Attention Needed: Solving the Issue of Deliberate Game Delays

Roctan · July 2

Hi everyone,

I want to address a problem that many of us are facing: deliberate game delays by some players. It's frustrating when opponents intentionally use up the maximum time to force us to quit, especially when they have bad cards or have played poorly and still want to win.

Here are some suggestions on how we can solve this problem:

Rating Unfair Gameplay: It would be helpful to introduce a rating feature that allows us to report unfair players. Players who are frequently marked as unfair could then be excluded from rankings for a certain period. This would make the competition fairer and prevent our hard work from being undone by such tactics.

Personal Ban List: Another idea is the use of a personal ban list. Players who repeatedly harass us or negatively impact the gaming experience in other ways should no longer be selected as opponents. It's frustrating to have to face players who have, for example, verbally sexually harassed us multiple times, and the corresponding reports go unresolved.

I hope these suggestions are met with approval and lead to an improvement in our gaming experience.

Best regards,
R0ctan

Personofsecrets · July 2

This idea might be good.

I've had a number of players get mad at me for missing lethal or say that I'm cheating them during the game.

That said, there are some players who everyone knows are toxic since they mouth off or take up the timer after making their move.

The system to block communication isn't enough since people can grief in ways that don't involve the chat box.

jaws343 · July 2

Both of those suggestions would do far more harm than good.

Players would absolutely weaponize a rating system to try to harm players who are better than them.

Players would also abuse a ban list, by, again, banning players who are better than them.

What better way to work your way up a scoreboard than to poorly rate or ban players you are worse than.

You think "no, players wouldn't do this!" But you only have to look to PVP for proof that they absolutely would. Players will report you for literally just PVPing in Cyrodil. This player base is report happy even outside of PVP.

spartaxoxo · July 2

I don't think this playerbase is report happy outside of PvP. I can't speak to PvP but I haven't had that issue and seldom see complaints where it wasn't obvious why someone was banned.

El_Borracho · July 2

I completely agree with @jaws343. I never want a player rating system as trolls and sore losers would be the only ones using it.

But as for the timer, I would prefer a fix where you have a time bank, 2-5 minutes or whatever someone thinks is a sufficient amount of time to think, for the whole game. The time bank starts ticking only after a player idles for more than a set period of time (3-5 seconds). If your time bank runs out, you lose, regardless of the score at the time. No more "full shot clock" hands, especially for opening round cash-outs.

Necrotech_Master · July 2

jaws343 wrote: »

Both of those suggestions would do far more harm than good.

Players would absolutely weaponize a rating system to try to harm players who are better than them.

Players would also abuse a ban list, by, again, banning players who are better than them.

What better way to work your way up a scoreboard than to poorly rate or ban players you are worse than.

You think "no, players wouldn't do this!" But you only have to look to PVP for proof that they absolutely would. Players will report you for literally just PVPing in Cyrodil. This player base is report happy even outside of PVP.

this is absolutely what would happen

i think there was a proven case of the 2nd option not working in another game, a pro level player was unable to find matches in their skill level because almost all other players blocked them, and in that time of the game it worked as you never played against a blocked player

so a pro level player was eventually unable to find matches, or when they did get them would be far below their opponents were basically novice level

jaws343 · July 2

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I don't think this playerbase is report happy outside of PvP. I can't speak to PvP but I haven't had that issue and seldom see complaints where it wasn't obvious why someone was banned.

I say it is outside of PVP because the number of posts here and reddit that point to some random listing in a guild trader, with zero context or background on that seller, and ask "should I report this person for scamming" are too many. Like no, just don't buy the item. So, I stand by report happy.

spartaxoxo · July 2

jaws343 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I don't think this playerbase is report happy outside of PvP. I can't speak to PvP but I haven't had that issue and seldom see complaints where it wasn't obvious why someone was banned.

I say it is outside of PVP because the number of posts here and reddit that point to some random listing in a guild trader, with zero context or background on that seller, and ask "should I report this person for scamming" are too many. Like no, just don't buy the item. So, I stand by report happy.

Reddit will give a skewed version of the playerbase. It's a pretty small amount of players on there. And people who use social media for video games at all tend to skew more towards "core" users whereas the population as a whole is more casual. You can really tell by how many players legitimately complain about unfairly being banned, as those systems tend to heavily favor the number of reports received.

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Both of those suggestions would do far more harm than good.

Players would absolutely weaponize a rating system to try to harm players who are better than them.

Players would also abuse a ban list, by, again, banning players who are better than them.

What better way to work your way up a scoreboard than to poorly rate or ban players you are worse than.

You think "no, players wouldn't do this!" But you only have to look to PVP for proof that they absolutely would. Players will report you for literally just PVPing in Cyrodil. This player base is report happy even outside of PVP.

this is absolutely what would happen

i think there was a proven case of the 2nd option not working in another game, a pro level player was unable to find matches in their skill level because almost all other players blocked them, and in that time of the game it worked as you never played against a blocked player

so a pro level player was eventually unable to find matches, or when they did get them would be far below their opponents were basically novice level

Yes, that was Overwatch. It's a team-based hero shooter fps. At the time, the most dominant hero in the game was Widowmaker. Whole matches would revolve around who had the better Widowmaker. This person was one of the best Widowmakers in the game. People didn't want to fight him, so they'd avoid him to give themselves a competitive advantage in climbing. So many did this that he couldn't find matches for his rank.

Personofsecrets · July 2

I'm sympathetic to the idea that people shouldn't have to play me if they don't want to. Why make a miserable experience for someone?

spartaxoxo · July 2

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I'm sympathetic to the idea that people shouldn't have to play me if they don't want to. Why make a miserable experience for someone?

The guy in Overwatch's queue times were very long. During off-peak hours, he couldn't even find matches at all. Many of the people doing it weren't miserable. He had consistently polite and friendly interactions. He was just good. And they didn't want to play him because they didn't want to lose.

ESO_player123 · July 3

jaws343 wrote: »

Both of those suggestions would do far more harm than good.

Players would absolutely weaponize a rating system to try to harm players who are better than them.

Players would also abuse a ban list, by, again, banning players who are better than them.

What better way to work your way up a scoreboard than to poorly rate or ban players you are worse than.

You think "no, players wouldn't do this!" But you only have to look to PVP for proof that they absolutely would. Players will report you for literally just PVPing in Cyrodil. This player base is report happy even outside of PVP.

Agree. Players will absolutely abuse such system if it was implemented. I dislike when someone intentionally stalls just like everybody else, but the reporting/blocking system is definitely not the way to solve this issue.

Tommy_The_Gun · July 3

From OP's Description, it kinda sounds like some players who want to do Tales of Tribute daily endeavour, simply leave their game on and go on a break. And it happens since walk-over do not count and there is no "I give up button" button (or if there is it won't count towards endeavour). So maybe the simpler solution would be to just let people play vs NPCs for the endeavour to count ?

WitchyKiki · July 3

I have saved screenshots of colorful whispers I've received, its a win. I laugh at them later with friends. As for time sitters, I am usually playing another game or reading when I'm playing TOT. They are just wasting their own time at that point.

Necrotech_Master · July 3

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

From OP's Description, it kinda sounds like some players who want to do Tales of Tribute daily endeavour, simply leave their game on and go on a break. And it happens since walk-over do not count and there is no "I give up button" button (or if there is it won't count towards endeavour). So maybe the simpler solution would be to just let people play vs NPCs for the endeavour to count ?

there is an option to concede, but i dont know if it counts towards the endeavor or not if you choose to concede (though the endeavor states to just play a tribute match, i dont know if this implies "to normal victory route" or can include concession)

Personofsecrets · July 3

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I'm sympathetic to the idea that people shouldn't have to play me if they don't want to. Why make a miserable experience for someone?

The guy in Overwatch's queue times were very long. During off-peak hours, he couldn't even find matches at all. Many of the people doing it weren't miserable. He had consistently polite and friendly interactions. He was just good. And they didn't want to play him because they didn't want to lose.

How did overwatch fix that issue?

Personally speaking, I would probably block a handfull of people. A couple of trolls and a few that just quit all of the games at the start.

Some people enjoy the challenge, so I've been told, but I do suppose that certain implementations of a system could be abused.

Necrotech_Master · July 3

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I'm sympathetic to the idea that people shouldn't have to play me if they don't want to. Why make a miserable experience for someone?

The guy in Overwatch's queue times were very long. During off-peak hours, he couldn't even find matches at all. Many of the people doing it weren't miserable. He had consistently polite and friendly interactions. He was just good. And they didn't want to play him because they didn't want to lose.

How did overwatch fix that issue?

Personally speaking, I would probably block a handfull of people. A couple of trolls and a few that just quit all of the games at the start.

Some people enjoy the challenge, so I've been told, but I do suppose that certain implementations of a system could be abused.

i think they ended up reverting that system entirely if i remember correctly, so that blocking people no longer prevented you from being matched, just communication

spartaxoxo · July 3

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I'm sympathetic to the idea that people shouldn't have to play me if they don't want to. Why make a miserable experience for someone?

The guy in Overwatch's queue times were very long. During off-peak hours, he couldn't even find matches at all. Many of the people doing it weren't miserable. He had consistently polite and friendly interactions. He was just good. And they didn't want to play him because they didn't want to lose.

How did overwatch fix that issue?

Personally speaking, I would probably block a handfull of people. A couple of trolls and a few that just quit all of the games at the start.

Some people enjoy the challenge, so I've been told, but I do suppose that certain implementations of a system could be abused.

They made a small avoid as teammate list. So you couldn't stop yourself being matched against someone but wouldn't be able to play with them. So, not a solution here.

They also added a mute function and a player endorsement system. Rather than rate opponents negatively, you can rate people you enjoyed matching with or against. They also gave small exp bonus for rating. The result was toxic chat was cut down on. Chat is still pretty toxic but it's less than it used to be because some people care about their ratings.

Alarra · July 22

As someone who frequently multitasks while playing (and I know from talking to others that I'm definitely not the only one to do so), and has been accused a couple times of running the timer, especially when stuff comes up that I have to deal with, I'm concerned about such a system being abused.There's a timer there for a reason - if I take too much time, then I lose my turn and potentially the game, simple as that. And occasionally there's been times too where I try to make my move but it doesn't respond to me clicking on anything for much of my turn - dunno if that's a lag spike or what. Try not to assume the worst of people, because you genuinely don't know what's going on at the other end.

When someone messages me about it while playing I try to reply to explain and apologize, but half the time it doesn't go through (I assume because they're set to appear offline?) And the one time I did send a mail afterward explaining it, I just got a rude response after. 🤷‍♀️

ESO_player123 · July 22

Alarra wrote: »

As someone who frequently multitasks while playing (and I know from talking to others that I'm definitely not the only one to do so), and has been accused a couple times of running the timer, especially when stuff comes up that I have to deal with, I'm concerned about such a system being abused.There's a timer there for a reason - if I take too much time, then I lose my turn and potentially the game, simple as that. And occasionally there's been times too where I try to make my move but it doesn't respond to me clicking on anything for much of my turn - dunno if that's a lag spike or what. Try not to assume the worst of people, because you genuinely don't know what's going on at the other end.

When someone messages me about it while playing I try to reply to explain and apologize, but half the time it doesn't go through (I assume because they're set to appear offline?) And the one time I did send a mail afterward explaining it, I just got a rude response after. 🤷‍♀️

Well, while the stalling behavior is not common, I's usually possible to tell when a player stalls on purpose. When this happens across multiple games with the same player it's a dead giveaway what is going on. I have played with one particular player that stalls when the game does not go their way. They also once stalled when they won and instead of finishing the winning turn (they had a huge lead over me), they waited until the timer on that last turn would run out instead of clicking on the hourglass.

Personofsecrets · July 22

I guess that it's worth mentioning that a number of opponents do complain to me that I'm taking too long. What's funny about that is that they almost always have taken up more total time during that same game than I have.

ESO_player123 · July 22

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I guess that it's worth mentioning that a number of opponents do complain to me that I'm taking too long. What's funny about that is that they almost always have taken up more total time during that same game than I have.

I think what is being discussed in this tread is not about choosing a deck that takes longer to play out (like Almalexia) or thinking a bit longer about the next move. Intentional stallers are a completely different breed.

Edit: like in the example I described above or in situations when a player at the very start of the game plays all their cards and then waits for the time to run out on each turn.

Personofsecrets · July 22

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

I guess that it's worth mentioning that a number of opponents do complain to me that I'm taking too long. What's funny about that is that they almost always have taken up more total time during that same game than I have.

I think what is being discussed in this tread is not about choosing a deck that takes longer to play out (like Almalexia) or thinking a bit longer about the next move. Intentional stallers are a completely different breed.

Edit: like in the example I described above or in situations when a player at the very start of the game plays all their cards and then waits for the time to run out on each turn.

Yes, and that is what I'm being accused of when I'm just playing as normal. That includes games where people claim that I'm purposely dragging out the game even when they have taken more time than I have during that same game.

It is obvious when people are taking up the turn timer in bad faith. There are still some players that expand what that means to even cases like what I write.

Rkindaleft · July 31

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Both of those suggestions would do far more harm than good.

Players would absolutely weaponize a rating system to try to harm players who are better than them.

Players would also abuse a ban list, by, again, banning players who are better than them.

What better way to work your way up a scoreboard than to poorly rate or ban players you are worse than.

You think "no, players wouldn't do this!" But you only have to look to PVP for proof that they absolutely would. Players will report you for literally just PVPing in Cyrodil. This player base is report happy even outside of PVP.

this is absolutely what would happen

i think there was a proven case of the 2nd option not working in another game, a pro level player was unable to find matches in their skill level because almost all other players blocked them, and in that time of the game it worked as you never played against a blocked player

so a pro level player was eventually unable to find matches, or when they did get them would be far below their opponents were basically novice level

I used to play the competitive mode in FIFA a few years ago and this is EXACTLY what happened at the top divisions. People would just block all the YouTubers and known pro players' accounts so they had a less likely chance at facing someone who was good/try to get easier matches.

GuuMoonRyoung · August 2

Ehhhmmm... I might be guilty of such behavior, just the other day I decided to *** around and took rajin, I kept giving my opponent bewilderment while taking only the rajin cards to knock down his prestige. The match went on for more than 30 minutes, he finally managed to get 40 while I was still down to only 12. After the match, he sent me pm saying: "This game is not for autistic people, never play this game again.". Can't blame the guy, I took out my frustration on him, I was on a long ass losing streak and didn't feel like giving another match my very best only to be disappointed again.