I hate quitters , but specially those idiots who quit in first 2 minutes of the online game. When they start badly in the first turn or just have bad worm placement they quit. We have to do something about it, they are ruining game for other people. What you think?

i think there ID which most likely is unique to there IP needs to get changed to reflect and show that the person is a early quitter.

this A) lets hosts decide to keep him/her or not and B) banning is pretty harsh.

obviously when said person joins a game after being flagged as a quitter, that client will send a message to the host upon joining a game saying that he/she quitted early in a previous recent game.

if someone annoys you, just don't play with them again

it's that simple

if someone annoys you, just don't play with them again

it's that simple

Let's not get common sense involved here.

I've got a better idea, how about letting people quit when the host is being a <beep /> WITHOUT being banned for an hour.

Run, thing is that that people should be punished temporarily for ruining game for everyone. For instance someone else could play in their place but who knew that they would quit.
I`m not that crazy to start remembering all people that I play with, especially people who quit in the early stage.
I like franpas idea, but still I think that that people should be punished globally for at least half hour.

Maybe some kind of database creation for users who play online should be available (database would be stored and created locally for every user by that user). In that database user should be able to set people by their ID in groups (friends, quitters, etc...). And if you host a game some kind of message should say if any of that players are in your groups.
I would surely like some kind of local database creation to be enabled in game.

And what about when the host hasn't set up the map properly (accidentally setting a border etc) or when someone realises they don't know the rules for that gametype, or when a connection drops out, or when the game crashes? Do those warrant an hour of banning?

How about a vote kick function?

There's nothing to play for in worms, there's no ladder, there's no ranks, no prizes, quitting should not be a problem, so what you have to do is, get to know some people, become friends with them, play them, get to know more people, get more friends, until you know around 100 people, and then, then you shouldn't have any problem with quitters.

How about a vote kick function?

The host can kick people as it is, if they want to hold a vote they can ask people in the chat (privately if need be). I can't see a time where this would be needed.

Run, thing is that that people should be punished temporarily for ruining game for everyone.

you can't force people to play the game.

if they're at risk of being banned just for quitting, then they're going to pick one of the other options instead:

1/ fag about and break the rules and generally be an idiot
2/ spam the chat
3/ minimise and do something else until several minutes have passed, forcing everyone else to sit through their completely uneventful turns
4/ go to the toilet and take a dump

What Yakuza said. And if you do play serious games in leagues, there are rules in most of them that punish the person quitting.

stupid idea about banning someone if he quits. What was the reason that he qyut? Maybe he HAD to, maybe his worms got stuck or colors screwed up, anyway - if things like that happen you really dont wanna be banned after you logon again, that would be a real bad evening....

Get to know your opponents and play with friends. People I don't like get kicked by myself from the game, no need to get some kind of FBI database running for that. Waste of bandwidth and cpu. ^^

Indeed a stupid idea.

How would you know the difference between an accidental network drop and some quitter who simply terminated/unplugged his connection then?

You wouldn't get any quit messages anymore, but only network drops.

i still think i had the right idea, people who quitted early would always have a chance to make a case against a new host to let them in.

so if they crashed or quitted early or the map was wrong, they have the abililty to tell people.

it doesnt need to last long at all, 15 minutes? maybe 30 tops.

edit: also, the host must accept the quitter/crasher before he/she can insert teams.

i still think i had the right idea, people who quitted early would always have a chance to make a case against a new host to let them in.

so if they crashed or quitted early or the map was wrong, they have the abililty to tell people.


People lie all the time. It'll be near impossible to detect truth from lies.

It isn't a good idea, just use your common sense and don't play with people who frequently drop.

Why not have it temp (half hour) ban people who have quit and/or been disconnected, say, three times in one day or something.

Let me ask a question here, why would somebody join a game, only to quit immediately? Disconnection is probably the most common reason, in which case a ban is just uncalled for.

I think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill here (never thought I'd use that phrase, my mum always used to say it).

Let me ask a question here, why would somebody join a game, only to quit immediately?


You can't possible be asking such an obvious question, can you?

There's a million reasons why someone would quit inmediatly or shortly after the game started, he might realize the level of skill is too low for him, or too high. He might realize no one speaks his language, that the game doesn't turn out to be his beloved normal scheme and that worms are in anchor mode and can't move, and a looooooong etctetera.

People lie all the time. It'll be near impossible to detect truth from lies.

It isn't a good idea, just use your common sense and don't play with people who frequently drop.

if they lie then it becomes pretty obvious during the game now doesnt it? dont play them at all if they quit.

banning is only for the extreme and imho would require people of power to monitor and manage the channels...

There's a million reasons why someone would quit inmediatly or shortly after the game started, he might realize the level of skill is too low for him, or too high. He might realize no one speaks his language, that the game doesn't turn out to be his beloved normal scheme and that worms are in anchor mode and can't move, and a looooooong etctetera.

I think all of those are fair reasons to leave games, finding out you've stumbled accross some professional ropers is going to scare the wits out of most new players (I know from experience) and because of that they leave before making fools of themselves and annoying the other players.

The quits are part of WormNet and indeed many other online games, there's no point punishing people for it.

This is not going to happen.

One thing this can be shaped into something that makes sense, is to implement some kind of rating system, where players would be able to "rate" other players. The more you've been around and the better your own rating, the more your ratings "weight". I believe something similar is already used in some online systems, like X-box Live Arcade?

What do you think?

good tho people will focus on particular people and thus thos people will always have a bad ranking.

what determines your own rank?

I think a better - and probably easier - solution would be the ability to add usernames to a blacklist which prevents them joining your game (or automatically boots them on sight)

That way you wouldn't have to remember every jerk you've played with - just add them to the list as they come along

Run also made a good suggestion too.

Perhaps a "greylist" for people you're keeping an eye on, and if they annoy you again and again, then they get demoted to your blacklist.

Depending on whether or not a database is suitably available for the purpose, I do have a suggestion (borrowed from elsewhere) that could work quite nicely. This goes on for a bit so you don't need to read it.

I saw a forum once where every member has an amount of "influence" and a "rating level". You start off with no influence and a rating or 10 so. People who do have influence can praise you and give you a positive rating for being helpful, kind, informative or generally just being an asset to the community. As people's ratings rise to say 15 or 20, they get there first little bit of influence, which means they can add a single point to someone elses rating. As more people rate you as an asset, you can add 2 or more points to another players rating. You can only have one rating per player and this is where the database part comes in, say A rates B with +3, but then B does something stupid, A can change the rating to +1 or +2, it does not add an additional 1 or 2. This way if you decide to have negative rating you can at most rate someone negatively once. (Probably no more than -2). You need to be a respectable member of the community to get a high rating, which gives you more influence. I don't think "rating" is the right word because it brings about a sense of superiority, but "communal points" could work.

This is all well and good for bustling forums (where I found the idea) but I don't know if WormNet is really enough to warrant such a dramatic system. I'm pretty much dismissing that idea myself but I thought I'd leave it for you to think about. Though the greylists\blacklists could work as long as a database (or bot I guess) can be made for it.

that system would suffer the same problem as cyber shadows. groups of people would focus on under ranking everyonw they meet.

The system I and Hurrell described are in effect almost identical. If you just started out, or have a general bad rating, your rating would be worth very little.

And if (as Franpa pointed out) people focus on underrating others, they in turn recieve massive discipline from others, this drops their rating and influence severely and subsequently all of the negative points they've given to others are no longer in effect.

It's a good system, but I just don't know if WormNet is capable of handling or worth the effort of installing such a thing, as good as it would be.

I guess that offline database for every player locally would be an easier thing to do and still very effective.
Like I said, in that database users should be able to set people by their ID in groups (friends, quitters, etc...). And if you host a game some kind of message should say if any of that players that joined are in your local groups.

And if (as Franpa pointed out) people focus on underrating others, they in turn recieve massive discipline from others, this drops their rating and influence severely and subsequently all of the negative points they've given to others are no longer in effect.

It's a good system, but I just don't know if WormNet is capable of handling or worth the effort of installing such a thing, as good as it would be.

ah ok then :)

add a new feature to catch people like this an warn others about them, give them a flag so they notice.. like a Deserter flag

(yes getting the idea from WoW)

when somone buggers off from a game within a minute, that person gets a flag next to his name on wormnet that shows hes a deserter and that flag will be with him for 15 minutes. so people know what to do when they notice them.

not playing with them again is stupid because they can change names.. believe it or not, but i actually played with a guy and he quit 4 games perposly to anoy me, he would change his name too so i wouldnt notice.. kept doing it to everyone on that day.

anyway, the person gets a deserter flag if a guy leaves a game too early, or if they must leave early then some kind of option allows the game creater to give a him a flag or not..


whatever use your imagination on that idea

I'm not against hypothetical debates, I think they're good and healthy, I only hope this feature is not being considered as it's an overkill trying to fix something that ain't broken, has much easier personal solutions and that would probably end doing more bad than good.

a ranking system like cyber and hurrel suggested coupled with a personal buddy book would be best, like in AG we have a number next to our names which is independent and people can change it, the more people rate you high, the better and so on so forth, and this ranking system is tied into the buddy book aswell, so you got easy access to rating thos you play often etc.

in the IRC part of the game, before or after you join a channel, there is a cancel/exit button on the bottom right, we could add the buddy book or whatever to the bottom left :P