Guild Wars 2

Michael Henninger.7451:

And lastly; we are considering allowing video evidence to lead to account action. I will say that even if we don’t use it we always check on the accounts in question and I can assure you that the one video link I received last night is leading to two account terminations.

im really glad this is on the table.
there isnt a whole lot of motivation (or opportunity) for people to edit video or manipulate circumstances so heavily that it becomes a foolproof false positive, although some kind of verification procedure would be a worthy practice.

i sincerely hope you will accept videos in the future, and im a bit disappointed that no one ever told us you currently cant act purely on footage submitted through tickets (although i expect you are able to stalk the accused yourselves). it.. is implied i guess.. just wasnt clear.

first of all since when is it illigela to palce siege weapons until the map bursts? also since when is depliting supllies illegal? i can understand that with kitten behavior its jsut anyoing and disturbs the fun of WvW but why is it OKAY to ban people for building numerous siege weapons but not for acting like kittens?

ShroomOneUp.6913:

first of all since when is it illigela to palce siege weapons until the map bursts? also since when is depliting supllies illegal? i can understand that with kitten behavior its jsut anyoing and disturbs the fun of WvW but why is it OKAY to ban people for building numerous siege weapons but not for acting like kittens?

since its anet’s game and you play by their good grace and theyve reserved the right to ban you without notice for pretty much any reason. and at least they arent abusive about it.

inb4 this guy is one of the griefers

Part 1

There is an easy way to stop this by simply improve the Siege Weapon Mechanics.

1) Make all Starter Zones impossible to place Siege Weapons in there
(This will also stop Servers from parking whole Siege Golem Armies in there and leads to the point, that they need to be parked elsewhere in save areas like Keeps or inside Towers as long as you keep them, what makes keeping them more important than it is right now.)

2) Make Siege Weapons deployable only in specific spot areas.
Does it make sense for example to place a Catapult directly in front of a Gate ???
HELL NO, it makes no freakign sense, but people do this crap only to maximize their DPS Efficiency to take down Gates/Walls the fastest way that is possible, because auf 1s Auto Attacking with the Rocks instantly crashing into the gates/walles for immediate damage, without having to wait for it that the flying rock lands somewhere.

Catapult for this example should be changed to work like RANGER LONGBOWS.
they should be only deployable at spots that are within their range, and their possible Targets need to be at least their maximum range away from them.

So if you want to place for example a Catapult, that has a basic range of say 3000 (not including the elevation bonus), then you would be able to place a Catapult only at places in the WvW Map, that is at least a distance of 3000 away from you, so that you will hit it, if you charge the Catapult for its maximum range.

For the exchange of that, Catapult will deal more damage, based on the range, so wider the target is away, so more extra damage will do the rocks.

3) Flame Rams for example would be only placeable directly in front of gates, because thats their only purpose for where you want to place them.
if you would try to deploy a Flame Ram in a place, where no Gate is in the range of the Flame ram, then you won’t be able to deploy it. So simple and the problem of this kind of Siege Weapon Trolling would be instantly solved.
Make also a LIMIT THERE, the maximum amount of Flame Rams that should be deployable at gates should be 2.
That will slow down the extreme speed of how fast zergs can open gates and would lead to the point, that Siege Golems should become more important.
I’d also reduce significantly the Damage of Rams against Gates and slightly increase the Damage of Golems against Gates.
ANet should make out of Golems the OFFENSIVE GATE BREAKERS, while Flame Rams should be much more the SUPPORTIVE GATE ENFEEBLERS, that support the Zerg and help the zerg to deal more damage against the Gates, support the zerg with Protection against Damage more, like they do already, but way too weak, which support the players by scarign away defensive NPCs liek they do now already.

Plus Anet should increase the Roles of all Classes for WvW siginificantly, there should be professions liek for example the Elementalists, which should be able to deal more Damage towards Gates with such powerful fittign Skills like Meteor Shower, than for example a simple Thief or a Ranger would be able to do with their simple Arrows.
Also Players, except Elementalists in this case shouldn’t be able to damage Gates, unless a Flame Ram has weakened the Gate!!

Part 2:

3) Arrow Carts would be placeable everywhere, but to solve the trolling ascpect, I think Arrow Carts should be only deployable by WvW Commanders.
Here the problem could be solved, that once a AC has been put somewhere and this has been done by someone who wants to troll, a deployed AC construct can be deconstructed then any time by other players as long its not fully build up.
A fully build up AC should be also removeable by any player, but first after a time limit of say for example 2 Minutes. But only if the AC hasn’t received any damage after this while. Only AC with 100% Health would be removeable after 2 Minutes anytime.
Removing an AC from the place would lead then to the player getting 5 Supply, but no Blueprint back.

4) Ballistas should work like Catapults, only with a difference, that they deal alot more damage against players and especially against Golems, significant lesser damage against gates, they help only to weaken them more in a different way than Flame Rams do. So bigger the range, so more devastatign their shots should be and only deployable in this case at PRESET locations.
In WVW currently are only Cannons and Mortars preset at specific locations.
Anet should change Ballistas also to such preset locations, just with the difference, that players would see in the map exatly, where they can place a Ballista, and where not.
This limitation would be shared among all server,s so they would work like those Street Guardians, there can always be at a place a ballista only for 1 of the 3 Servers.
is somewhere already a ballista of an enemy, then it needs to be destroyed, so that you can place your own Ballista (or in case of role improvements, an enemy ballista needs to be stolen/sabotaged by a thief!!)

5) Trebuchets, would work like Catapults and Ballistas together, only at preset locations, with them doing the most damage against walls, when hit from maximum range. Their locations would be preset and if there is somewhere already an enemy treb, then you need to destroy/steal and sabotage it to get it for your own side

These suggestions should show you simple, how much potential there is still to significantly improve the WVW experience for everyone to a much more fun and mostly logical little war simulation which solves also all this trolling in one go, if Anet would simple improve more the general Siege Weapon Mechanics in WVW to work more logical in the sense of how you would use siege weapons in real life!
Compared to how players abuse their mechanics currently just to get maximum DPS with them to destroy gates and wallest in the just fastest possible way there is, it is sad to see, that ANet ignored improving WvW in general for way too long time!

WvW is in a dire need of more significant Gameplay Improvements. I hope the removal of the WvW Exploration Part is just the beginning of more Mechanics and QoL improvements that we will hopefully see in the near future and also with HoT as also follow up expansions or general Feature Packs.
WvW currently uses felt only like 10-20% of the potential it has to be basically GW2’s most awesome Gameplay Mode in my opinion.

Orochimaru.4730:

Michael Henninger.7451:

I investigated this last night and the claims are false. I found the person that was placing siege and terminated that account.

Also, remember that false reporting can lead to a suspension or termination of your account.

For what reason was this player’s account terminated? They were playing the game as they wanted, there isnt anything in the terms saying you cannot build useless siege so…???

There absolutely is. You should re-read it. It is very clear on the matter.

Orochimaru.4730:

And what will happen in those matches where you completely dominate the matchup, the commander thrown down a ram, and then a random player throws down a dozen ballista blueprints? We laugh at it sometimes cos we’re so bored we’d actually build them sometimes for a laugh. Are you now saying this person who threw those ballistas can get suspended from the game if now reported?

A ballista is perfectly useful, although to a lesser extent, in any area a ram is useful.

ShroomOneUp.6913:

first of all since when is it illigela to palce siege weapons until the map bursts? also since when is depliting supllies illegal? i can understand that with kitten behavior its jsut anyoing and disturbs the fun of WvW but why is it OKAY to ban people for building numerous siege weapons but not for acting like kittens?

The problem ins’t siege number or supplies. The problem is intentionally being a kitten. With that kind of reasoning, one could always argue ‘since when is it illegal to push buttons’. The problem ins’t pressing any button, but what follow when you do. Does it merely switch tv channels or it kill people?

In our particular instance, does your throwing siege or taking supplies intentionally help or hinder your sever? Does it kill the fun for all save you?

coglin.1867:

There absolutely is. You should re-read it. It is very clear on the matter.

I have done, nowhere does it say siege trolling is not allowed.

coglin.1867:

A ballista is perfectly useful, although to a lesser extent, in any area a ram is useful.

And again who is to say which siege location is useful and which is not?
When the game first came out, my guild was one of those what used rams in open field combat with enemy zergs.
Skill 2 on a ram induced fear on enemies, some players didnt realise that and used that to our advantage.
So even though we had dozens of players shouting why we throw down rams each time, we carried on and won our fights.

Now in this instance, what happens if those same players reported our commander? He’d get banned for what most thought was useless siege when it was vital to our fights especially when we are outnumbered 2-1 or more!

But again I refer to my first point, nowhere does it say in the rules of conduct that siege trolling is not allowed. If the rules are changed to include it, then anet will be spammed with and endless list of what people constitute as trolling and ruin the entire game! It’ll become just another karma train EOTM maps.

Orochimaru.4730:

For what reason was this player’s account terminated? They were playing the game as they wanted, there isnt anything in the terms saying you cannot build useless siege so…???

As trolly as this post seems, there are players I have encountered that do hold this stance, so I will answer it. If what you WANT to do comes at the detriment of other players’ enjoyment of the game, you will be punished.

Personally, I’m sick of 1 guy interfering with large groups’ enjoyment of the game simply because he “wants to tag up and go fight centaurs in WvW”. Nowhere in life is “I want to do it” a legitimate excuse for miscreant behaviour.

Also about finding loopholes in the terms of service that “allow” you to bother other people – you’re simply a terrible person for doing such. I’d use more flavourful words, but they would end up censored. The attitude where people behave miserably because it’s not illegal to is a disease on society. I suggest changing your attitude before somebody hurts you for it. There’s a reason people act respectfully towards each other: it makes life easier.

suggestions to add names, allow siege removal, etc.

Adding names would invite pointless trolling of innocents, allowing siege to be removed would invite hmm shall we call it ‘anti-siege trolling’? Only ‘commanders’ can place ac’s? lol. Do you know how many people have commander tags? And how is that stopping anyone from trolling?
Actually, I’m not going to waste time countering all those other ideas I’ve seen posted. So many are purely bad, were already discussed in a thread with a dev, and they were beaten to death with all the reasons against them. Many of those changes would not help WvW at all, and would in fact ruin so much, and make it even more stale… unless I suppose you are in T1? maybe T2… which if so, I’m sorry, but not everyone is up there, nor do they all want to be. (I would imagine even up there, and in some cases especially t1/t2 some of these ideas would be as bad if not worse).

As I said before, and will keep saying on this subject. Consider it from all angles, if it can be used by trolls to do even more trolling, or as much as they can now, what is the point in doing it?
“The ‘cure’ should not do as much harm as, nor more harm than, the ‘disease’”

Michael Henninger.7451:

Off-topic: Go TC!

On-topic: I didn’t see them refresh any ‘illegal’ siege while I was following them but that doesn’t mean they didn’t when you saw it. I have some fancy new reporting being built by Shazbawt that will tell me more about what happened before I entered last night (~4pm Pacific).

As for the reporting abuse we’re not going to take action on an account for reporting someone we find to be innocent. The account in question did far more than that. Also, please do NOT encourage other players to join in and hit the report button based on “I saw them do it” because this will land a suspension in most cases.

And lastly; we are considering allowing video evidence to lead to account action. I will say that even if we don’t use it we always check on the accounts in question and I can assure you that the one video link I received last night is leading to two account terminations.

Again; we don’t like cheaters.

Haha yes, go TC!

Sorry about my post, it sounds a little accusatory upon re-reading it. I was just in defensive mode; I was there, I know some of the players that did the reporting and I wanted to make sure they didn’t end up in hot water because of this.

S’all good now. Thanks for clearing those things up and glad that you are getting some new toys to play with. Happy hunting!

And while Anet’s at it, please put in measures to stop players from chucking down troll portals in areas where chests pop up after you kill an npc. Today some troll Mesmer killed half our zerg (which in my opinion is sabotage and disruptive behaviour) by placing a portal on top of a reward chest, ultimately leading to the edge of a cliff. No one was expecting to take the portal, but it just so happened to be what people interacted with in that particular second when attempting to aoe the loot from said chest, only to find a portal opening up to their death. Including mine. Luckily I was able to teleport in time, but we don’t need people sabotaging our own teams, and still this goes on…

Curo.2483:

Orochimaru.4730:

For what reason was this player’s account terminated? They were playing the game as they wanted, there isnt anything in the terms saying you cannot build useless siege so…???

As trolly as this post seems, there are players I have encountered that do hold this stance,

If you have been around since launch you may remember that siege trolls have always been around. We complained about it then, the answer we got from a moderator was that they cannot control the way a player plays the game.

Even though we quoted the rules of conduct and pointed out that this is clearly affecting everyone, they still refused to do anything about it, so why now after 3 years do they now say you cannot do this?

Zaoda.1653:

And while Anet’s at it, please put in measures to stop players from chucking down troll portals in areas where chests pop up after you kill an npc. Today some troll Mesmer killed half our zerg (which in my opinion is sabotage and disruptive behaviour) by placing a portal on top of a reward chest, ultimately leading to the edge of a cliff. No one was expecting to take the portal, but it just so happened to be what people interacted with in that particular second when attempting to aoe the loot from said chest, only to find a portal opening up to their death. Including mine. Luckily I was able to teleport in time, but we don’t need people sabotaging our own teams, and still this goes on…

Heheh… sorry but that’s pretty funny.

Well, its mostly the players fault. They couldnt see the BRIGHT PINK confirmation to use the portal? Also if you select and click on the chest you can open it that way too.

I guess that’s what happens what you mindlessly just mash the interact button without seeing what it is displaying.

@ Lunacy:

1) I don’t know from where you got that “adding Name” thing, but it wasn’t me.

2) only Commanders beign able to put AC’s was a Suggestion instead from me and I haven’t said, that it would be a perfect solution. its merely a restriction that should help to reduce the cases of trolling with ACs, because its much more likely to get reported, if you have a visible Commander on your Map, that recognizable sabotages your own side by trolling with unneccessary Siege Weapons being placed by him/her.
Why do you think do people troll so much this way? Because of the current anonymity, that most likely no one will see them, whikle they troll.
So to take the fire its hotness, you make take away those trolls their anonymity as best as possible and reduce as best as possible the chances of peopel beign able to troll by taking the fire its air away, in that case, allowing only Commanders to place AC’s because changing AC’s to preset locations like my suggested Ballista Change for example makes not really sense to do the same heere with AC’s. Therefore are AC’s too important as defensive SW to be placeable anywhere at will.

Sure, there are many Commanders, but the amoutn of Commanders in WvW is by far alot smaller, than the total amount of WvW Players, so it will definetely drastically reduce the chances of seeing someone trolling in WvW and thats the sole purpose of a restriction like that.

3) I don’t care about what you are blabblering there about an Elitist Nonsense about kitten ect. thats just not at all about the topic and has nothing to do with the suggestions, other than being destructive criticism, without saying anything constructive at all about the suggestions, for why you think the suggestions would be exactly bad and how you think, that the base idea could be improved to prevent maybe your issues you have with my ideas, which I might have personally overseen to think about, you know

4) Fact is, all my suggested ideas above there focus mainly only on stopping, preventing or restricting the WvW Trolls from placing Siege Weapons at senseless places or in such an amount, that nobody else will be able anymore to place Siege Weapons.
by changing certain Siege Weapons to preset locational Siege Weapons, similar to how Mortars and Cannons functionize, Anet will be able to increase the Limits of Siege Weapon Placing for all other Siege Weapons, that stay like they are and can be placed anywhere where you want, like AC’s.
Plus to that suggestion of mine is also, that it would incredibly help to balance WvW by slowing down the speed of how incredibly fast gates can be opened currently due to the limitless rams that can be basically put up in front of a gate, where realistically 2-3 should be maximum as a limit.
Also by changign rams to be a more significant supportive Siege Weapon by reducing their damage and therefore making it possible, that with their help Players can do more significant Damage to set up the focus for quick gate destructions to Golems is imo also the right thing to balance better the WvW Game Mechanics, because thats the sole purpuse for why Golems exist in WvW, they are the Gate Breakers mainly, or they should be that in my opinion honestly to make Golems more important, which doesn#t change the point, that players should be still able to break gates just ionly with Rams, but it should take with Rams alot more time, than right now it is the case, where you can breeze through Gates in a matter of no time with like 1-2 superior Flame Rams already if nobody stops you with a Siege Disable in time.
Brief said, rams deal definetely way too much Damage to Gates, than it is good for WvW.

I absolutely don#t see, where my suggestions here should do any harm to WvW or invite any kind of “anti siege-trolling” as you say, only because I suggested, that players should be able after a TIME LIMIT to remove also Siege Weapons and that only when the Siege Weapon has still 100% Health!!
Means, if any enemy should see and attack that placed Siege Weapon, your said anti-siege Troll wouldn’t be able to remove a Siege Weapon that is somewhere needed from the field.

Most important Siege Weapons in GW2 get anyway controled and patrolled by their Scouts that ensure, that the Uptime of the Siege doesn’t run out. So I think it wouldn’t make sense to try to anti siege troll something, that gets permanently watched over.
An a troll, which just places unneccessary sieges to just remove them again a few minutes later makes no sense and would be just a big waste of time for that person.

If neccessary, removing siege could be also restricted to a Commander only feature to massively reduce the possibility of any trolling too.
Show me any person, that is willing to waste 300 Gold just to become a Commander in Wvw to be able to troll there and risk getting their accounts terminated ?

For troll siege I wish there was a vote ability to destroy, where it would take like 10 votes.

Joey.2769:

For troll siege I wish there was a vote ability to destroy, where it would take like 10 votes.

Problem with that is it give the trolls one more way to mess up for the server.

Not if you make the votes for unique individuals. If you have 10 people trolling on your map at once then GG.

Joey.2769:

Not if you make the votes for unique individuals. If you have 10 people trolling on your map at once then GG.

Not that hard you kitten of a player that takes supply from the Tower your scouting then 9 guildis help him remove all siege you build.

Don’t know if it’s already been brought up or not.

What about a way to report the troll seige itself?

Select the siege, right click, select report and choose “Siege abuse”. (Also this reporting option will be available on players who are abusing seige.)
That way a GM can come and investigate the seige, destroy it and track down the person who threw it.

This way troll seige can be removed, clearing up the cap, and the offenders can be tracked down and actioned as appropriate. This way we don’t need to actively see the players doing it, which can lead to such players being announced in map chat to be reported.

Of course, this might be able to be abused if people are just reporting seige abuse on every piece of seige in order to get it removed if cap has legitimately been reached. However, too many “false” reports would not only significantly increase the workload of GMs, and decrease their response times to actual seige abuse. But action can also be taken against players abusing the seige abuse function (i.e. reporting a legitimate treb in a keep).

Don’t know if it would be a viable solution or not, but it certianly is something that can be considered.

Lunacy Solacio.6514:

Exeon.4358:

Couldn’t Anet make it so you can only drop rams in a “X” radius of gates in the first place? other siege would be harder but at least other siege wouldn’t be completely useless

As has been said countless times before, flame rams have other uses than just smacking gates. If you want to limit how players use siege, then just do like siegerazer, smack a tower, ring pops up, you wait to ‘cap’ the ring and then siege appears, build it, ram a gate. Yet some people are going to think this would be a good idea too >.<

Kindly tell us what other use a flame ram has, please?

We used to place a flame ram in a camp for the fears to break groups apart then snipe them down one by one. More for giggles though but it did save a guildies life once. Funniest battle ever.

I’ll admit we had tons of other siege and just tossed a ram for the fun of it. But it did get used.

Doll Mistress.9267:

Lunacy Solacio.6514:

Exeon.4358:

Couldn’t Anet make it so you can only drop rams in a “X” radius of gates in the first place? other siege would be harder but at least other siege wouldn’t be completely useless

As has been said countless times before, flame rams have other uses than just smacking gates. If you want to limit how players use siege, then just do like siegerazer, smack a tower, ring pops up, you wait to ‘cap’ the ring and then siege appears, build it, ram a gate. Yet some people are going to think this would be a good idea too >.<

Kindly tell us what other use a flame ram has, please?

Lords room on the lord for the iron hide buff.

Shadow.3475:

Joey.2769:

Not if you make the votes for unique individuals. If you have 10 people trolling on your map at once then GG.

Not that hard you kitten of a player that takes supply from the Tower your scouting then 9 guildis help him remove all siege you build.

Haha sucks to be on your server if you have a full group of 10 actively trolling you.

Doll Mistress.9267:

Lunacy Solacio.6514:

Exeon.4358:

Couldn’t Anet make it so you can only drop rams in a “X” radius of gates in the first place? other siege would be harder but at least other siege wouldn’t be completely useless

As has been said countless times before, flame rams have other uses than just smacking gates. If you want to limit how players use siege, then just do like siegerazer, smack a tower, ring pops up, you wait to ‘cap’ the ring and then siege appears, build it, ram a gate. Yet some people are going to think this would be a good idea too >.<

Kindly tell us what other use a flame ram has, please?

I like how I said something in a general sense to the whole thread and 1 person acts like I called them out and attacked them, (no not you Doll Mistress, but a bit above). .
On that subject, never underestimate the lengths to which people will go to troll. If anyone can remove any siege I throw down, what incentive is there to defend anything if someone is just going to come along and tear down my work?

As to what I quoted above: As someone else said, iron hide on lord, also can be put at the top of stairs for the iron hide and knockback. Or if bored, you take a camp for supply, you set up a ram in the middle of the field, and you knock around the rams with a ram. Why? Well… why not ask ‘Why not’?

If the suggestions are to prevent any creative usage of even 1 type of siege, then why not just prevent all creative uses of all siege? Why are we even able to throw siege at all? Why not have it set up in explicit locations, like with siegerazer then. Which… his ram still is bad. Catapult behind a gate, or a treb, so that it can only hit the gate is creative. Kinda sucks when every single tower or keep is defended that way and you wanna take it, but it’s hard to argue that it isn’t effective.

What about open field ram in a fight? 50 people just got iron hide for 5s. Well timed that could make a bit of a difference. Niche use? Definitely. Why prevent people from trying it though? It’s been done and worked, and it’s also failed miserably.

ShroomOneUp.6913:

first of all since when is it illigela to palce siege weapons until the map bursts? also since when is depliting supllies illegal? i can understand that with kitten behavior its jsut anyoing and disturbs the fun of WvW but why is it OKAY to ban people for building numerous siege weapons but not for acting like kittens?

Because it’s a) exploiting the siege cap system and b) something players cannot counter. If someone acts like a jerk you can just /ignore them and don’t have to worry about it, if someone is draining your server’s supplies and spamming useless siege to cripple defenses there’s absolutely nothing you or other players can do. That’s why it requires GM intervention.

And no, we really don’t want to ever give players the ability to destroy siege or stop other players from placing siege, because the exploiters will just exploit that to grief us in new ways.

How about an extra mastery?

Siege dismantler. Only works on siege that isn’t under the control of a player or in the process of being built.
Tier 1 – Dismantle a siege weapon, regain 0 point of supply – 10 points
Tier 2 – Dismantle a siege weapon, regain 1 point of supply – 25 points
Tier 3 – Dismantle a siege weapon, regain 2 points of supply – 50 points
Tier 4 – Dismantle a siege weapon, regain 3 points of supply – 100 points
Tier 5 – Dismantle a siege weapon, regain 4 points of supply – 250 points
Tier 6 – Dismantle a siege weapon or siege weapon construction site, regain 5 points of supply – 350 points

Why not just attach a name to the siege, that way there is no guessing on who dropped it or false blaming someone else/guild? That way it’s easier for people to get called out on it and easier for Anet to track down as the person who dropped it will get reported much quicker.

ShroomOneUp.6913:

first of all since when is it illigela to palce siege weapons until the map bursts? also since when is depliting supllies illegal? i can understand that with kitten behavior its jsut anyoing and disturbs the fun of WvW but why is it OKAY to ban people for building numerous siege weapons but not for acting like kittens?

Since about the same time it became ArenaNet’s privilege to put you on a watch list.

Well done.

DeadlySynz.3471:

Why not just attach a name to the siege, that way there is no guessing on who dropped it or false blaming someone else/guild? That way it’s easier for people to get called out on it and easier for Anet to track down as the person who dropped it will get reported much quicker.

you mean easier to falsely accuse people of wasting supply on ‘regular’ siege or yell at them for ‘poor placement’ even if it was a very good placement at the time it was thrown?

Lunacy Solacio.6514:

DeadlySynz.3471:

Why not just attach a name to the siege, that way there is no guessing on who dropped it or false blaming someone else/guild? That way it’s easier for people to get called out on it and easier for Anet to track down as the person who dropped it will get reported much quicker.

you mean easier to falsely accuse people of wasting supply on ‘regular’ siege or yell at them for ‘poor placement’ even if it was a very good placement at the time it was thrown?

Agreed. Thats how I feel about it as well.

I still like the idea of being able to report the siege itself. This keeps people from attacking and harassing players, but it gives the GMs a chance to look into the matter and take action as needed.

To me it’s a win/win situation.
It deals with seige trolls, and gives the GMs the tools to track them down.

I’m ok with putting names on siege. If you’ve built a good community, those players will help train the newbies for siege placement, rather than harassing them. If they harass instead of help, report them for the harassment.

Turning down an idea to stop trolling because “rude players are rude” is not a very good argument.

Also, a system like this discourages people from playing poorly. So many people play poorly because they can hide behind a veil of anonymity. Same reason people troll and harass – anonymity. If things are more transparent, you will have less trolling, less harassment, and less poor play. Do we really want to encourage the following line of thought: “I’m going to do this stupid thing because nobody will see me do it, and even though it’s going to hinder others’ enjoyment of the game, it won’t come back at me, so who cares?”. I sure hope we don’t.

Michael Henninger.7451:

Again; we don’t like cheaters.

Not from TC myself but have played there in the past and seen the siege and map/commander trolls in action myself first-hand, same as on BG , JQ and SFR (EU) for that matter, along with a fairly consistent cheater/hacking commander based on TC also (since gone/banned).

It turned me off the game completely and I’ve only recently started playing again.

So just wanted to say thanks for what seems like you folks in Anet actively dealing with this stuff.

It’s a similar line (though not as aggressive) as what the PlanetSide2 Devs did (and still do) to combat hackers/cheaters – being there themselves to deal with it.
What they’ve accomplished by doing that, and it was no easy task, is to almost completely wipe out hackers/cheaters in the game and destroyed multiple commercial hacking groups who created advanced hacks/cheats for their game, with the help of their players also who hated the cheating.

Only small suggestion I’d make is to try also to pay a little more attention to EU servers (even though I’m back on a US server) as I know it’s not as easy for you folks to do so given the time zone differences.

Anyway, keep it up, as a player, I’m impressed that you’re doing this and it’s very reassuring to hear of you being so active in combating the cheating/hacking so thank you.

Curo.2483:

I’m ok with putting names on siege. If you’ve built a good community, those players will help train the newbies for siege placement, rather than harassing them. If they harass instead of help, report them for the harassment.

Turning down an idea to stop trolling because “rude players are rude” is not a very good argument.

Also, a system like this discourages people from playing poorly. So many people play poorly because they can hide behind a veil of anonymity. Same reason people troll and harass – anonymity. If things are more transparent, you will have less trolling, less harassment, and less poor play. Do we really want to encourage the following line of thought: “I’m going to do this stupid thing because nobody will see me do it, and even though it’s going to hinder others’ enjoyment of the game, it won’t come back at me, so who cares?”. I sure hope we don’t.

The whole premise resides on IF you have built a good community. The fact that players are trolling would suggest that this good community doesn’t exist. In an ideal community, there would be no reason to have names on seige, as people wouldn’t be trolling. There would also be no reason to have a reporting system in place at all. No reason for GMs, and no reason to even have such a discussion.

A perfect society cannot work, because people are people with all the faults that are common among people. Sure it’s a great ideal, but unless human nature itself changes, it cannot work.

Having names on siege opens up more opportunities for harassment. Say a noob placed seige incorrectly. What is to stop someone from PMing them, and raging on them because they need to “L2P noob! Place the siege right or GTFO!”?
A good community? Sure, but again, people are people. As shown by the fact that people are raging, harassing, and trolling.

I really don’t see how placing the names on seige stops trolls from being trolls. I do see it creating more problems, maybe not seige trolling, but more harassment and a worse community than it already is.
Having seige reportable however removes the name, but still allows GMs to investigate and take action. If trolls know they can still get caught by just reporting their 15 rams in an open field, that in of itself should be a deterant. This way they can still do whatever without actively being observed, but it will come back to bite them after the fact, instead of during.

In an ideal community… players could also pm a person and compliment them on placing some good siege. Not just harass for bad placement but compliment as well.

I saw a placement of a great treb yesterday, and most definitely would have given him props for his placement. Only I didn’t know who it was.

Hexin.5603:

In an ideal community… players could also pm a person and compliment them on placing some good siege. Not just harass for bad placement but compliment as well.

I saw a placement of a great treb yesterday, and most definitely would have given him props for his placement. Only I didn’t know who it was.

True,

But generally speaking, how much more often does things like that happen, than someone QQing about something stupid? Like calling the person who just killed you a noob, and l2p and a host of other things… (yeah it’s happened. They died 1v1 vs my condi necro as a thief, and tried to whine to me about it, doesn’t make much sense.)

Out of something like 20k kills … many from guild raids so not the same as 1v1 … I think I’ve had 3 people IM me whining or stroking there ego. Maybe I’m just lucky.

Michael Henninger.7451:

And lastly; we are considering allowing video evidence to lead to account action. I will say that even if we don’t use it we always check on the accounts in question and I can assure you that the one video link I received last night is leading to two account terminations.

Sorry for bumping an old topic, but where should we send videos so that you or the correct person will see them? Do the videos sent to the exploits email get passed on?