How is this system set up? I would like to know how someone could kill a team member over and over again and never be prompted to boot them from the game. But for someone who accidentally runs over a team mate or a piece of their destroyed banshee kills a team mate they can be instantly kicked. How has this glaring inconsistency been allowed to go on for so long? It needs to be either prompt for every time betrayal or never at all.
Thoughts one this matter would be appreciated.
Also, apologies if this is the wrong place for this topic.
Since the game can’t determine if a betrayal is intentional or not it basically guesses by keeping track of how many betrayals you’ve done and how often. If you betray frequently the boot option will appear sooner and vice versa.
Not trying to argue, but I must politely disagree with that. I do not think that’s how they track it because my friends and I have betrayed each other, and other players over and over again in online matches and other players still do not get the option to boot us right away if we betray them. And let’s just say, I have many betrayals on my record. I think it’s just random. Luck of the draw. If there IS some sort of system to it, I have yet to figure it out and I’ve been playing this game since it’s release.
> How is this system set up? I would like to know how someone could kill a team member over and over again and never be prompted to boot them from the game. But for someone who accidentally runs over a team mate or a piece of their destroyed banshee kills a team mate they can be instantly kicked. How has this glaring inconsistency been allowed to go on for so long? It needs to be either prompt for every time betrayal or never at all.
>
> Thoughts one this matter would be appreciated.
>
> Also, apologies if this is the wrong place for this topic.
Personally if it was me, I’d give the team the option to vote out a player if he/she’s being a nuisance with a majority vote system. Would mean me and my guys can play and boot the random or two if they’re being difficult (as they commonly are).
Best is when you’re playing invasion, dominating in a wraith and an idiot team mate rushes as you fire your plasma mortar and they get caught in the blast…
but yeah, people don’t exactly use judgement when that option comes up. Still, the system is good for when you have the team killing jerks…
> It needs to be either prompt for every time betrayal
IIRC Bungie tried this. Every single accidental betrayal was met with a boot, clearly demonstrating that the community as a whole isn’t mature enough to handle the ability to boot on every betrayal.
> or never at all.
They tried this as well (though not intentionally).
Bungie had to disable Betrayal Booting in Living Dead in order to fix a glitch that led to wrongful boots. Once again, the community demonstrated that it is not mature enough to handle this degree of latitude: nearly every single match in that playlist was filled with betray-trolls. Eventually, Friendly Fire was disabled for that list.
Friendly Fire sans booting is also used in Grifball to this day. Betray-trolls in Grifball are still fairly common, so the community evidently hasn’t matured significantly since the days of bootless Living Dead.
What we need is some sort of intention analyzer that computes the likelihood of a betrayal being accidental. Unfortunately, this would have to be implemented within the host rather than on the MM servers, making it impossible in Reach and unlikely in 4.
After reading the reasons, I understand now how the betrayal counter comes up, but it still pisses me off how people betray you on purpose. I’ve noticed it more and more lately. I play BTB more often cause it’s fun, gives access to vehicles, and can be very tactical. However, people get very greedy. The second a heavies match started, I got into the tank and this guy started shooting me and throwing grenades to kill me so he can have it. To punish him, i stopped the tank and let him kill me, so when the option to boot came up, I slammed the button as hard as I could making sure he could not get it. He got booted instantly. Take that, jerk! Another BTB match I grabbed a sniper, and this other jerk started shooting me. After about 30 seconds of running away from the guy while he was still trying to take the sniper, an enemy wraith killed him. I call that Karma at its best. Why can’t people just deal with not having their favorite toys? Idc if someone takes a vehicle I was gunning for. They got there first. Who cares? Btw, I’m not some new player. I’m currently a Noble (Just got there actually, started playing Reach early 2011) so it’s not like I’m bad with weapons and vehicles.
For me, it’s usually the second time somebody on my team does a betrayal before I’m given the option (a few times it was one betrayal). With me, if somebody betrays or purposely shoots me, I’ll shoot them back, just enough to injure but not enough to kill. After that I’ll let them kill me, and once the option to boot them comes up, it’s a definite A button.
> > clearly demonstrating that the community as a whole isn’t mature enough to handle the ability to boot on every betrayal.
> >
> > Once again, the community demonstrated that it is not mature enough to handle this degree of latitude: nearly every single match in that playlist was filled with betray-trolls. Eventually, Friendly Fire was disabled for that list.
> >
> > Betray-trolls in Grifball are still fairly common, so the community evidently hasn’t matured significantly since the days of bootless Living Dead.
>
> With all due respect, this is pretty much common sense. Look at the age levels that Halo is aimed toward: most are 6-25 year olds and 80% of them are male. Bungie even ALLOWING betrayals in this game was a big mistake. When you do that, all you’re going to have are people complaining about being booted, trolls, and people getting into arguments over it. They already took betraying out of living dead and that didn’t ruin anything. So why not just take it out of every game type? The only argument I get is that people would spam grenades and rockets. Well I’m sry, but don’t you only start out with 2 grenades and you only have 2-4 rockets? If anything, it might only affect a couple seconds of gameplay but the game itself would pretty much remain the same, minus all the complaining, booting, and arguing. If you still aren’t fine with that, then why not create an option to toggle on and off friendly fire games or betray-enabled games? Kinda like the psyche profile. If you choose to have a game where betrayals aren’t allowed, then it will connect you to other players who chose the same thing.
>
> By the way, I’m not saying you’re wrong, but maybe it’s not so much a maturity factor as it is a statement. While a lot of these people may be, in fact, too immature to handle a boot option, maybe others are just making a statement. Besides, some people get enjoyment by playing the game a different way. I’ve seen hilarious youtube videos of people betraying and listening to angry reactions. It’s all in fun and they mean no harm. Some people just take games waaaay too seriously. In my eyes, THEY’RE the ones who need to mature and grow up. Video games aren’t everything and it’s not the end of the world if you get betrayed.
>
> My last statement of this post: any game company should know damn well that if they give players an option to boot another player, they are more than likely going to abuse it. We already have a large amount of players trying to hack/lag/boot other players. You actually give them an OPTION to boot is like giving a fat kid a piece of cake. Enough said.
You should get a medal for booting people. I also would have enjoyed seeing some boot-related achievements tied to the Anniversary map pack. “Boot a teammate during a 1 Flag CTF match on a Defiant map.”
It keeps track of same team damage across multiple games No one knows anything more specific than that for obvious reasons, but a rule of thumb is if you dont usually team damage people, you can get 2 free betrays in a game. Use them wisely.
I will also say that there is MASSIVE confirmation bias when it comes to peoples idea of how bad the betray system is. Everyones got a cool little anecdote about it.
David, your intention analyser is already in there, albeit rudimentary. Any system more complicated would probably be ripe for being gamed by aholes. You said yourself, people cant be trusted.
Yeah the maturity and intelligence level of the community is pretty horrible. I can understand the reasons why you would want to have it realistic, but if 343i is smart, they’ll just make it so you cant kill people on your own team. Turning off friendly fire fixes all these problems.
Listen I haaaaate the little -Yoinks!- that mess up your tank/or shoot you for the rifle because you got it first, and will devastate with it if not for these pests.
But to turn friendly fire off, is to simply ruin Halo.
You might call that a little dramatic, but its not… especially for those of us who have played Halo from the get go.
I can handle change here and there, a games gada evolve. But to turn of friendly fire means, if a team mate and an enemy are in close quarters combat, you can just spam em with the rocket launcher and bam, enemies dead and your buddy just fine, sorry but thats lame as heII.
the only way to fix this problem would be to have a damn Halo judge/Monitor, save the video of somebody doing this and send it somewhere, but that system would get overwhelmed no doubt because the plethora of COD kids are ruining out community.
I have to agree with you ^ I mean if you disable friendly fire, there would be no sense in assassinations, because a guy with a rocket will get showstoppers and Yoinks.
> > How is this system set up? I would like to know how someone could kill a team member over and over again and never be prompted to boot them from the game. But for someone who accidentally runs over a team mate or a piece of their destroyed banshee kills a team mate they can be instantly kicked. How has this glaring inconsistency been allowed to go on for so long? It needs to be either prompt for every time betrayal or never at all.
> >
> > Thoughts one this matter would be appreciated.
> >
> > Also, apologies if this is the wrong place for this topic.
>
> Personally if it was me, I’d give the team the option to vote out a player if he/she’s being a nuisance with a majority vote system. Would mean me and my guys can play and boot the random or two if they’re being difficult (as they commonly are).
That could be abused…easily.
I don’t agree with that system at all, because other players can just boot others for power weapons given majority vote.
The system seriously pisses me off, just half an hour ago i stick an enemy player, a team mate then comes in and trys an assassination on the stuck enemy and blam, betrayal, and i get booted, fools!!!
> > How is this system set up? I would like to know how someone could kill a team member over and over again and never be prompted to boot them from the game. But for someone who accidentally runs over a team mate or a piece of their destroyed banshee kills a team mate they can be instantly kicked. How has this glaring inconsistency been allowed to go on for so long? It needs to be either prompt for every time betrayal or never at all.
> >
> > Thoughts one this matter would be appreciated.
> >
> > Also, apologies if this is the wrong place for this topic.
>
> Personally if it was me, I’d give the team the option to vote out a player if he/she’s being a nuisance with a majority vote system. Would mean me and my guys can play and boot the random or two if they’re being difficult (as they commonly are).
I could see a few problems spawning from such a system myself. Although this system could be used to boot purposeful betrayers where the system fails, it could be easily abused, like someone before me has stated. If some players don’t like someone else that is on their team, they can be booted unfairly. Players could be falsely accused of acts they did not commit by noobs which are sore losers. For example, in Forza 4 I was booted from a lobby because apparently I rammed someone off the road on the last corner of the final lap, when in my clear view he spun off and I overtook him to gain 1st place. I’ve been voted out of matches and other games simply based on my name alone. Although I see your intentions would be benevolent in regards to purposeful betrayers, this system would probably instigate a lot more problems, consequently meaning that the forums would start to fill up with more complaints. We don’t want that to happen.
Overall, a system to try and discern accidental from purposeful betrayals will never work effectively. The current system in Reach is essentially guess work. It might work, it might not work. Such a system to effectively tell from accidental and purpose would be quite difficult, if not impossible. It is one of those things that, as much as we would like it to happen, it just won’t due to some reason or another. As the saying goes “life’s a -Yoink!-”.
> > Personally if it was me, I’d give the team the option to vote out a player if he/she’s being a nuisance with a majority vote system. Would mean me and my guys can play and boot the random or two if they’re being difficult (as they commonly are).
>
> I could see a few problems spawning from such a system myself. Although this system could be used to boot purposeful betrayers where the system fails, it could be easily abused, like someone before me has stated. If some players don’t like someone else that is on their team, they can be booted unfairly. Players could be falsely accused of acts they did not commit by noobs which are sore losers. For example, in Forza 4 I was booted from a lobby because apparently I rammed someone off the road on the last corner of the final lap, when in my clear view he spun off and I overtook him to gain 1st place. I’ve been voted out of matches and other games simply based on my name alone. Although I see your intentions would be benevolent in regards to purposeful betrayers, this system would probably instigate a lot more problems, consequently meaning that the forums would start to fill up with more complaints. We don’t want that to happen.
>
> Overall, a system to try and discern accidental from purposeful betrayals will never work effectively. The current system in Reach is essentially guess work. It might work, it might not work. Such a system to effectively tell from accidental and purpose would be quite difficult, if not impossible. It is one of those things that, as much as we would like it to happen, it just won’t due to some reason or another. As the saying goes “life’s a -Yoink!-”.
Fair enough.
My system’s still better than the current one that’s completely random.
Couldn’t agree more . . . I had games where I have a guy constantly trying to kill me (I took the sniper). He does it like three-four times and then I kill him once and get booted
> > > Personally if it was me, I’d give the team the option to vote out a player if he/she’s being a nuisance with a majority vote system. Would mean me and my guys can play and boot the random or two if they’re being difficult (as they commonly are).
> >
> > I could see a few problems spawning from such a system myself. Although this system could be used to boot purposeful betrayers where the system fails, it could be easily abused, like someone before me has stated. If some players don’t like someone else that is on their team, they can be booted unfairly. Players could be falsely accused of acts they did not commit by noobs which are sore losers. For example, in Forza 4 I was booted from a lobby because apparently I rammed someone off the road on the last corner of the final lap, when in my clear view he spun off and I overtook him to gain 1st place. I’ve been voted out of matches and other games simply based on my name alone. Although I see your intentions would be benevolent in regards to purposeful betrayers, this system would probably instigate a lot more problems, consequently meaning that the forums would start to fill up with more complaints. We don’t want that to happen.
> >
> > Overall, a system to try and discern accidental from purposeful betrayals will never work effectively. The current system in Reach is essentially guess work. It might work, it might not work. Such a system to effectively tell from accidental and purpose would be quite difficult, if not impossible. It is one of those things that, as much as we would like it to happen, it just won’t due to some reason or another. As the saying goes “life’s a -Yoink!-”.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> My system’s still better than the current one that’s completely random.
>
> Just sayin’.
I agree that it is better than the original system for the purpose stated. I’m just concerned about how it could be horribly abused. And, as much as I love the Halo community, I feel as though there are too many immature people who will abuse it. If players were much more mature, then your system would work very well; light-years better than the current guesswork system. Unfortunately, the latter is not the case.
