Should Troublemakers Lose Rank?

I think about troublemakers like Sean who brings in an army of alts to a team game, playing both sides, in order to rig the game. He gets 2 day bans, 1 week bans, but none of that seems to discourage him. Perhaps At War should do discipline a little more "military style", and actually take rank and SP/upgrades away, requiring the player to earn it all back. Perhaps then the punishment would be serious enough to deter troublemakers?

Idk who cares about losing rank. if he does that many times just permaban

No-no

No, mutes and bans do the trick just fine.

I think I got reset a rank before years ago then didn't come on for months and forgot. Maybe it didn't happen, I idk, if its possible can the mods or admins see?

Then the only way to lower your rank would be to disobey the rules. Believe it or not some players want their SP reduced, I revert back to Hormogita in 2015, when a mod lowered his SP as a request because he preferred to look like a rank 9, however many players objected as this would be unknown to any players not aware of his 'true rank'. So the idea is fundamentally flawed for that reason alone.

Start out with making tunder3 at least a rank 2 and i'm all for it

Sun Tsu hit it on the head as usual. Would be an ok idea if not for the rank smurfing.

Instead of decreasing the rank you could put an extra information in the profile which would be the number of bans received, then when creating a game give the possibility to inhibit access to those who have more than a number of bans

作者： Eridans, 27.08.2020 at 02:30

Instead of decreasing the rank you could put an extra information in the profile which would be the number of bans received, then when creating a game give the possibility to inhibit access to those who have more than a number of bans

Is publicly vilifiing the player really a good way to do business? The objective of moderation in game being: To stop the problem from happening, yet to also keep players and hopefully rehabilitate the player so that they know not to do it again. Publicly shaming players in my opinion wouldn't be the most user friendly way of dealing with problem players. Each case warrants its own level of punishment or ban so a 3 strikes and out policy wouldn't work either.

作者： Sun Tsu, 28.08.2020 at 05:26

作者： Eridans, 27.08.2020 at 02:30

Instead of decreasing the rank you could put an extra information in the profile which would be the number of bans received, then when creating a game give the possibility to inhibit access to those who have more than a number of bans

Is publicly vilifiing the player really a good way to do business? The objective of moderation in game being: To stop the problem from happening, yet to also keep players and hopefully rehabilitate the player so that they know not to do it again. Publicly shaming players in my opinion wouldn't be the most user friendly way of dealing with problem players. Each case warrants its own level of punishment or ban so a 3 strikes and out policy wouldn't work either.

in this post we are dealing with someone who is a repeat offender, who does not care about punishments, so much he continues to cheat and ruin the game of others, not someone who makes mistakes 1 or 2 times but then changes direction.

Mine is an idea that could also be wrong or maybe it could be implemented differently, for example not all bans are marked in a visible way, but only the most serious ones or in case of relapse or after a certain time the number decreases automatically up to always zero if it receives no more.

moreover, it does not necessarily have to be visible on the profile to everyone, but only to the interested player, the game simply prevents you from entering games if it has a number of bans higher than that decided, but the only one who would notice this is the interested player

Then clearly if the thing is marked but not visible to the players but visible to the moderators who in the event of a repeat offense increase the penalty up to the ban for life then in my opinion it would be fine the same

Hell no