Is Griefing a huge Problem for you? How Could Klei fix it?

[Cheggf]

1 minute ago, Aeglefire said:

 

That's not real testing. Real testing is that Klei implements it.

Real testing is looking at games that have attempted this and seen it universally fail. 

[Aeglefire]

Real testing is testing in the actual game.

[Aeglefire]

I'm going to try to explain my karma system again here:

So, on the player screen, there will be a small basic notification seen there next to the player name, I'm envisioning a simple smiley face. If you hover over the smiley face, you'll see a smiley and frown face, each with a number. The smiley face has max 10 likes, the sad face has max 3 dislikes. If that person has been kicked recently, they get a dislike. People can choose to like/dislike a player in-game on the same server if they choose to do so. These likes/dislikes dissipate down to zero over time, so that players always tend towards neutral reputation. I'm thinking 3 days to get rid of all dislikes, and 20 days to get rid of all likes. Likes dissipate more slowly than dislikes.

[W0l0l0]

10 minutes ago, Aeglefire said:

So, on the player screen, there will be a small basic notification seen there next to the player name, I'm envisioning a simple smiley face. If you hover over the smiley face, you'll see a smiley and frown face, each with a number. The smiley face has max 10 likes, the sad face has max 3 dislikes. If that person has been kicked recently, they get a dislike. People can choose to like/dislike a player in-game on the same server if they choose to do so. These likes/dislikes dissipate down to zero over time, so that players always tend towards neutral reputation. I'm thinking 3 days to get rid of all dislikes, and 20 days to get rid of all likes. Likes dissipate more slowly than dislikes.

Griefers would probably team up to give each other happy likes, which would catalyse cooperation to maximise fun ruining. 

[Aeglefire]

Ok guys I give up, the current system is the best system, let's not change it, the game is perfect right now as it is. Griefers are not that big of a deal.

[Mysterious box]

59 minutes ago, Cr4zyFl4mes said:

You can place walls & fences next to each other.

The power to mark profiles as griefers wouldn't belong to a single player, but to a bulk of players. You would have to be very unlucky to get a lot of bad karma for doing nothing bad.

That's very untrue people get kicked for eatting mandrakes, getting resources others want first, taking up a spot on the server they want to save for their friend, kicked for getting glom/chester first etc. Players can't be trusted with that kind of power because it assumes the majority always have good intentions.

[1bubbainpa]

Oh yeah, a karma system. I have never seen a functional karma system in ANY game I’ve played with multiplayer interaction unless someone can prove me wrong.

Anyways, the problem with adding griefing-prevention tools is the following:

1. Griefing-prevention tools should not have an impact on overall gameplay, or has to be used in assumption of player good-will. *cough* rollback *cough*
 

2. Griefing-prevention tools should not be obnoxious for legitimate players to deal with, like the idea of private chests or some of the other crazy things I’ve seen recommended as anti-grief measures.

3. There’s always gonna be another way for griefers to grief. I have literally never seen a public game or public server implement on any sort of system reduce griefing to a 0%.

With that in mind, I think the tools we have now are... alright. Only thing I can add is when a player leaves, they can leave their items behind as a server toggle.

[minespatch]

1 minute ago, 1bubbainpa said:

the idea of private chests

You mean like mimics? Such as evil Chester?

[Aeglefire]

In hindsight, I now don't tihnk a karma system is good because it's just too quick to dissipate reputation, and also it's so hidden it's hardly ever going to be used. It would have to be something longer-lasting and/or with automatic checking of player actions. But this is so many cans of worms.

[clickrush]

1 minute ago, Aeglefire said:

In hindsight, I now don't tihnk a karma system is good because it's just too quick to dissipate reputation, and also it's so hidden it's hardly ever going to be used. It would have to be something longer-lasting and/or with automatic checking of player actions. But this is so many cans of worms.

For sure it is a can of worms, because it never gets to the root of the problem which is inherently social, not technological. Social systems that prevent and control shitty behavior exist and can be implemented. They are called communities.

* Open a discord channel, a subreddit, steam group, a forum thread here or a combination thereof.

* Establish some basic, simple etiquette for cooperative survival games, write that down.

* Invite players who agree with you and especially well-known players like streamers and forum regulars.

* Keep inviting players who apply, kick players who don't comply, moderate conflicts.

The three biggest indicators of success:

* You have enough members to start games regularly.

* Griefing happens very rarely and is dealt with.

* People start complaining about your community and open discussions/feedback/suggestion threads.

[Aeglefire]

Just play with community moderators, and talk to players you don't know via communication, I think this is the best way to combat griefing, in addition to the tools already implemented of rollback, kick, griefer spawn protection, item dropping upon leaving server, etc. And that mod that tells the server if a player has burned or hammered another player's structure, yes that's good, I would like that in the main game.

[AllFunNGamez]

22 hours ago, Cheggf said:

But, to answer the thread title.

No, not really. The current systems in the game work adequately to protect against griefing.

 

I am so confused in the other thread you bashed my idea because it would help griefers more than players but here it seems as if you are mentioning griefers are not that big of an issue? Which is it?

[Aeglefire]

22 hours ago, reichull said:

There is actually a decent mod called Camp Security that does I think what you're looking for.
If a player without permission of a structure tries to burn/kill/destroy something that isn't theirs- it won't allow them

. 

 

 

This one, I think this should be in the main game. This is a great way to make sure which players are griefers and which are not. I like this mod a lot, even though it can be bypassed, but of course everything can be bypassed.

The functionality of this mod or some form of it should be in the main game as added deterrent of griefing.

Edit: But of course, after just thinking about it for a few minutes, it would be weird for the main game to display server notifications like this, it also detracts from the main gameplay. *sigh*

[Cr4zyFl4mes]

21 hours ago, Cheggf said:

Give me your Steam profile and I will get a bunch of my friends to leave a -rep on it.

You wouldn't be able to report any player as you want. Rather you'd be able to rep a player you played with in the last hour or so.

20 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

That's very untrue people get kicked for eatting mandrakes, getting resources others want first, taking up a spot on the server they want to save for their friend, kicked for getting glom/chester first etc. Players can't be trusted with that kind of power because it assumes the majority always have good intentions.

well, that's why the  report wouldn't count per player but rather per server. So even if a group of players has some unjustifyiable reason to report you, you'd get only 1 report. You'd have to collect multiple reports from multiple servers for it to count. What's the chance that you'd get reported unjustifyiably across all the public servers?

I am not saying this system would be perfect (obviously it wouldn't be able to catch one-off griefers), but to me, it sounds like it could work.

[CameoAppearance]

I almost never encounter griefers even when I play on Klei servers, but I do tend to play at off-peak hours so that might be affecting my experience. I don't even frequently encounter selfish and/or cartoonishly inept players who unintentionally ruin the game for other people (by hoarding resources or fighting fire hounds too close to the base or whatever, stuff that isn't obviously malicious), much less players doing things that have no benefit to them and aren't plausible mistakes in order to grief. 

[Mysterious box]

1 hour ago, Cr4zyFl4mes said:

You wouldn't be able to report any player as you want. Rather you'd be able to rep a player you played with in the last hour or so.

well, that's why the  report wouldn't count per player but rather per server. So even if a group of players has some unjustifyiable reason to report you, you'd get only 1 report. You'd have to collect multiple reports from multiple servers for it to count. What's the chance that you'd get reported unjustifyiably across all the public servers?

I am not saying this system would be perfect (obviously it wouldn't be able to catch one-off griefers), but to me, it sounds like it could work.

That would either have to be very very involved on kiel's part for the reports or what's to stop a griefer from farming rep through multiple servers.

[Cr4zyFl4mes]

38 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

That would either have to be very very involved on kiel's part for the reports or what's to stop a griefer from farming rep through multiple servers.

Do you mean farming positive reports? I only meant negative reports.

[Tranoze]

Just make it harder to ruin other people's game.
Base fire spread are too easy when people hammer flingo. To make it harder, we could have a protection wire that shock people when they try to hammer something. Maybe need 1 goat horn + 4 gold, can be apply it to any structure to prevent player from hammering them. They can still use deconstruction staff to relocate, but i believe something like deconstruction staff is not something griefers can easily obtain.

Right now, any griefer can ruin a base using 2 twigs and 2 grass, which klei give everyone 5 twigs and 5 grass when they first join. Im not saying it is bad, but life have been too easy for people who want to ruin other's game.

[Mysterious box]

14 minutes ago, Cr4zyFl4mes said:

Do you mean farming positive reports? I only meant negative reports.

The system would only allow players to lower someone's rep? That seems like it could cause alot of problems in and of itself.

[Dr. Safety]

I don't think anything automated will be able to fairly and correctly detect griefers to give them negative reputation. The only way to fix this problem is some form of human moderation, which just can't happen in Klei servers. The best thing is to not get attached to Klei servers and go to community servers with active moderators if you want a long lasting world.

Look at other games. Public servers are usually moderated by the majority, which is how it is in Klei servers. Community servers are typically moderated more adequately due to human moderation

[Cr4zyFl4mes]

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

The system would only allow players to lower someone's rep? That seems like it could cause alot of problems in and of itself.

You don't have to see the "reputation" as a score, you just have to look up reports per servers visited for example.

[Cheggf]

5 hours ago, Cr4zyFl4mes said:

You wouldn't be able to report any player as you want. Rather you'd be able to rep a player you played with in the last hour or so.

Which literally only prevents people who don't play on public servers from being false reported. But people who don't play on public servers wouldn't be affected by the reporting system anyways.

[Mysterious box]

At the end of the day I feel like it would give too much power to the players which atleasting in my experience when it comes to this sort of thing has always gone wrong but if it really came down to it I'd prefer kiel handling than assuming the system won't be abused by random players if they went forward with it. It's not like kiel doesn't care it's just solutions like these open the door to a whole can of worms of the expensive variety.