Jump to content


Photo

Public Discussion on Increased Penalties for DC


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 856 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 02 February 2019 - 03:34 PM

DH, what do you think?

Simple DC: First: Warning letter Second time: 10 points deduction Third time 50 points deduction and every time onward -50 points.
SR: Warning letter +10 points Seond time: 50 points Third time: Rating reset (It should be proven that is is not a connection problem and someone is just logging back in to play the game). And onward rating reset.
ATW: Warning letter + 20 points Second time: 50 points Third time: Rating reset and onward rating reset.


Edited by Don_Homer, 02 February 2019 - 03:36 PM.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#42 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 856 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 02 February 2019 - 03:55 PM

Simple DC: First: Warning letter Second time: 10 points deduction Third time 50 points deduction and every time onward -50 points.
SR: Warning letter +10 points Seond time: 50 points Third time: Rating reset (It should be proven that is is not a connection problem and someone is just logging back in to play the game). And onward rating reset.
ATW: Warning letter + 20 points Second time: 50 points Third time: Rating reset and onward rating reset.

Forget about the ''one week off'' penalty. So this should be the last measurement I think for SR and ATW. And maybe make it longer when people wont learn.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#43 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,519 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 03 February 2019 - 04:41 PM

This would require record keeping.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

#44 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 5,915 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 06 February 2019 - 06:41 AM

A player who loses to a sneaky rejoin is like this goalkeeper

 

Yes, this is funny.   But your nonchalance about the unsportsmanlike 2:30 waiting that is forced upon you by your opponent is not the rule, I daresay.  Most persons are bothered by this, albeit to different degrees.  Sure, if you don't mind waiting you should never get caught like your unfortunate soccer goalie.  But the SR penalty is applied for those who ARE bothered by the 2:30 waiting and have experienced the unfortunate goalie's lapse in attention.  Should we interfere with such stupidity?  Maybe not.  I could see that argument. As an old country doctor used to say, "There's no pill for ignorance."  

 

Nevertheless, the current MT sentiment is that Sneaky Rejoins are a very unsportsmanlike thing to do and we will hammer them.



i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604


#45 josephwhite

josephwhite

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 10 February 2019 - 06:12 AM

One thing that is missing from this discussion is what the fruit has been from the current disconnect policy. It takes time to post and time to keep records for the moderators. Has the past policy made any changes in behaviour? One would need to keep records to determine this fully, but there may be anecdotal evidence. Otherwise, disconnectors are doubly succeeding - wasting our time in the game and on the forum. What I mean by succeeding is either:

  1. People stop doing this practice because of the penalties
  2. People don't do it in the first place (harder to measure, except possibly by number of reports of this)
  3. People are penalised to the extent that we don't have to deal with them anymore (e.g. reset account will take quite a while to get back to the level to affect most of the people on the forum). Also, this is a form of revenge - they waste our time, we waste their time by having to go and play low ranked players for quite a few hours before they are at a level to challenge us again.

 

My concern is less with the person who disconnects once or rarely, but the ones who do this repeatedly to be a jerk. For example, one guy (Airmail, Eniak, thesi, Toreva, ithi, Poppins and possibly Fiddle, Crisp, oikog, Barrel) keeps creating new accounts and does this to be a jerk - I don't think he cares about ranking. As long as we can't stop him based on IP address or something similar, continuously resetting his account will at least ensure that he has to spend the time at low ranks before he can annoy us again.

 

Another issue with point deductions is that it means that people are playing a person at higher skill who has a lower rating. E.g. if you are 600 and someone is down to 400 due to 200 worth of disconnect penalties, instead of being equal on a win or loss, you will lose much more on a loss or gain much less on a win. At least if the person's account is reset, it will take him a while before he will even be matched with you.

 

Therefore, I would propose full reset after 3 disconnects and don't even bother with the point deductions. Alternatively, of the options listed, I would go with 3 or 4.


  • Don_Homer, Napoleon 1er and tobermoryx like this

#46 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 5,915 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 11 February 2019 - 11:29 PM

I think, unfortunately, disconnecters, like the proverbial poor, will always be with us. Still, the reset penalty is appealing to me after a certain point. Two questions:

1) Would you feel that a reset is better than the simple ELO to 100 penalty?

2) Would you feel the reset should come after more 50 point dings? Say, 5 or 6?

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users