Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.
-
I say this in regards to custom games as MM is different:
Can we stop with the rules? FAF is starting to feel like a digital nanny state. It's a small enough community as is, it's like we're trying to literally rule it out existence.
Too often lately there's something else that needs rules added or further restricted.
- Name change restrictions (That no one asked for other than mods getting annoyed at players having some laughs)
- Leaving games: Honestly that whole thread was pretty cringe to read. So much debate over something players can self moderate for and already do.
- Constant debate over smurf accounts when we all know a ton of players have and use them anyway
- And now unpausing? Again, something players can not only self moderate for, but literally just re-pause anyway.
Just let the community handle things themselves when it comes to things that be player-moderated.
-
@snoog said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
Can we stop with the rules? FAF is starting to feel like a digital nanny state. It's a small enough community as is, it's like we're trying to literally rule it out existence.
Too often lately there's something else that needs rules added or further restricted.
- Name change restrictions (That no one asked for other than mods getting annoyed at players having some laughs)
- Leaving games: Honestly that whole thread was pretty cringe to read. So much debate over something players can self moderate for and already do.
- Constant debate over smurf accounts when we all know a ton of players have and use them anyway
- And now unpausing? Again, something players can not only self moderate for, but literally just re-pause anyway.
Just let the community handle things themselves when it comes to things that be player-moderated.
Of your 4 examples of restrictions that evidence FAF feeling like a digital nanny state, 2 are where the rules have been or are proposed to be relaxed, and 1 (pausing) is querying if the community wants the rule relaxed or to be made more consistent in how its moderated. The only example where things were actually made stricter was name changes which can be done every 3 months instead of 1 month previously.
Your suggestion to "just re-pause anyway" wouldn't solve the pause issue either, since the other player just unpauses immediately (and you and your teammates are typically limited in how many times they can pause).
-
@snoog
People behaving on their own is the best case possible, but rules exists as this doesn't always happen, and i believe this pause stuff to be one of those situations.
I think index has a good point here and a rule or a system to prevent this issue might be needed, because there is a problem and thisbut literally just re-pause anyway
is not a solution at all.
What do you think it's gonna happen? You repause, the other guy keeps unpausing cause he doesn't care. In case the pausing player has an urgency and can't pay attention to the game for 1-2 minutes the game is ruined because a team will be put in a significant (and unfair) disadvantage. Re-pausing is gonna solve nothing.I will add my personal experience to this: there was a time where i paused and someone instantly unpaused (from my own team). I had to do something right that instant that i could not ignore, after my third attempt at pausing, and his next unpausing, i just ctrl+k my com and went to attend to the important IRL stuff i had to take care of.
My idea on this: introducing a punishment for "unpausers" is gonna flood the moderation team with reports, and they already have a lot to deal with. Furthermore, i think that if some kind of rule has to be made, it is one that protects a player quitting in a situation similar to mine (justified ctrl+k imo).
I suggest a possible solution to unpausing: make a system where every player (or team) has a set maximum pause time (like 2 mins per player or around 5-6 per team, idk), and make the unpause work on a majority vote or when time runs out. That way, i can pause and have a few minutes to deal with IRL and come back, if a single annoying guy tries to unpause due to bad manners, he can be blocked by the more civil users in the game.
Ideally, a pause without timer would be better (imagine a custom games with friends where a guy has to be absent for more than 5 minutes but everyone agrees to wait for him, if there is no more time left on pause they would not be able to do that), but that would require people to self-regulate and again, i wouldn't count too much on them, sorry for the low expectations. Alternatively, this pause timer could be implemented only in ladder to leave custom games more "free" to manage pauses.
@IndexLibrorum what do you think?
-
In theory this makes sense but in practice this rule does not. I agree with snoog here, you can't create "anti-asshole" rules for everything, because everything can be exploited. Will there be a rule that a pause has to be for a serious reason also?
-
I disagree with it being a rule, just foe whoever it is and don't play with them anymore. Rules are great in theory but n oy only do they cause a disconnect between players and mods, but they're also rarely honored and it creates more of a backlog for mods to handle, just foe and ignore imo, much simpler.
-
Only time I seen this is in Dualgap with russians who want easy advantage. So sure lets ban them for it
-
Is it possible to implement forced in-game pause with a time limit?
Meaning player can force 1 or 3 minute pause and no one can unpause the game for that duration of time.Currently the only in-game lobby settings regarding something similar is “3 time breaks, 7 time breaks, unlimited”. And the 3/7 options are terrible cause if someone’s keep unpausing you are quickly out of limit
-
Some people do not appear to understand that this topic is a suggestion. And you can disagree with the suggestion without ridiculing it.
I disagree with the suggestion. The data is in the replay, therefore you could extent the replay parsing to detect it that a (different) player immediately unpauses after a pause of another player. Therefore it would not even be difficult to confirm a report. However, I think this is an unhealthy direction. It's not clear that this is 'not okay' and I think therefore players will just get banned and perceive that as random.
The suggestions of @snoog may work, but that is not how the engine functions that we have available work. They work on a per-player basis, not on a per-team basis.
It may be possible to overwrite the global and force a delay before a (different) player can unpause the game after another player paused it. We could make that delay at least 10 seconds. This appears at the moment of writing like a small hook, without complicated logic: If you did not initiate the pause then you have a 10 seconds delay before you can unpause.
When there is a bad actor then you can keep the game 'paused' for 30 seconds on your own. And if you have team mates then you can keep it paused longer. This is not perfect, but neither is the fact that the player that pauses does so for a very long duration
.A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned
-
A pause going for longer than 2-3 minutes with no update on ETA does bother me and I will begin telling the lobby I plan on unpausing the game. At that point you would have been better off telling us to rehost. I don't have the luxury to walk away and do whatever while randomly waiting for you to get back, I have to stare at my 1 or 2 engies (these pauses always seem to happen right at game start for whatever reason).
I imagine somebody is wondering how that applies to "immediate unpausing" and the answer is that if you do unpause, somebody is always bothered by it and pauses again and you go through the dance of using up their unpauses.
In later game situations, if the pause is THAT long the more responsible thing is to give your base and ask for it back when you are back. I have done this before and it's been fine without making everyone twiddle their thumbs.
-
@Sainse said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
Is it possible to implement forced in-game pause with a time limit?
Meaning player can force 1 or 3 minute pause and no one can unpause the game for that duration of time.Currently the only in-game lobby settings regarding something similar is “3 time breaks, 7 time breaks, unlimited”. And the 3/7 options are terrible cause if someone’s keep unpausing you are quickly out of limit
@Crofis said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
I suggest a possible solution to unpausing: make a system where every player (or team) has a set maximum pause time (like 2 mins per player or around 5-6 per team, idk), and make the unpause work on a majority vote or when time runs out. That way, i can pause and have a few minutes to deal with IRL and come back, if a single annoying guy tries to unpause due to bad manners, he can be blocked by the more civil users in the game.
If this is possible, that would be an elegant way to solve the issue too. Thanks for the suggestion.
@Strydxr said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
it creates more of a backlog for mods to handle
Don't worry about the extra work for the mods; with the systems we currently have in place moderating this rule more strongly would not add significant amount of work to our plates. I wouldn't be suggesting this idea without considering the effect on our team, ofcourse!
-
I also think it is better to improve the situation by changing how the pause system works instead of changing the rules. The issue seems to be primarily one guy in a teamgame being a dick and unpausing immediately while the rest has no issue waiting. If we change pausing to requiring a vote we can strip this power from a singular player. I know that counterstrike has a vote for a timeout of a fixed length. (Or at least it did while I actively played it.)
If we think carefully how we design this system and how many votes we require, I believe we can come up with something that is pleasant for everyone involved. For example it could be a pause of a fixed length that could be resumed earlier with a vote. -
@BlackYps Perhaps a system where a person can request a pause for a minute, or two minutes, which has to be accepted by vote. Don't allow the pause to be cancelled before, except by the person who initially requested the pause?
-
@Jip said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
The suggestions of @snoog may work, but that is not how the engine functions that we have available work. They work on a per-player basis, not on a per-team basis.
@BlackYps I'd personally suggest this solution:
@Jip said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
It may be possible to overwrite the global and force a delay before a (different) player can unpause the game after another player paused it. We could make that delay at least 10 seconds. This appears at the moment of writing like a small hook, without complicated logic: If you did not initiate the pause then you have a 10 seconds delay before you can unpause.
That way we do not fight with how the engine functions work and the solution is simple to test and maintain.
-
The only problem is the potential abuse. So unless you make it so there is definite pause limit per team, it can go wrong. Not per player, but per team. As otherwise it's possible for someone to go afk for a long time, and have his teammates/premades just prolong it as long as possible. Which imo is a no-go. And considering you can't have pause time allocated per team. I think it would be necessary to split say, 15 minutes of time on each team to it's players. So say, 2v2? Everyone get's 7.5 minutes, 3v3 5 minutes per player in team. 4v4 3.75 minutes. So that the possible wait time will never go above certain limit.
Why 15 minutes? Dunno, just shooting in the ballpark of what CS-2 offers with all it's possible timeouts being used. Obviously it up to debate how much time could be allocated in faf. But I think that 15 minutes is definitely the upper limit of time per team allowed. Though to be honest, I would Ctrl+k after just 5 minutes of waiting. I'm not here to look at my t1 mexes, but to play the game. Especially if it's global one. I guess ranked I could be inclined to wait lil bit more.
-
I like the idea of a pause with a fixed length before a player can resume, providing it's relatively short. Around 30s feels reasonable to me, since the default is 3 pauses, so in a 3v3 with 30s that'd mean your teammates could pause for 3m (in addition to the 30s from when you pause and have to go afk) with no further pauses then permitted by them.
Avoids any need for moderation, and strikes a balance between competing interests (since resuming the game while one player is afk likely ruins the game, but it's also no fun to be forced to wait for ages because of one player)
-
A minimum duration for a pause is a good start IMO. I haven't touched Dota 2 in years but they had a similar system when I played it.
-
I'm embarrassed to inform you that i quite often missclick on the pause button while microing units in intense fights :3 (and i've seen other people do the same), but if no other solution is better due to engine i guess that's still an improvement
-
@TheVVheelboy said in Suggesting rule change: make immediately unpausing after a player asked for a pause against the rules.:
The only problem is the potential abuse. So unless you make it so there is definite pause limit per team, it can go wrong. Not per player, but per team
The game does not work this way. It works on a per-player basis. There's a lobby option to limit the number of pauses. You can use that to prevent it from being infinite.
And if there are infinite timeouts and a party decides to do that then I think you can just report them. See also the rules and search for 'Ruining games'. It states:
Ruining games — Do not deliberately ruin games by abusing game mechanics, such as continuously pausing the game or spamming pings.
