain part of the community wants.

It is completely pointless to talk to you. You are not listening to any word of what people (not agreeing with you) are saying. It seems illogical that you are trying to make a point with this disrespectufl ign while not trying to understand the point people are making.

But I guess I'm not going to be understood so let's play it simple: did you ever loose one of YOUR baby to cot's death? (this is NOT, and never will be, what I'd wish to anyone, sincerely)