Ghosting in Scenarios.

Not sure if someone has made a proper post yet but why is ghosting becoming illegal for scenarios? It's difficult for us to start games sometimes and once they're going no one wants it ruined because someone has something urgent or needs to leave.
Letting a friend takeover in an appropriate situation stops the game failing and pissing everyone off.

We're currently discussing it but would like to hear the "scenario players" input on it too, currently we aren't as stringent about ghosting in non-competitive games (ones that don't involve elo) but that rule may change if scenario CW's were to become more prevalent. We understand that scenario's fail because people must leave so ghosting alleviates this issue, but the same thing applies to any sort of game, a like a long CW or large world game, where do we draw the line for ghosting? Technically speaking accounts are non-transferable, they aren't meant to be shared, problems arise when players do bad things on their friends acc and then claim victim afterwards.

Написано от Heat Check, 29.01.2019 at 07:44

We're currently discussing it but would like to hear the "scenario players" input on it too, currently we aren't as stringent about ghosting in non-competitive games (ones that don't involve elo) but that rule may change if scenario CW's were to become more prevalent. We understand that scenario's fail because people must leave so ghosting alleviates this issue, but the same thing applies to any sort of game, a like a long CW or large world game, where do we draw the line for ghosting? Technically speaking accounts are non-transferable, they aren't meant to be shared, problems arise when players do bad things on their friends acc and then claim victim afterwards.

I agree the line must be put down on anything with elo at stake or competitive games.
However scenarios ( specifically team games) and world maps are difficult to compare because each pick must always be taken for the game to work and if someone leaves it breaks down. On the other hand, world map games do not revolve around each side to be specifically used against another.

''Ghosting'' is a community fix to a large problem within AtWar itself. There is no backstop to prevent games from failing if someone has to go. Ideally this will be fixed by allowing players to pick a scenario side even as the game has already begun. Or some kind of vote based player swap system.

It's not used immorally to rob someone from elo or anything, I can more or less understand why people who duel can take frustration if the person they think they are facing is actually someone else. Yet this is not the case for scenarios, here it is done mainly to prevent games from failing as a leaving player unbalances the scenario.

I'd like to hear some arguments in favour of changing this AtWar rule from a moderator so I can provide further arguments if needed.

Who ever was against it....I understand it's bad if some high rank for some reason ghost low rank and "carry" by beating inexperienced players,but if high rank ghost high rank in high ranked game everyone will be only be happy except for maybe few exceptions idk

Написано от Heat Check, 29.01.2019 at 07:44

We're currently discussing it but would like to hear the "scenario players" input on it too, currently we aren't as stringent about ghosting in non-competitive games (ones that don't involve elo) but that rule may change if scenario CW's were to become more prevalent. We understand that scenario's fail because people must leave so ghosting alleviates this issue, but the same thing applies to any sort of game, a like a long CW or large world game, where do we draw the line for ghosting? Technically speaking accounts are non-transferable, they aren't meant to be shared, problems arise when players do bad things on their friends acc and then claim victim afterwards.

In my 3 years of atwar experience i have witnessed countless games where people ghost an account. I play 99% scenario maps. This happens to practically every scenario game that goes past 10-20 turns. A normal scenario game goes to 50 turns. Some even go to 75 turns. Some can go longer. The normal minute per turn is 5 min. 50 x 5 minutes = 250 minutes. Not everyone can play a game for 6 straight hours. Thats why in most if not all scenario games in which i have been in players have been ghosted. I have had no issues before until Brian came to a game in which i ghosted an player and without consultation he asked the ghosted player and me to leave the game. And received warning and ban threats. The game at that time was already past t40. So we had been playing for more than 200 minutes. The problem with brian however has been resolved so there is no hard feelings. But after witnessing such an issue, it made my eyes open to the problems we have. And after CC stands towards ghosting it naturally boosted my passion to fight for what i believe.

As the rule in the rule section 4.4 says only cw and duels are prohibited from ghosting, as they are competitive and ghosting makes it unfair. In scenario games there is no comp/ elo to be won so ghosting is a non- issue. Sure u can play a game vs someone who u'd think is not a 'pro' player but appears to be far better. I regularly change my name, i have seen people go incognito. Who can then say who these people are who you are fighting. So in my opinion the whole issue therefore is nonsense. And yes a lower ranked player can ask an higher ranked to play for him which can make it appear unfair. We also have 'alts' accepted, thats just atwar life or are we gonna prohibit them too?

In my opinion, I think it ghosting in scenario just helps the community far more than it has negative impact. Even WD experienced this in a scenario we had been playing, and suddenly 1 team member had to leave and he didnt let a friend ghost him. The game instantly failed and we all were enraged, and the mood worsened and there was no other games played that day.

For those who havent played a scenario. Most played scenario fail if one team member/ large nation, leaves the game. If the map is balanced, it can take only 1 player to fail a map even if it is already been played for 40 turns. Players who have played scenario's or are members of that community will surely understand this and the need to not enforce such an rule on those maps.

Thank you Isil for finally listening instead of just throwing oil at the flames in the other thread, like the others still do.

As said above, ghosting is, especially when you consider that scenarios/maps usualy take around 20/30 turns (when played properly, I guess) a must in alot of cases, due to people leaving games. AW should either implement some sort of system that whenever someone has to go, another person should be able to retake that position or allowing ghosting with restriction for scenarios. Since the whole purpose of this ''no ghosting'' rule was to prevent people from farming elo in clanwars/duels by ghosting lower accounts.

Imo the game could use a change with the joining/leaving/spectating parts of the game which would solve the problem we face with leavers/ghosting rule aswell.
I made a suggestion about changing the joining/leaving/spectating part of the game in this thread: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=39641

Here is the quote:

Написано от Waffel, 12.12.2018 at 19:25

What if I have an addition to that. (Not sure if it is possible though within the programming but, let me know what you think of it).

Lets say that we change the whole joining/leaving/spectating part of the game? For example if a player has to go, or seems to have internet problems (you name it), he clicks the button [Leave & Allow spectator to replace spot].

You might ask now, which of the spectators will replace this spot? Well... what if you can choose as spectator to enter a reserve list or just spectate the game regularly? The system should automatically place a number on the waitinglist/reserve list, and the at number 1 replaces the first one that leaves and so on.

I think this probably works the best on scenarios, since this is a no-go with clanwars and duels lol.

The benefit of a system like this, it will like you've said above, keep the games going and more consistent, and I think the games would be way more fun, like a world game of 20/20 fighting till they lose, instead of a world game that empties in 5 turns.

Написано от Waffel, 29.01.2019 at 12:03

You sound like same exact post wasn't made back in 2017 and had 0 effect

Написано от bubartem, 29.01.2019 at 13:53

You sound like same exact post wasn't made back in 2017 and had 0 effect

Написано от Waffel, 29.01.2019 at 13:56

Написано от bubartem, 29.01.2019 at 13:53

You sound like same exact post wasn't made back in 2017 and had 0 effect

https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=34229
!

Scen cw post https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=36397

Not like there were non,they just had 0 effect

Написано от bubartem, 29.01.2019 at 14:00

Not like there were non,they just had 0 effect

Until now, when we actually get people to notice it.

Написано от The_Empirezz, 29.01.2019 at 08:25

''Ghosting'' is a community fix to a large problem within AtWar itself. There is no backstop to prevent games from failing if someone has to go. Ideally this will be fixed by allowing players to pick a scenario side even as the game has already begun. Or some kind of vote based player swap system.

It's not used immorally to rob someone from elo or anything, I can more or less understand why people who duel can take frustration if the person they think they are facing is actually someone else. Yet this is not the case for scenarios, here it is done mainly to prevent games from failing as a leaving player unbalances the scenario.

I'd like to hear some arguments in favour of changing this AtWar rule from a moderator so I can provide further arguments if needed.

This is also being discussed in mod forum... if all players agree ghosting be allowed to prevent this, it would resolve this issue. The problem that has been reported is when players purposely ghost to gain a strategic advantage. This is rare in normal games, but it is happening and it is being reported to mods.

Написано от brianwl, 05.02.2019 at 07:38

This is also being discussed in mod forum... if all players agree ghosting be allowed to prevent this, it would resolve this issue. The problem that has been reported is when players purposely ghost to gain a strategic advantage. This is rare in normal games, but it is happening and it is being reported to mods.

Now to ''ghost'' in order to get a strategic advantage is something different, something I completely agree should not happen (unless all sides agree). It is however impossible to tell when it happens as moderators are the only ones with the ability to check IP.

Thank you for replying and providing some context as to why the rulechange is discussed from your perspective.

I suggest this community fix be maintained with mods just checking ips more often if people so request. On top of that, as a larger fix to add something what AtWar needed long ago already. A mechanic to allow a midgame player swap to occur, for scenarios. But this could also help be of use in lengthy non-scenario cws I imagine.

Nice thread glad these kind of things are talked about since its sometimes confusing to understand the correct stance/view on it

Написано от The_Empirezz, 05.02.2019 at 08:55

... mechanic to allow a midgame player swap to occur...

Great idea... this would be a complete solve.