Redeemed 6 Posted June 24, 2018 Showing green, bronze, silver, and gold threat levels in district seems to just cause toxicity much like announcing bans did... If you are green, bronze, or even silver you are harassed for being a noob. If you are gold (even if it is just temporary) in a bronze district you are accused of intentionally dethreating. If you beat / kill someone with a higher threat level, you are accused of being a dethreater, hacker, or reroll. So, how about we just hide showing threat levels... If the player is on your team, they have green rank symbols If the player is on the other team, they have red rank symbols If the player is not on either team, they have gray rank symbols No one knows anyone else's threat level so no one can harass or make accusations based on threat... Just a thought. Love it or hate it. Either way. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Excalibur! 207 Posted June 25, 2018 No. People will find a way to be """toxic""" anyways. People will still spot those who play bad. You need to stop getting so much importance what people say and learn to ignore when necessary. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZoriaDunne 327 Posted June 25, 2018 Solution to remove the toxicity is removing the chat, just like in some games where you can't chat. But yeah, not the best idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redeemed 6 Posted June 25, 2018 5 hours ago, Excalibur! said: No. People will find a way to be """toxic""" anyways. People will still spot those who play bad. You need to stop getting so much importance what people say and learn to ignore when necessary. It doesn't bother me personally what people say, but if you just read district chat you'll see 90% of it is toxic with a majority of that referencing threat level. Showing threat provides zero benefit to the game especially with the poor matchmaking system and unbalanced missions. This also helps drive new players off and contributes to the decision of some weakerminded players to cheat. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Creedh 7 Posted June 25, 2018 i belive Matt said they will do something about the threat system. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Excalibur! 207 Posted June 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Redeemed said: It doesn't bother me personally what people say, but if you just read district chat you'll see 90% of it is toxic with a majority of that referencing threat level. Showing threat provides zero benefit to the game especially with the poor matchmaking system and unbalanced missions. This also helps drive new players off and contributes to the decision of some weakerminded players to cheat. I doubt it. Do you have any information about the chat influencing the amount of players or you just took it out of your head? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CookiePuss 5377 Posted June 25, 2018 9 hours ago, Excalibur! said: No. People will find a way to be """toxic""" anyways. Speak for yourself my guy, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrChan 337 Posted June 25, 2018 Been saying this for years. The main issue is that you'd have to also hide district threat, and then you'd have to sort players into the right district for their threat rather than just letting them pick one at random so matchmaking wouldn't suck. Ideally the game would enforce auto-join, but that'd probably create too many instances of dumping people in near empty districts. Maybe if you selected Financial and were offered three districts closest to your or your team's threat and picked the ones with the best numbers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redeemed 6 Posted June 25, 2018 2 hours ago, MrChan said: Been saying this for years. The main issue is that you'd have to also hide district threat, and then you'd have to sort players into the right district for their threat rather than just letting them pick one at random so matchmaking wouldn't suck. Ideally the game would enforce auto-join, but that'd probably create too many instances of dumping people in near empty districts. Maybe if you selected Financial and were offered three districts closest to your or your team's threat and picked the ones with the best numbers? My thought is that player threat would only be hidden in district so there wouldn't be a need to hide district threat. Players would still see their own threat level on the character selection menu, etc. This obviously is just a short-term, temporary fix, until a better matchmaking system and district instance management system could be implemented. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swft 356 Posted June 25, 2018 There needs to be a way to distinguish players by skill. We are waiting for the matchmaking/threat update so, let's just... wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redeemed 6 Posted June 26, 2018 (edited) 21 hours ago, swft said: There needs to be a way to distinguish players by skill. We are waiting for the matchmaking/threat update so, let's just... wait. Why does "There needs to be a way to distinguish players by skill", at least visibly to other players? In my mind, as it is currently, there is no actual benefit to visually showing threat level and it just leads to prejudices, name calling, hackusations, etc. I have no problem showing a player their own threat level or some other sort of statistical indication of their performance compared to other active players. Like a performance rating or something. It could even be a daily rating, weekly rating, monthly rating, etc. I think the rating should be character based though because progression level in regards to access to mods, weapons, etc can have an impact, big or small, on match statistics and outcomes. As an example, if I am using a low progression level character against a team with high progression level characters who have access to car surfer, explosive weapons, etc, I end up at a disadvantage either small or great depending on the mission and stage. I am not complaining about this match up, but it does impact the stats and possibly the overall outcome of the mission. Edited June 26, 2018 by Redeemed 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VickyFox 353 Posted June 26, 2018 (edited) Honestly people will judge other players by their mission performance. If not by their rank or threat then people will judge by Kill/Death ratios as if this was Call of Duty. Threat segregation if lifted would remove the incentive for dethreating and I'm sorry to the newer players but they can't complain about a game which every opponent is randomised. Edited June 26, 2018 by VickyFox 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HK33E 40 Posted June 27, 2018 6 hours ago, VickyFox said: Honestly people will judge other players by their mission performance. If not by their rank or threat then people will judge by Kill/Death ratios as if this was Call of Duty. Threat segregation if lifted would remove the incentive for dethreating and I'm sorry to the newer players but they can't complain about a game which every opponent is randomised. Well... NUFF Said. Hey Vicky, long time no see. 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fortune Runner 796 Posted June 27, 2018 On 6/25/2018 at 4:42 AM, Excalibur! said: No. People will find a way to be """toxic""" anyways. People will still spot those who play bad. You need to stop getting so much importance what people say and learn to ignore when necessary. open conflict has it this way for a reason - its what many people asked for in open conflict I have yet to see any toxic chat or trolling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PersianTiger 28 Posted June 27, 2018 ummmm, It kinda brings challenge for player. From another POV when you look at it, well this might not be right, i mean differing players based on their skills is totally not good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
