Halo 4 Banhammer-How I imagine it!

Games Other Halo
1

Note: This is all my opinion and you have all rights to disagree. In that case please be polite and constructive!!! TL;DR at the bottom. Thanks!

Hello! This is my idea of how the Halo 4 Banhammer should work.

Quitting:
There are 2 groups of reasons why people quit. For one group, they should be punished, for the other group, they should not be punished.

Group 1:
Not liking the map you are playing on- This isn’t a reason to quit. The majority likes the other map. When your map gets chosen, other people who didn’t like it don’t quit. Be fair.

Not liking the gametype you are supposed to play- Same as above

Wanting to annoy other people- Quitting just to leave your teammates alone against a bigger number of enemies isn’t fair.

Quitting because you cannot defeat the enemy in a fair battle- If your enemy is clearly better, and you quit, it isn’t fair. It’s part of the game, and you can’t get better if you keep quitting. Don’t ruin the fun for other people because you can’t get a kill. Adapt!

Group 2:

Getting spawn-killed- This isn’t fair, and quitting for that would be completely alright.

Lag- If you are in a game which lags so much that you can’t play properly, it would be alright to quit.

Getting booted for an accidental betrayal- Accidental betrayals happen, and I hate it when I get banned from MP just because somebody felt like booting me because I killed them accidentally.

If you think about it, people who quit because of reasons from group 1 usually quit in the 1st minute of the game (except for the 4th reason). Quitting because of reasons from Group 2 usually happen mid game. That way, the Banhammer could recognize if the player quit with a good reason or a bad reason. Bad reasons should be punished.

Punishment- Quitting 5 times in the 1st minute of the match will ban you from MP for 15 minutes.

AFK:

AFK-ing isn’t fair. It is understandable that you must leave because you have to do something IRL. If you must AFK for 1 minute, it is alright. 2 minutes of AFK, the banhammer will notice you and add 1 game of AFK until the punishment. If you must leave for a longer time, just quit the game. It would be a lot more fair to quit and not give the enemy a free point, then doing the opposite.If you AFK to rank up, you should be banned.

Punishment- AFK-ing 3 games in a row bans you for 1 hour. If you AFK again in the same week, you will be banned for 1 day. If the same happens in the same month, you will be banned for 3 days. The last punishment will be a 1 week ban from MP and a rank reset.

Betraying:

I’m not sure how Reach’s betrayal system worked, but as I’m informed, every team was allowed to betray only once. That would basically mean that if I have a weapon which my teammate wants, he could betray me and take it. But if I want vengeance, he will boot me.

That’s why I think that every player should get the right to betray once. As I already said, accidents happen, and people shouldn’t be booted for them. There are times where you can’t tell if it was an accident, so if it would happen another time, it most likely was on purpose. That’s when a player should get the option to boot. Accidents can happen 2 times as well, but then it really is your fault and you should have been more careful.

Punishment- Getting booted for betrayals counts as quitting, and as it’s own thing. If you get booted 7 times in 1 day, you get a 15 minute ban. Doing the same for 1 day in the same week bans you for 1 day. Then the punishment gets reset and you start from a 15 minutes ban again.

Cheating (modding, use of Aimbots, etc.):

Punishment-If detected, a player should be banned for 1 week and get a rank reset. If it happens again, 2 weeks and another rank reset. Doing the same a 3rd time should either ban the player forever, or for 1 month. (you decide)

That’s how I imagine the Banhammer. If I missed anything, tell me. What are your opinions?

TL;DR: Don’t be lazy. Read it. I can’t explain it in a short text.

2

Note: Banhammers can only detect Quitting in itself. There’s no way to actually determine Why someone quit unless you’re there.

> Group 1:
> Not liking the map you are playing on- This isn’t a reason to quit. The majority likes the other map. When your map gets chosen, other people who didn’t like it don’t quit. Be fair.
>
> Not liking the gametype you are supposed to play- Same as above
>
> Wanting to annoy other people- Quitting just to leave your teammates alone against a bigger number of enemies isn’t fair.
>
> Quitting because you cannot defeat the enemy in a fair battle- If your enemy is clearly better, and you quit, it isn’t fair. It’s part of the game, and you can’t get better if you keep quitting. Don’t ruin the fun for other people because you can’t get a kill. Adapt!

I’m semi-content with some of these. However, there isn’t necessarily a system established that will “figure out” how/why they quit. It’s not like they’re forced to take a polygraph after quitting so most of this is moot.

> Getting spawn-killed- This isn’t fair, and quitting for that would be completely alright.
>
> Lag- If you are in a game which lags so much that you can’t play properly, it would be alright to quit.
>
> Getting booted for an accidental betrayal- Accidental betrayals hap

Spawn Killing/Camping/etc is a part of combat whether you like it or not or whether it works for you or not. Camping is a legitimate war strategy b/c you want your enemy to be taken by surprise. Not run in guns blazing. Same goes for Spawn Killing. Not exactly my cup of tea but as been mentioned before - that’s based around Map design and if it can be taken advantage of, then so be it. Spawn Killing isn’t so bad that you can NEVER get out of it. It’s about reaction and reflexes.

There should be no “legit or alright” reason to quit when the game isn’t like others where another random can just join. It drastically decreases teamwork and creates a huge imbalance. Lag comes down to connection which comes down to your ISP. That’s YOUR responsibility in general.

> Punishment-If detected, a player should be banned for 1 week and get a rank reset. If it happens again, 2 weeks and another rank reset. Doing the same a 3rd time should either ban the player forever, or for 1 month.

Why give so many “opportunities”? This seems way too lenient for something that’s more detrimental during the match than quitting. This is deliberately trying to ruin your fun and you want to give them the three strike rule?

> That’s why I think that every player should get the right to betray once

This makes no sense. So even if you know someone purposefully killed you to get the Sniper, they get that instant pass?

This is why I prefer the methods laid out by the developers. You don’t have to accept their rules and regulations. You also don’t have to play the game. Freedom of choice is fun.

3

I dunno. I think the banhammer works fine as it currently is. The only modification I would like to see is give it ability to determine if a player lagged out or quit. If a player lags out of a game, this should not count as quitting.

Concerning the betrayal system: There was a thread back on B.net that talked about ways for a system to determine if a betrayal was purposeful or on accident. Honestly, I think the friendly fire system needs to go completely. It’s fun for certain gametypes and should be kept as an option in customs, but there are just to many ways to exploit it online.

4

> Note: Banhammers can only detect Quitting in itself. There’s no way to actually determine Why someone quit unless you’re there.
>
>
>
>
> > Group 1:
> > Not liking the map you are playing on- This isn’t a reason to quit. The majority likes the other map. When your map gets chosen, other people who didn’t like it don’t quit. Be fair.
> >
> > Not liking the gametype you are supposed to play- Same as above
> >
> > Wanting to annoy other people- Quitting just to leave your teammates alone against a bigger number of enemies isn’t fair.
> >
> > Quitting because you cannot defeat the enemy in a fair battle- If your enemy is clearly better, and you quit, it isn’t fair. It’s part of the game, and you can’t get better if you keep quitting. Don’t ruin the fun for other people because you can’t get a kill. Adapt!
>
> I’m semi-content with some of these. However, there isn’t necessarily a system established that will “figure out” how/why they quit. It’s not like they’re forced to take a polygraph after quitting so most of this is moot.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Getting spawn-killed- This isn’t fair, and quitting for that would be completely alright.
> >
> > Lag- If you are in a game which lags so much that you can’t play properly, it would be alright to quit.
> >
> > Getting booted for an accidental betrayal- Accidental betrayals hap
>
> Spawn Killing/Camping/etc is a part of combat whether you like it or not or whether it works for you or not. Camping is a legitimate war strategy b/c you want your enemy to be taken by surprise. Not run in guns blazing. Same goes for Spawn Killing. Not exactly my cup of tea but as been mentioned before - that’s based around Map design and if it can be taken advantage of, then so be it. Spawn Killing isn’t so bad that you can NEVER get out of it. It’s about reaction and reflexes.
>
> There should be no “legit or alright” reason to quit when the game isn’t like others where another random can just join. It drastically decreases teamwork and creates a huge imbalance. Lag comes down to connection which comes down to your ISP. That’s YOUR responsibility in general.
>
>
>
> > Punishment-If detected, a player should be banned for 1 week and get a rank reset. If it happens again, 2 weeks and another rank reset. Doing the same a 3rd time should either ban the player forever, or for 1 month.
>
> Why give so many “opportunities”? This seems way too lenient for something that’s more detrimental during the match than quitting. This is deliberately trying to ruin your fun and you want to give them the three strike rule?
>
>
>
> > That’s why I think that every player should get the right to betray once
>
> This makes no sense. So even if you know someone purposefully killed you to get the Sniper, they get that instant pass?
>
>
>
> This is why I prefer the methods laid out by the developers. You don’t have to accept their rules and regulations. You also don’t have to play the game. Freedom of choice is fun.

With Quitting, I meant if they should program the Banhammer to determine when the player quit. If he quits in the 1st minute, it counts as an unfair quit.

I agree with lag. However, Spawn-Killing is a tactic, but a very cheap and unsportlike one. I didn’t mention anything about camping.

When banned for the first time, people should think about what they did. Most people would say “I shouldn’t do this if I want to keep playing”
If they do decide to do it a second time, they get one last chance. The 3rd time, they should be banned forever.
Banning them forever immediately after the first attempt would not be right in my opinion. Paying for a game they can’t play online isn’t fair. But however, I see what you mean, and I kinda agree. So, wouldn’t 2 opportunities be fair?

Halo Reach’s system was even less fair. They could get the sniper anyway, but you couldn’t get it back. With this system, you can get your weapon back, and if the same player betrays you again, you can boot him.

5

> Quitting because you cannot defeat the enemy in a fair battle- If your enemy is clearly better, and you quit, it isn’t fair. It’s part of the game, and you can’t get better if you keep quitting. Don’t ruin the fun for other people because you can’t get a kill. Adapt!
>
> Group 2:
>
> Getting spawn-killed- This isn’t fair, and quitting for that would be completely alright.

Lol the irony.

Games always start off fair. If you are getting spawn killed over and over, its because the other team is much better than you.

I’m going to leave now because I don’t think I could take the rest of your thread seriously.

6

> I dunno. I think the banhammer works fine as it currently is. The only modification I would like to see is give it ability to determine if a player lagged out or quit. If a player lags out of a game, this should not count as quitting.
>
> Concerning the betrayal system: There was a thread back on B.net that talked about ways for a system to determine if a betrayal was purposeful or on accident. Honestly, I think the friendly fire system needs to go completely. It’s fun for certain gametypes and should be kept as an option in customs, but there are just to many ways to exploit it online.

You mean to completely take out Friendly fire ut of MP. If that’s what you meant, it wouldn’t be a good idea. Taking it out could lead to the game being abused.

7

> With Quitting, I meant if they should program the Banhammer to determine when the player quit. If he quits in the 1st minute, it counts as an unfair quit.
>
> I agree with lag. However, Spawn-Killing is a tactic, but a very cheap and unsportlike one. I didn’t mention anything about camping.
>
> When banned for the first time, people should think about what they did. Most people would say “I shouldn’t do this if I want to keep playing”
> If they do decide to do it a second time, they get one last chance. The 3rd time, they should be banned forever.
> Banning them forever immediately after the first attempt would not be right in my opinion. Paying for a game they can’t play online isn’t fair. But however, I see what you mean, and I kinda agree. So, wouldn’t 2 opportunities be fair?
>
> Halo Reach’s system was even less fair. They could get the sniper anyway, but you couldn’t get it back. With this system, you can get your weapon back, and if the same player betrays you again, you can boot him.

So what if there’s a power outage while someone is playing in the first minute? That counts as unfair?

Again, what if it’s something they can’t quite determine or isn’t really their fault? It’s singling out people that are in the statistics of the millions. It’s highly unlikely to happen.

No, everyone gets the same ban-able treatment. It’s worked so far and I don’t see them scrapping it.

And again, fairness comes down to how the player plays. The rules are there and they don’t ask for much. -Yoink- happens but it also comes with consequences and I’d say they’re fine as is.

8

seems like a good idea to me. If they just make you loose XP and wait for a timer it would be better

9

> > With Quitting, I meant if they should program the Banhammer to determine when the player quit. If he quits in the 1st minute, it counts as an unfair quit.
> >
> > I agree with lag. However, Spawn-Killing is a tactic, but a very cheap and unsportlike one. I didn’t mention anything about camping.
> >
> > When banned for the first time, people should think about what they did. Most people would say “I shouldn’t do this if I want to keep playing”
> > If they do decide to do it a second time, they get one last chance. The 3rd time, they should be banned forever.
> > Banning them forever immediately after the first attempt would not be right in my opinion. Paying for a game they can’t play online isn’t fair. But however, I see what you mean, and I kinda agree. So, wouldn’t 2 opportunities be fair?
> >
> > Halo Reach’s system was even less fair. They could get the sniper anyway, but you couldn’t get it back. With this system, you can get your weapon back, and if the same player betrays you again, you can boot him.
>
> So what if there’s a power outage while someone is playing in the first minute? That counts as unfair?
>
>
> Again, what if it’s something they can’t quite determine or isn’t really their fault? It’s singling out people that are in the statistics of the millions. It’s highly unlikely to happen.
>
> No, everyone gets the same ban-able treatment. It’s worked so far and I don’t see them scrapping it.
>
> And again, fairness comes down to how the player plays. The rules are there and they don’t ask for much. Yoink! happens but it also comes with consequences and I’d say they’re fine as is.

If you have a power outage, you don’t have luck. Power outages happened while playing Reach as well.

I still think it would be fair to give people one more chance.

10

> seems like a good idea to me. If they just make you loose XP and wait for a timer it would be better

At least somebody supports me…
Note: I don’t say you guys are bad for not supporting me.

11

Regardless of what people get banned for going forward there needs to be better notification of what is an illicit activity for those involved in virtual deviance.

If there is one lesson to be learned from the community from Halo Reach its that bans make people angry and make them quit playing altogether. Do I agree with what people have done to get banned? No. But they should get a warning screen telling them that they will be banned or reset for what they are doing… that is unless they are modders.