Unfair DDNet votekick system

[n000b]

i never got kicked by a funvoter, but i got blocked 'often' by a blocker and a vote doesn't kick him because people do not care when they do not get blocked too.

[BannZay]

@Frrr, yea good idea, this makes votes justice and partially solve the problem of endless votes on full servers, but votes will be still random, which will be not so big problem if it will be accepted.
Cuse this way, you will think about fail vote twice before voting every your enemy.

And Important, now my suggestion is publick, please finally attach voteinitiating to IPs not to playername

[CffTime]

I`m rly didnt see any logic here and in same your words, sry. Increasing vote barrier we get system, which give possibility to kick only when player are really harmful for server and many players got it.

I will explain this one more time.
Player's vote (no matter f3 or f4) , who don't know if one should be punished, is random. The more players are on server - the more random voting gets. Your idea will guarantee to make votes, on servers with somewhat small amount of players, random. Because it will now be more likely to be in need of these random votes to kick a player.

yea, very nice thing, when you goting kicked by random player with reason : "funvote ahahah". Very fcking normal thing! Maybe you didnt know that in DDNet this word used a bit wrong, I mean votes without any reason to kick, just for fun for voter, and pain for target. Do you think its normal?

You didn't quite understand what I meant. It's not that important for discussion anyway.

Easy suggestion:
If player A start vote for player B, then if player A reach less <50% he got ban/spec, otherwise If reach >50% of votes then target got ban/spec. With this system u will never see "funvote". Cuz vote start will impose liability.

No, sorry, but that's how it already works. If you call a vote against a player and you fail, a revenge vote will be called against you. Well, I guess it is not as stable as your idea.

And Important, now my suggestion is publick, please finally attach voteinitiating to IPs not to playername

Hm? What do you mean?

[BannZay]

The more players are on server - the more random voting gets.

Still no strong logic here. Anyways, I got what I mean, I`m just fully didnt agree with you. My target - votesystem, when player will be kicked only when it really needed. Now its random where you have 50% of succefull votecall.

If you call a vote against a player and you fail, a revenge vote will be called against you. Well, I guess it is not as stable as your idea.

Man, cmooooon. player A call vote - fail, player B call vote - fail, friend of A call vote - fail, friend of B call vote - accept, and all becouse of random, not cuse B is bad.

Another situation when player A call vote, and becouse of B is not really bad man, and probably bad only for A, not many people press f3. Result - A will be kicked by new vote system(using idea of Frrr). End of story
The moral of the story is : dont start vote if you didnt sure in succes of it.

[Chairn]

Best way would be take into account only the closest player to the target, so that player that are at the opposite side of the map don't have to make random vote.

[Soreu]

@BannZay: You kinda didn't get that votes will always be random as not everyone care/knows what's happening around you - players just vote based on reason/caller.
Same with funvotes, they will always be there not depending on the chance to pass, as they are not made for a reason but for fun as its "name" says. Giving the more percentage needed to pass a vote will be imo only more annoyed, as I barely got kicked from a fv, but a lot of times was blocked by guys of who we couldn't get rid of because all votes were failing (mostly just not enough votes in total, because ppl do not care as long as they are not involved)

@Chairn: but what then about those who actually do pause to see what's going on, before they vote? Also then small group of blockers/trolls will be able to kick every single guy they see on their way...

[BannZay]

not everyone care/knows what's happening around you

So why system should trust to this voters, and furthermore decide to kick player becouse of half of server randomly press f3.
The 75% is just more an adequate indicator

And if player block you is this reason strong enough to kick him from server? Players should decide who bad man, and if you play in group your group should block him. This type of gameplay looks nice and not random for me, but for sure not random votewars ofcourse.

---

For ppl who didnt read all hystory here 3 suggestions:
-Increasing persent for succes vote( for example to 70%)
-If vote fails - voter got banned/spec depends whihch he choose for vote for prevent fun/not important votes
-replace kick from server to kick from team, keeping players on server this way. Player will be able to play in another teams (1-75)

[Soreu]

It's often hard enough to get the 50% when it's really needed, so then I should probably pray to get the needed 75% if on server with 40 guys only 10 will vote and rest keep playing? I'm not an expert, but out of experience with all-the-votes-stuff, to me it would make the votes completely useless >.>

And it's not always possible to block the blocker(s), besides that, about both fv and blocking you can read on server with /rules

[BannZay]

@Soreu: as it should be. We play with votewars too much, now we think that its okay part of gameplay. If only not all players want kick him he shouldnt be kicked. At least we play in team 0 for fun. So why not got fun from cooperated war with blocker?
P.s.: harder to kick really annoing blocker - is the worse part of this feature, but dont miss about fv/personal dislike/kicking noobs/other not important votes

[Soreu]

But the most don't give a single fck because they are in other part, so you will never kick blocker or afk guy blocking path.

Nevertheless there is rule about funvotes in /rules, but it's impossible to always have mod on the server with guy doing them

P.S. We should wait longer between replies as we both edit posts xd