My internet connection sucks so I got disconnected then got booted many times. There is already the stat of how many times a player got booted but I think there should also be another stat showing how likely a player would boot other people so I can check and avoid playing with these people.

Just my 0.02 dorrars

The main problem I have with this is how to measure it. Sometimes, booting is necessary, but a server can't tell the difference between a necessary one and a non-necessary one.

If you did it like the booted amount, it would only serve to tell you how many times this person has booted. But, it wouldn't be able to give you a percentage for the stat, since there's no denominator. (It would probably take a lot of code to determine how many times someone could have booted.)
Also, there's the problem of who people are going against.
Example: If player A plays against people who have a 50% boot rate, and player B plays against people with a 5% boot rate, Player A will likely boot more, even if Player A only boots after 10 minutes as opposed to Player B's 5 minutes.

The only way I could think of measuring this is to take the Boot Time and subtract it from the Direct Boot Time. For example, if I boot after 10 minutes in a 5 minute Direct Boot, my time would be 5 minutes. This would separate the strict booters from the lenient ones. The lower the time, the more strict they are on booting. The server knows how much time has passed before a boot, so this is possible.
The problem with this is that it'd most likely require two stats, one for multi-days and one for real-times. Also, it's a bit confusing, and would need certain wording to make it work.

this has been theorized before.. my previous theory went by a percentage boot rate, seperate for MD and RT games ofc'

because playing a 2 minute boot game and waiting 5 minutes is much more lenient then playing a 30 minute boot game and waiting 33 minutes..
at least you'd have to take the total time past boot and divide it by the amount of boots..

In theory, since the game does record the speeds of the last 10 turns, you could even add in all exceptions to the boot time in the past 10 turns...
IE, alot of people will wait til 10 in a 5 minute boot, but if you take 6 minutes 3-4 turns in a row, they will boot you, esp if you are doing it intentionally..
instead of it just using the 1 for your last turn, it would use 1+1+1+1, to include all instances of passing boot in the past 10 turns.
Naturally this will make players that play high boot rate players with higher stats.. but hopefully this implementation would also include a higher rate of open games with better boot rating pre-req's..


I'd wager the best combat against this would be to include a boot limit on the auto-games, but I am unsure if Fizzer would ever implement something that would reward you for making a new dummy account..

+1 for alababi

and @Bakapon you are wrong and @Perrin3088 why so complicated?
You dont argue about the boot rate of players, asking Fizzer for separeted boot registers for Real time games, Multi games, games you have been booted because you exceed the timer for one minute, games you have been booted because you repeatedly exceeded the timer for 1 minute 5 seconds etc. ... You just have one value and it indicates a lot.
Everything over 10% is defenitely too much.
The same applies to alababis idea.
Statistics dont lie in big numbers. If you have a high booted-players rate per game, with a lot of games played, then in the end, its just because you boot often. A statistic for that is all alababi asked for and that is something that would come in handy for me as well, for blacklisting players in advance.

Statistics don't lie, but conclusions made by people based on statistics can be off. If I boot often, as said, it doesn't mean I boot unfairly. It means people I play with go regularly past the booting time. Some people might blacklist me based on how much I boot, but that would be unfair. Unless the statistic by default is hidden and you can turn it on, I would vote against this.

Get better internet or play games with longer boot-times. I dont see how a stat like this could be fair. Sure you can split between MD and RT, but there's also a huge difference between someone who plays ladder games only and someone who only plays auto-games.

Frankly I don't even see the problem with booting at the buzzer even thoug I don't do it myself. When joining a game you agree to it's settings, including boot times.

instead of trying to avoid playing people that boot why dont you just play games with longer boot time.... just a thought :D

I dont see any problem with that stat, if you boot far above average it will show. Simple as that. I boot almost never, because it is almost never necessary.
When we have that boot indicator both groups of people will be happy. You that play for your stats can keep playing each other and boot on the buzzer and us who enjoy a good game, even if it takes longer than the boot timer, can keep playing each other. I am blacklisting people that boot on the buzz anyway( or without asking, or if the game is undecided) and will not play with them again.
So all that changes is that non-booters can save a lot of time and frustration (less ruined games).

I like this idea because it would disencourage a lot of people from booting opportunistically. Sure, sometimes booting is neccessary because there are people who intentionally stall games they're loosing - or just because they're trolls. Sure, these are good reasons why such a counter wouldn't be entirely fair. But neither is the system we have right now, only showing boots you received.

Adding this counter could lead to lead to both stats complementing each other over time to produce a much more balanced & accurate picture of any player with enough games played. Being a "good sportsman" doesn't show in your stats at the moment. This could actually be changed with such a counter! And I think this is what most players would like to see, given how many angry threads a la "bl this guy he booted way too soon!" pop up all the time.

For example, a player profile showing ~700 RT-games completed and a boot rate around 5% at least looks like this might be someone reasonable, right? Now if this profile would also show something like a 30% "directly booted another player" statistic (>200 boots!), this could reasonably be read as being the profile of a player who "boots to win", and thus someone some people WILL want to avoid playing with. Same profile with only 3-10% boot rate - entirely different story! Right now, you would need to play at least one game with this player (possibly including a boot, an "unsportsmanlike" win, a blacklist entry exchange, flaming and maybe even a report...) to know anything about how loose he/she is when it comes to booting.

No one is FORCED to directly boot someone that often, really. "Vote to boot", "autoboot" and the newly implemented "abandoned games" feature can be relied on to keep games from stalling!

Gnuill, would that 30% be based on how many games he has booted in, or how many boots he has?

say I am playing a 24 ffa, and I boot to win on 18 players.. does that count as 18 counts, or 1 count?

would give a possibility of 2300% max boot rating if you booted 23 players per game.

myhand, a generic number ratio is not in warlights nature, imho. you say 10% would be adequate, what if I say anything about 35% is adequate, now I want a stat showing when people are booting over 35%, because booting at 7 minutes in a 5 minute boot game is not fine in my theoretical opinion. A static number will not be effective Imho.. my idea was intended to give players a real percentage to show the average amount of time it takes before the player will boot... Ofc any settings will be manipulated by people trying to make their stats look good..

you missunderstood me
I dont care for a complicated statistic showing under which circumstances someone booted.
I was merely stating that comparing that with the boot statistic we already have, you are not asking if they got booted after 2 minutes or in a real time game or in an FFA or whatever. You just take it and draw your own conclussions. So you wouldnt want someone in your game that got booted 35% of his games, thats fine. Why not have the same with a player that boots 35% of his games?
For me a simple stat showing the number of boots per game (or games per boot) would be totally sufficient.

because someone that boots 35% of his games against people at 5X boot limit shouldn't be penalized.. if you like auto games and get unlucky with players that don't surrender and just leave, you should not be just as punished as someone that will boot just for benefit.. Imho the stat you are interested in would be worthless, since as I understood it this was meant to help people differentiate between buzzer booters and necessity booters..

@Perrin3088

What I mean is that we need a statistic showing how many games in which a certain player have booted other players. For example, if I played a ffa game with 24 players and I booted one or some players, just count it as one game I've booted some player(s). If someone has been playing 100 games (any kind of games) and has booted other players in 20 games then something must be wrong with this guy. And I dont think there are many people who join games just to get booted. So when the "booted" stats help us to spot those who are likely to get booted, I believe we need the booting stat to help us spot the booters as well because both the "booted" and "booting" players ruin the games. Moreover, that new stat would make the opportunist booters have to think twice before booting

I played about 80 autogames now and I had to boot only 2 times, that`s roughly 2 to 3% of the games. I admit, while I joined mostly players with 65% win rate and up, minimum 50% I expect the rate to be higher in totally random auto-games. Still asuming it would be double as much we would reach about 5 to 6%, a number I could live with. My guess, people that boot for the win will have a higher boot rate then that even.

But dont get me wrong. I am not arguing about mere details here. If fizzer would go with a more refined statistic about booting, I would be perfectly fine with it. I was pledging for the simple statistic because i thought it would be less work to implement.

alababi, then the problem is you have a 24 player ffa and half the players go awol throughout it, and various people end up booting, then various people would get an increase to this stat for trying to use boot to advance the game.

myhand, granted.

@Perrin:
It would count as 1.
As for the auto-games: yes, that's a problem. As I said, the stat couldn't be perfectly fair, so this would be another example. You could theoretically let the abandoned games mechanic handle those games, but of course that would probably hopelessly clutter your "my games" list within a matter of days.
But with 24 FFA's it's really not that big of a problem IMO: just set reasonable autoboot & vote-to-boot times. A successful vote-to-boot obviously wouldn't add to *anyones* counter - with the effect that it might finally see some use! If too many people are gone at once to prevent a vote from happening, then you'd have to have enough time to wait for the autoboot to do it's work. Or boot, of course.

Now I understand that it's perfectly fine to say to someone who is complaining about getting booted in a '2min direct' game: "well, just don't join those games then".
But the same would go for someone who is complaining about having to use the direct boot more often in games with certain settings, would it not?