Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to General Forum   

Posts 1 - 29 of 29   
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 10:53:39


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
The ability to remove players who join your games, before the game has begun. Simple. Effective.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 11:18:36


Master Farah♦
Level 58
Report
Blacklist, invites and prerequisites. Simple. Effective
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 11:51:45


Death 
Level 59
Report
That would get abused a lot.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 12:00:25


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
I know lol.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 15:16:56


OnlyThePie
Level 53
Report
I actually agree with colonel. My main problem is not people I don't like in general, it's people who become inactive, or people who are being completely unreasonable/obnoxious. Maybe the person isn't always this bad, so they just get ejected from the game.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 16:01:40


Fleecemaster 
Level 59
Report
You know you can just blacklist a player to stop them joining right?

If they've already joined your game then just blacklist them, delete the game, and remake it.

Pretty simple, I'm not sure what you're actually after here...
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 16:16:20


{Canidae} Kretoma
Level 57
Report
I would like such a function. I normally do 40 player invite only games. Right now ONE has gone inactive, and i would have to redo all the slots and re-invite people. That will take me at least a full hour...
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 16:21:35


OnlyThePie
Level 53
Report
@Fleece: I'm not going to delete an entire game to get rid of one player, there are always people who don't rejoin.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 17:25:13

M. Poireau
Level 53
Report
That seems useful. (I actually thought it was already an option...)

However, it is NOT an alternative to "private games" - it doesn't solve any of the issues I was trying to fix. (Which has more with inviting players to your games than screening players OUT of them, which we already have blacklists and prerequisites for.)
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 18:06:12


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
Some people join diplos and don't claim a territory. Usually they go PE... it would end that.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 18:10:45


Master Jz 
Level 60
Report
IMO, people should be able to join and play any open game that shows up in their open games page. A feature like this would be nice for removing inactive and vacationing players, but I oppose a feature to remove just anyone.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 18:14:57


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
Is that a right or a privilege?
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 18:49:31


Benjamin628 
Level 59
Report
I think it's important to have certain people not be able to join your games.

"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 19:14:31


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
Dafuq?

Why would you blacklist a harmless lovable rogue like me???
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 19:16:30

wct
Level 56
Report
Vote to remove a player before game begins?
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 19:44:46


Zephyrum 
Level 60
Report
Hey, I'm with Colonel on this one.

When you're in a big real-time game (20+ people FFAs/Diplos/Whatever) and someone proceeds to be a prick in chat, blacklisting, deleting and re-doing is not an option, cause games with that many players take ages to fill and lots of people will be AFK or not reading chat to know why the game was deleted.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 20:27:05


The Hysterical Koala
Level 57
Report
If I understand this right, you want to be able to remove players from games in progress?

What's to stop somebody from removing a player because they are losing/winning/an obstruction?

AFAIK Diplos are games with rules that are already made up, not part of the warlight infrastructure. Why would Fizzer need to make something to support that specifically, when you could just choose who you play with? Or remove people before the game starts, who are not active, or not joining?
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 20:39:17


{Canidae} Kretoma
Level 57
Report
It is not possible to remove players when they have joined a game. They have to do it themselves. That is stupid...
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 20:44:09


OnlyThePie
Level 53
Report
@Koala & Kretoma: This function is only to enhance the current "Add/Remove player" ability, which only works BEFORE the game begins.

Right now, the only way to "remove" a player is if they haven't accepted. We want to change that.

Edited 1/1/2016 20:44:26
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 21:22:20


{Canidae} Kretoma
Level 57
Report
I know, i fully understand everything, but thank you nonetheless. ^^
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/1/2016 23:43:09


Zephyrum 
Level 60
Report
If I understand this right, you want to be able to remove players from games in progress?

What's to stop somebody from removing a player because they are losing/winning/an obstruction?

AFAIK Diplos are games with rules that are already made up, not part of the warlight infrastructure. Why would Fizzer need to make something to support that specifically, when you could just choose who you play with? Or remove people before the game starts, who are not active, or not joining?


No, talking about removing a person from a game while looking for players. The invite phase. In case someone joins and proceeds to be a dick.

And this is also valid for FFAs, not only diplomacies. FFAs are a part of the "warlight infrastructure", so...
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 01:28:02


The Hysterical Koala
Level 57
Report
If it is about the invite phase, the host could just set the game to start when he/she clicks begin. giving them plenty of time to see if someone is acting up already...?

I already see that happening on occasion.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 02:09:00


Fleecemaster 
Level 59
Report
Tbh, I don't seem to get any of these sorts of problems in my games, so I'm not 100% sure what the problem is...

Saying that I always blacklist troublesome players, so they can't ever join my games. I think most of my regular players would say my games are generally pretty stable?
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 02:36:36


ℳℛᐤƬrαńɋℰ✕
Level 55
Report
+ For the idea of Private Games
- For the idea of Password Games

What about option to reject?
For me its a two-way street. If one can invite then he should have the opposite function as well to reject? We can argue that there are roughly two ways to make games (lets leave out he private game idea at moment): Either Open-room + optional invites or Reserved seats for players aka Full Invitation.

Now the problem lies none of us want unwanted players in our games: we have two-methods thus far via Blacklist and Prerequisites.

For me I feel it is rather fool-proof system, unless a player´s games are constantly harassed by a Troll - seems rather rare occasion. Most people fear the misuse of this tool of declining players by force and so do I. For example if I join as a full team with my friend - a player may decline one of my friends and start the game before I can decline. Therefore we would be in minority or forced to play with stranger in team game against another team, that what was not my intention.

Warlight has proved more than once, that people are obsessed with Level, stats and points here. I do not care if someone deliberately declines experienced players to raise his stats, Farming is faster method - ask Lottery players or Certain clans. As well you can set max level on prerequisite and other cool things help you to hide your games from ranked players. But too much power to host, at least in my eyes makes joining games as a team risky business.

And really if things are that bad, then just Delete The game and re-host, even with 40 players it would take few minutes to invite them all. And if one fears, they do not join - then probably they were not up to the game in first place! This tool would be used in wrong reasons mainly in my eyes - cant see why would I need it. This is enough - that I can delete my games if something is going wrong.

What we truly need is Option to host private game - so I would not need to add absurd prerequisites, although its not hard to make - just why not make a workaround every-day function! Surely I am not alone here. - Need uservoice link for decent idea here - will give my +3 straight away!
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 03:07:42


Fleecemaster 
Level 59
Report
I can see why Fizzer isn't keen to add the options to kick players from games tbh
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 04:07:55


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
As I'm sure I already made clear, this option would only work until the game starts, the same way you can't add people to the game once it has started.

There are two possible ways for this to work. The first is basically just removing the block on the host "removing players that have already hit accept".

The second is changing the "accept" button to a "request" button, which sends some form of notification to the host who can accept or reject the player who has requested to join his game.

Either way, this option should only be possible in games with 20+ seats to prevent abuse, and perhaps it can even be introduced as part of the future "diplomacy" update which probably will never happen.

Hope that clears some of the fog for the haters.
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 04:17:44


Fleecemaster 
Level 59
Report
"The second is changing the "accept" button to a "request" button, which sends some form of notification to the host who can accept or reject the player who has requested to join his game."

Isn't far off what a Private game would be like anyway...?

There's a lot more suggestions than we can handle, are there any other developers about willing to chip in? Everyone has been busy over the holidays too, which is understandable...

Edited 1/2/2016 04:18:47
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 13:24:15


ℳℛᐤƬrαńɋℰ✕
Level 55
Report
I would see that request -> accept/reject function as this. That sometimes prerequisites are just false and player could still ask to join without sending an e-mail asking to invite. Happened with me rather a lot of times - and to be honest, usually someone who sends and e-mail, takes his time and is player to be considered in game. This would eliminate that, but just to speed up the process I would favor this angle approach.

But not that Accept game would be by default request. Like I explained above: If I join as a team, then either some or half of my team could be declined, and I have to end up playing with unwanted players. Its too common here, the Host just wants game to shift in his advance - I do not want to be bad person - but there is not just enough morale and ethics among Warlight players, although it should be strategy game (which I have beginning to doubt a lot lately).

- Private Game seems at moment the best way to play. And I would add the Request button for option, when player cant join due to BS or high prerequisites. But never as default!

Edited 1/2/2016 13:31:36
"Reject Player" (Alternative to Private Games): 1/2/2016 16:20:51


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
^I feel you...
Posts 1 - 29 of 29   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service