5 ms·

This reminds me of how games (coughLeagueOfLegendscough) match me up with a player that I literally just reported for harassment, griefing etc. in the previous

This reminds me of how games (coughLeagueOfLegendscough) match me up with a player that I literally just reported for harassment, griefing etc. in the previous match. Like, there weren't any other possible players to match me with out of the many thousands? I don't mind waiting a few more seconds to match up with someone else! I'm getting a lot of responses as if I expect the player to be totally blocked from matching with me, but that's not really what I mean. Even a basic "temporary match score reduction" would work. I would also expect a cooldown system where the reduction caused by reporting no longer applies. Arguing against the idea "because it creates a prisoner's island" misses the subtlety of a well-thought-out implementation where reporting simply lowers the matchup "rank" for a while, and serial-false-reporters have their reports basically nullified/ignored.

lupire 4y ago
Did you Block or just report?
- dannyw 4y ago
  It shouldn't matter.
judge2020 4y ago
Dota 2 added a (paid) “avoid player” option, where the matchmaker will not match them with you no matter what. It's definitely possible. https://win.gg/news/dota-2-avoid-player-feature-improved-as-long-as-fans-pay-up/ https://win.gg/news/dota-2-avoid-player-feature-improved-as-...
- account42 4y ago
  Great, another incentive for developers to make the game less fun until you pay up.
proteal 4y ago
Overwatch had a feature where you could avoid players, but a top sniper was avoided by enough top players that he could never find a match. The matchmaking system could never find him a match because almost all potential matches had at least one player on each team that had him avoided. The devs eventually reworked that feature so that he could play the game. Sometimes seemingly innocuous features have weird edge cases! Even for an average player, adding an avoid player feature would ultimately make matchmaking take longer. It necessarily reduces the number of valid matchings of players, so the system will only be slower. My guess is that average queue time is an important metric that management does not want to increase. It’s an especially tough sell because if you really wanted fresh players in your game, you could always not queue for a few minutes and you will almost certainly get all-new teammates.
- bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
  Isn't it fair that if every player you play against decides they don't want to play with you, you shouldn't get to play? Obviously something is wrong with you. (A 4chan style let's-make-this-person's-life-hell attack notwithstanding)
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    Your parent comment specifies that the reason so many people were avoiding this guy was that he was good at the game. I wouldn't agree that that should mean he's not allowed to play.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - judge2020 4y ago
    It wasn't that this player was disrespectful/racist/etc., it's that they were so much better that playing against this player was almost a guaranteed loss.
    - 4y ago
null0pointer 4y ago
I've noticed this happen in other online games. So these days when there's someone I don't want to play with again I will report them but also wait a few minutes before queuing for the next match to give that player time to get matched with others.
adamdusty 4y ago
This has been discussed by the community for as long as I've been playing (2012ish), and rito has said they won't do it because it creates a "prisoners island" type situation where all the mean players end up playing together and player retention drops. They argue its much better to attempt to rehabilitate rude players, but this was back when riot Lyte was doing his thing. I don't know if they spoken on the subject since.
- luckylion 4y ago
  That's wild. Their reasoning (or even finding, they should have the data) is that if you isolate the annoying players away from the general population, people overall play less? I'd intuitively expect the opposite, you play less if you constantly have rude players around. Or is it more of a thing of "60% of our players like to harass people, if we only pair them with other harassers, they don't have any fun and leave"?
  - adamdusty 4y ago
    My memory isn't 100% but they essentially said that most players are actually unlikely to be toxic with any regularity. Typically players will have a bad game, and they will lash out. They said that for players that are habitually toxic, a short ban (I think 2 weeks is standard) significantly reduces the chance of reoffending. For players with repeat bans for harassment or aggression they get permanently banned or eventually quit because of frequent longer bans. Most of their communication should still be online in some form whether on their website or reddit. All this is just from my memory so subject to misremembering.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  > They argue its much better to attempt to rehabilitate rude players That's fascinating. It was rude and nasty players that drove me away from online gaming completely. They make it seriously unfun, and if it's not fun, there's no point in doing it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dncornholio 4y ago
Your solution is to lower the chance of a rematch. But it's not impossible. Right? Who says LoL doesn't do this already? Maybe you did got matched in a this unlikely scenario.

lupire 4y ago

Did you Block or just report?

dannyw 4y ago
It shouldn't matter.

judge2020 4y ago

Dota 2 added a (paid) “avoid player” option, where the matchmaker will not match them with you no matter what. It's definitely possible. https://win.gg/news/dota-2-avoid-player-feature-improved-as-long-as-fans-pay-up/ https://win.gg/news/dota-2-avoid-player-feature-improved-as-...

account42 4y ago
Great, another incentive for developers to make the game less fun until you pay up.

proteal 4y ago

Overwatch had a feature where you could avoid players, but a top sniper was avoided by enough top players that he could never find a match. The matchmaking system could never find him a match because almost all potential matches had at least one player on each team that had him avoided. The devs eventually reworked that feature so that he could play the game. Sometimes seemingly innocuous features have weird edge cases! Even for an average player, adding an avoid player feature would ultimately make matchmaking take longer. It necessarily reduces the number of valid matchings of players, so the system will only be slower. My guess is that average queue time is an important metric that management does not want to increase. It’s an especially tough sell because if you really wanted fresh players in your game, you could always not queue for a few minutes and you will almost certainly get all-new teammates.

bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
Isn't it fair that if every player you play against decides they don't want to play with you, you shouldn't get to play? Obviously something is wrong with you. (A 4chan style let's-make-this-person's-life-hell attack notwithstanding)
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  Your parent comment specifies that the reason so many people were avoiding this guy was that he was good at the game. I wouldn't agree that that should mean he's not allowed to play.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- judge2020 4y ago
  It wasn't that this player was disrespectful/racist/etc., it's that they were so much better that playing against this player was almost a guaranteed loss.
  - 4y ago

null0pointer 4y ago

I've noticed this happen in other online games. So these days when there's someone I don't want to play with again I will report them but also wait a few minutes before queuing for the next match to give that player time to get matched with others.

adamdusty 4y ago

This has been discussed by the community for as long as I've been playing (2012ish), and rito has said they won't do it because it creates a "prisoners island" type situation where all the mean players end up playing together and player retention drops. They argue its much better to attempt to rehabilitate rude players, but this was back when riot Lyte was doing his thing. I don't know if they spoken on the subject since.

luckylion 4y ago
That's wild. Their reasoning (or even finding, they should have the data) is that if you isolate the annoying players away from the general population, people overall play less? I'd intuitively expect the opposite, you play less if you constantly have rude players around. Or is it more of a thing of "60% of our players like to harass people, if we only pair them with other harassers, they don't have any fun and leave"?
- adamdusty 4y ago
  My memory isn't 100% but they essentially said that most players are actually unlikely to be toxic with any regularity. Typically players will have a bad game, and they will lash out. They said that for players that are habitually toxic, a short ban (I think 2 weeks is standard) significantly reduces the chance of reoffending. For players with repeat bans for harassment or aggression they get permanently banned or eventually quit because of frequent longer bans. Most of their communication should still be online in some form whether on their website or reddit. All this is just from my memory so subject to misremembering.
JohnFen 4y ago
> They argue its much better to attempt to rehabilitate rude players That's fascinating. It was rude and nasty players that drove me away from online gaming completely. They make it seriously unfun, and if it's not fun, there's no point in doing it.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dncornholio 4y ago

Your solution is to lower the chance of a rematch. But it's not impossible. Right? Who says LoL doesn't do this already? Maybe you did got matched in a this unlikely scenario.