Blocking Games from Starting

[eldryan]

If you don't want certain game to start, for example u want 3v3 and there's 7 ppl who want 4v4, sitting in 3v3 game watching new joins to channel sign without knowing issue and then unsign delaying game from auto-unhosting and delaying 4v4 from starting for 15mins should be bannable. It's just ridiculous to have this function in game like this, then deny swaps cuz "I want 3v3."

Recently skillerinstinct did something similar to this (by recent I speak of 20 mins ago) and it's such blatant abuse I can't imagine why action isn't being taken to prevent this.

[skillerinstinct]

wow really?

I am not sure if I 100 % understood what you mean, you somehow have an unusual word order. Or it is because I am not a native english speaker( I allready see the mature counter on my english coming). But anyways it seems like you say that I block games, while you do it and encourage others for it too.

So I will just recapiluate what happenend:

1. Someone started a 4s, when there were for sure enough ppl around and not afk.

2. 6 or 7 ppl were signed, when you told others to unsign, because you want challenge game for what ever reasons( be aware, you told. Didn't ask if others are fine with it, which is requirement therefore anyways as far as I remember.)

3. We unsigned and went for a 2s in the end. So we didn't block at all.

So it's more you who blocked a game, but for sure not me. I waited 30 min for a game and dont feel like waiting more for such a kindergarden.

[skillerinstinct]

And he just kicked me from observer spot in 3s lobby, when we could have gone for a 4s. Gog was there too in observer slot.

So you "blocked" gog from a game too, just to revenge me. Don't create such threads, if it is just personal. What a hypocrite you are

[Krumme]

You are all adults - try and act like it
There is no reason why this should be a problem - try and get as many in the games possible or if someone simply despice 4s 2 people have to obs until 2 more are in lobby

[eldryan]

I didn't block gog from anything. If you were to play, you would be on my team, and I didn't want that. So it wouldn't be 4v4, just 3v3...

Also, you literally blocked donbola from accepting challenge by starting 2v2, when we had 8 players sitting there waiting for 10 mins because you were the last one and refusing to unsign from 3v3. Which you made to block the challenge after all unsigned from 4v4. Then when other 3 wanted to unhost 2v2, because they were signing for challenge, you refused.

I am not banning anyone who doesn't unsign, telling ppl to unsign is not remotely relevant to this.

@krumme This is the larger issue of players blocking games they wish for from getting started, because of their preference for a certain game type. It has happened more then once, and is something so easily preventable.

[Krumme]

@eldryan if it is so easily preventable please do give me your suggestion to a rule or w/e that would help more than it would harm and we will take it into consideration

also if this is such a big problem take screenshots and send them to us so we have something to judge from as this currently is ones word against the others and us mods can't be in channel checking all the time if people behave - again I really hope you will try and respect each other and the wishes of the majority

[eldryan]

@eldryan if it is so easily preventable please do give me your suggestion to a rule or w/e that would help more than it would harm and we will take it into consideration

also if this is such a big problem take screenshots and send them to us so we have something to judge from as this currently is ones word against the others and us mods can't be in channel checking all the time if people behave - again I really hope you will try and respect each other and the wishes of the majority

Rule can be:
a. Don't stay signed if majority is against 3v3 or 4v4 mode.

Or fix can be:
a. Make Challenge mode so can't interrupt by starting without !accept yet.
b. Make so can't unsign/dodge challenge mode if teams already drafting (not exactly related, but challenge mode is unpolished setting).

For afkers:
a. Reset time to auto-unhost at 3 minutes, not 10. If game doesn't start yet in 3 minutes, can remake. No need keep it for 10 minutes.

[Krumme]

"a. Don't stay signed if majority is against 3v3 or 4v4 mode." that is pretty much a "rule" already as it's commen knowledge to do so but I don't see a "punishment" of this? should you get banned for a day for wanting 3v3 instead of 4v4 or the other way around? explain futher please

"a. Make Challenge mode so can't interrupt by starting without !accept yet." - not sure what you mean as your english is somewhat confusing - please explain

"b. Make so can't unsign/dodge challenge mode if teams already drafting (not exactly related, but challenge mode is unpolished setting)."
I agree this could be a rule but then again people that dodge those games imo. counts as dodging normal games so I don't feel the need to make another rule toward this.

"a. Reset time to auto-unhost at 3 minutes, not 10. If game doesn't start yet in 3 minutes, can remake. No need keep it for 10 minutes."
Sounds like a good idea to make the auto unhost time smaller - not sure I agree with 3 minutes but could be something that we should follow up on as this could fix the afk'ing/dodging via afk'ing etc.

[eldryan]

a. If you are blocking other game from starting, by staying in 3v3 with 8 ppl want to play 4v4, yes you should be banned. It's game ruining in a small fashion.

a. If you start a challenge, without having someone else accept it, the challenge can be stopped by a !start2. I was speaking as someone who has just talked about this for 20 mins+ to other players, and didn't feel elaboration was necessary as the more well-versed !challenge ppl already know of the issue.

b. Technically it's not a rule, and they would say "but game didn't start, I am allowed to !unsign before game starts."

[ZTX)Fiji]

Skillerinstinct was right. . As (ALWAYS) Eldryan was the only One opposing the rest, because He wanted challenge as the only person out of 8 - and the other 7 Players just wanted a game to start - as a solution they decided to start 2x 2v2 without eldryan when diablo_ logged on. The issue of eldryans wish for a Challenge was disgussed with a Whisperfest so He wouldnt get offended. Skillerinstinct didnt anything wrong, it was just a simple disagreement.

[eldryan]

you are dumb fiji. literally every player whispered me except skiller and martiny, and on top of that half the players complained to diablo...

[Diablo_]

and on top of that half the players complained to diablo...

Hm, that's new to me
Only you complained to me and maybe pewpew and donbola, tho I wouldn't say they complained and just helped elaborating what happened.

We might lower the auto-unhost timer but besides that I don't see a reason to change anything. I for one think people should be able to play whatever they want, but ofc I also hope that usually people start games so as many as possible can play.

As Krumme said we are all adults and we really shouldn't have to intervene in how games are to be hosted. If there's a blatant abuse going on (for example 4 people want to play 2vs2, a fifth guy stays signed in a 4vs4 and just ignores them), sure, report it, but that's not the case here.

Also, why would skillerinstinct be wrong and you right. If you are 8 people you can either 2x 2vs2 or 1x 4vs4. If you don't want to play 2vs2, why would skiller have to play 4vs4 if he doesn't like that (and the waiting with it)?

[Diablo_]

For afkers:
a. Reset time to auto-unhost at 3 minutes, not 10. If game doesn't start yet in 3 minutes, can remake. No need keep it for 10 minutes.

I just noticed that I maybe missunderstood this. Are you refering to "the game has been aborted because no activity in the last 10 minutes" (and want to lower this) or to how long someone can be afk after a game has been hosted until you can unhost it? Or do you actually want both being set to 3 minutes?

[eldryan]

For afkers:
a. Reset time to auto-unhost at 3 minutes, not 10. If game doesn't start yet in 3 minutes, can remake. No need keep it for 10 minutes.

I just noticed that I maybe missunderstood this. Are you refering to "the game has been aborted because no activity in the last 10 minutes" (and want to lower this) or to how long someone can be afk after a game has been hosted until you can unhost it? Or do you actually want both being set to 3 minutes?

i meant first one. 3 mins too short to wait imo after game is hosted, unless player said he is ok with swapping if he is afk or something.

also they elaborated because no need to repeat everything i just said, and restated what I said (their complaint was rather obvious in that they were sitting in channel because they couldn't play due to waiting for challenge...)

[Diablo_]

Auto abort timer will (probably) be set to 5 minutes whenever uakf.b gets to it.

No further responses, case solved, archiving.