1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hey please check out our new forum Suggestions and Ideas found in the area "The Bay" - as we love all your ideas and want to collect them in one place, - please use it going forward. :) Thanks already for helping to make Battle Bay an even better experience. Remember: If your idea already exists - simply add your comment or like to an existing one so we avoid duplicates.
    Dismiss Notice

Appeal Process against Anti-Seal Clubbing Penalty (~800 below max infamy)

Discussion in 'Suggestions & Ideas' started by YerJokinArnYer, 16 Jul 2018.

  1. YerJokinArnYer

    YerJokinArnYer MVP

    Joined:
    1 Oct 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Location:
    UK
    I wonder whether there should be an appeal process for players affected by the anti-seal clubbing penalty.

    Obviously some players deliberately drop infamy, and should be punished to protect the weaker players.

    But I’m talking about the genuine players who, for whatever reason, lose a lot of infamy and get caught up in it. It can take them a long time to get back out, and they can become frustrated and even quit the game. Or they may become uptight due to the penalty, and so play poorly as a result which compounds the problem. And once they’re being punished, it is harder to improve your gear/training so it is harder to climb again.

    At the moment, the penalty is applied using an automated system, which looks purely at infamy and ignores things like, for example
    Were there floaters on my team?
    Was I carried to my infamy high?
    Did I have bad teammates?
    Was the internet bad in my part of the world, and so I suffered a lot of disconnection?
    Am I performing in each game, but just being unlucky?
    Etc

    So my thought would be that a player could submit a request for their results to be looked by a human who could make a judgement on this looking at a more rounded set of factors. In fact, I wonder whether this is a right players have under GDPR? (Under GDPR people have the right for a human to review decisions made by machines, but not sure whether game data is included in GDPR)

    If the player stays at the low infamy limit, their results should be regularly reviewed to make sure they aren’t then abusing the system.

    NB: I am not subject to these anti-tanking rules myself, so this is not a selfish request.
     
  2. R4Z0R

    R4Z0R Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    11 Nov 2017
    Messages:
    972
    Location:
    why do u wanna know?
    i feel like devs wouldn't be keen due to the extra manpower needed, maybe they integrated the machine analysis system to reduce their workload and use that time to do something else like check for bugs, code new implementations, fix stuff etc.
    Disclaimer: I'm not a dev so the above statements are not concrete. They are only predictions.
     
  3. YerJokinArnYer

    YerJokinArnYer MVP

    Joined:
    1 Oct 2017
    Messages:
    1,197
    Location:
    UK
    I agree. Any system implemented would need to be one that wasn’t heavy on manpower.
    I’m probably suggesting looking at battle results screens, plus disconnection reports, as these probably would have enough data to show whether a player was playing hard. I’m not suggesting that a Dev would watch all the replays, as that would be far too much work.
     
  4. ViscountSniffit

    ViscountSniffit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2017
    Messages:
    2,614
    I’m somewhat ambivalent about this idea.

    On one hand I agree that innocent people shouldn’t be punished. Appealing the punishment would offer a possible solution to the problem.

    On the other hand, it’s a problem that shouldn’t exist in the first place. And if they had the man power to check appeals, then they might as well just check tanking reports, and ban the people who are doing it on purpose.

    I suppose, since the alternative is likely to be ‘nothing changes’, I support this idea.
     
  5. Spinners71

    Spinners71 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2017
    Messages:
    463
    Other games (League of Legends, for one) have crowd-sourced the manpower to review reports & appeals.
    Similarly, I imagine it wouldn't be hard to create a way for players to review data and recommend to grant/deny appeal requests.
    This doesn't necessarily need to be limited to anti-tanking situations, but could be broadened to other things.
    Community in charge of the community.
    Rovio could oversee the process, and even have as much control as they want for who exactly would be the people they allow to review player situations.
     
    TheAntiSnipe likes this.
  6. Jimbot

    Jimbot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2018
    Messages:
    200
    I dropped a ton of infamy getting acclimated to my mk5 speeder and I got scarily close to infamy tanking penalties. I wasn't deliberately tanking, missing shots, or even playing badly. I just wasn't accustomed to the speed. I was almost penalized for effectively progressing in the game.
     
    StrictSalmon307 likes this.
  7. StrictSalmon307

    StrictSalmon307 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    31 Dec 2017
    Messages:
    1,582
    Occupation:
    Professional student
    Location:
    Home
    Yesterday I lost 42 games in a session and was also almost kn the tanking zone. I played normally as well, and wasn’t doing anything wrong.
    Sometimes bad luck happens, nothin you can do about it
     
    Jimbot likes this.

Share This Page