{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/8/2023 6:33:09 AM
24
This is why we need negative commendations, so this way, it serves as an in-game warning.
I had this happen during the 2nd week of lightfall durning a 100k campaign mission run. Luckily, they were a millisecond too slow, and I barely got the pinnacle.
We could have commendations like:
Greifer-pushes players off edges, starts encounters early, boots players durning final encounters
Foul mouth/screamer
Quitter
Afk
Piggyback - looking for carries
English
-
Oh no bro....cant do negative. Woke logic states we all get trophies even if we dont play and have no value and anyone that sucks its because the systemic rasicm built in that is causing it.
-
Editado por Sen: 4/8/2023 11:25:29 PMNah, dude. If you kick someone at the end of an activity, for WHATEVER reason, it's petty and you're garbage. It's not needed. Kick them in the moment. Not at the end if you don't like them.
-
How would you give a bad commendation if they kick you?
-
Bad accommodations never need to be in the game people will abuse them too much
-
That would be abused far more than eager edge
-
This is what I thought commendations was gonna be not just how much someone spends playing the game. even if it refreshes weekly incase you have grievers that give you bad ones on purpose
-
Yes, there's no way that would be exploited to sandbag someone you dont like even if they were a fine teammate.
-
Bro I noticed in crucible if you are performing well the casuals decide that even you don't deserve a commendation. Negative ones will have adverse effects
-
This is true. I ran several 4 and 5 kd iron banner games last night.....got -blam!- zero but the dudes with .25 and .15 got 3+...thats woke logic for ya
-
Dude! IB Top scorer .match clutch . and the bluberries are patting their "bros" on the back for finishing last! But all told ,I've given only @20 more than I've recieved across all my playing .Not too bad an average
-
[quote]Dude! IB Top scorer .match clutch . and the bluberries are patting their "bros" on the back for finishing last! But all told ,I've given only @20 more than I've recieved across all my playing .Not too bad an average[/quote] Most people don't look at the match results when giving commendations and just award the character based on looks or proximity to their own
-
Editado por Gibbon, the Ape Defector: 4/8/2023 4:41:19 PMThat is definitely possible, so even good people will have a few bad commendations. [u]But only a few[/u]; truly bad people will have a noticeably higher number of bad commendations, so even in cases of abuse of the system, it would still work pretty well. But in the face of that there will be a lot of negative commendations to go around if negative is an option. So there would have to be some clearer measuring tool that makes them less capable of crowding out positive ones if they do overpower positive ones on a normal basis.
-
idk man, look at the system we have now. People dont give commendations because they think a person deserved it, they give them out at random. Whats to stop people from doing that with negative ones, even just for laughs?
-
Okay sure, there is potential for a serious case of abuse. But personally I'm not against the idea of giving it a trial run and seeing how it goes. And if negative commendations significantly overpower the positive, then just take it back out. That type of thing can happen, like with sunsetting for example.
-
I definitely think griefer would be a good commendation to be able to try and give a player but I think that it can’t just be as simple to give as other commendations as trolls could take advantage of that too. I think it should have to be attached to a report against the player and expire from their record about the average time a season is active. if they get 2 other corroborating reports in that period it becomes permanent (carries across seasons and expansions permanent). To increase the chances they can’t cheese it they nor anyone in their clan or friends list can see negative reports until it’s permanent. It also wouldn’t be a bad idea if after 5-15 permanent reports they have a month long ban on LFG.
-
Totally wouldn't live up their no "name and shame " ideology. They're too "woke" to realize thats what it takes to defeat trolls and hackers/cheaters. It's Something Humans have used very effectively over the millennia to curb abhorrent social behaviors.
-
NO SIR!! YOU ARE WRONG! Trolls and such are only problems because of the systemic rasicm that been built in to keep the lesser man down. That .15 kd player has a reticle that move opposite of where he wants it to go and the bullets shoot backwards...hell when he supers its give the enmy thier super... Man the system gotta be tore down!!! DEFUND THE DEVS!!!!
-
It should also only be an option to report in pve and trials
-
people would abuse it though those same people would give those coms just to be tools
-
Negative coms would be even more useless than positive. People in general are more inclined to leave negative feedback over positive and it would just be exploited by salty crucible players
-
Editado por Gibbon, the Ape Defector: 4/8/2023 4:43:14 PMI just defended the idea but maybe I should have read more first lol, that is a good point Although.. if the only negative ones you give are extremely specific, like the examples given such as "foul-mouthed/angry" or "hinders gameplay", then upset commendations wouldn't be given out [u]as much[/u]. (The issue you're describing would still be present)
-
I think Negative Commendations COULD work but there would have to be something to trigger these to appear. So for OP's scenario, if the boss encounter was currently active and he was participating in damaging the boss, there would be no legitimate reason for the Fireteam Leader to kick them other than a situation where the person who has been kicked may have been trolling... Lets get back to this argument later. If a boss encounter is currently active and a Leader kicks someone, that player gets a personal commendation screen to flag up to admission whether the kick was justified or not [i](which it most likely wouldnt have been during this moment in time I'd imagine)[/i] and if they wish to take a course of action in the form of commending the leader negatively. [b][i](this commendation screen ONLY occurs if a leader has kicked someone during an active boss encounter and the player kicked has any damage number dealt on the boss/relic possession time). [/i][/b] Now lets get back to whether someone was trolling during the encounter, if a player was trolling during this period of time, the best course of action for the fireteam leader is to wait for the wipe and then kick the troll. The leader is free to kick whomever they wish to as it wouldn't affect anyone on the wipe screen or an encounter yet to be active. Letting someone participate in damaging the boss and kicking them when that boss is almost dead is straight up, a d*ck move.
-
[quote]This is why we need negative commendations, so this way, it serves as an in-game warning. I had this happen during the 2nd week of lightfall durning a 100k campaign mission run. Luckily, they were a millisecond too slow, and I barely got the pinnacle. We could have commendations like: Greifer-pushes players off edges, starts encounters early, boots players durning final encounters Foul mouth/screamer Quitter Afk Piggyback - looking for carries[/quote] Yeah and then salty people give negative commendations to everyone lol. Thanks but no thanks
-
Exactly. Would work just as poorly as what they have now, only kinda worse.
