What are your ideas to reduce toxicity?

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > Make pips a reward only for winning instead of "participating" in Ranked games.

>

> The thread is about removing Toxicity, not removing PvP itself.

 

PvP doesn't only revolve around ranked and farming the rewards in that mode. Ranked is meant to be the competitive way to play, and the fact that everyone gets a participation award totally ruins that intention.

 

Believe it or not, giving people rewards for winning naturally encourages competition and discourages this do-nothing attitude of "oh I can throw the game and harass my own team because i'm going to get pips for it anyway" or... "Yeah, I play ranked. I don't really try to improve, and I don't care whether I win or lose, but it's one of the best ways to farm gold in the entire game so I play anyway."

 

Throwing games in itself is a toxic interaction, and encouraging casual play in the only competitive option outside of ATs only builds resentment between those who actually try, and those that are just pip-farming.

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > > Make pips a reward only for winning instead of "participating" in Ranked games.

> >

> > The thread is about removing Toxicity, not removing PvP itself.

>

> PvP doesn't only revolve around ranked and farming the rewards in that mode. Ranked is meant to be the competitive way to play, and the fact that everyone gets a participation award totally ruins that intention.

>

> Believe it or not, giving people rewards for winning naturally encourages competition and discourages this do-nothing attitude of "oh I can throw the game and harass my own team because i'm going to get pips for it anyway" or... "Yeah, I play ranked. I don't really try to improve, and I don't care whether I win or lose, but it's one of the best ways to farm gold in the entire game so I play anyway."

>

> Throwing games in itself is a toxic interaction, and encouraging casual play in the only competitive option outside of ATs only builds resentment between those who actually try, and those that are just pip-farming.

 

Removing payoffs removes player motivation.

Removing player motivation ultimately ends up removing players from the game mode, resulting in an even smaller player base.

If the ranked player base diminishes even further, you'll have top 0.1% players being pitted against bronze or worse (if there even is a rank below bronze).

Then ranked would be no different from unranked.

Seeing how high platinum players **already** are pitted against low silver players, competitiveness is next to non-existent anyway.

[Burnfall.9573]

> @"Paradoxoglanis.1904" said:

> Ban thief and mesmer from pvp lol

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.tentonhammer.com/articles/guild-wars-2-are-thieves-and-mesmer-s-the-cause-of-the-meta.amp&ved=2ahUKEwiQtYXJwp_mAhVqg-AKHcPXB0sQFjAIegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0N9oY9xyYrUYqeCnHg6ou5&ampcf=1

 

My ideas to remove Toxicity is to remove the idea and the mindset of it. In other word, anything which encourages or promotes u healthy gaming experience, eliminate it before it spreads.

 

Wvw is a perfect example of how Toxicity is given full power to destroy all healthy experiences, including its players heath. promoting and encouraging Toxic behaviors at the extreme and giving hackers and exploiters full refuge to do anything they want at will.

 

I've never experienced a game which justifies Toxicity especially for 7 years this much.

 

Toxicity is intended and intentional

 

**'Dont say you care about me and than intentiomally hurt me in a way that isn't for the best"**

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

> @"Burnfall.9573" said:

> > @"Paradoxoglanis.1904" said:

> > Ban thief and mesmer from pvp lol

>

> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.tentonhammer.com/articles/guild-wars-2-are-thieves-and-mesmer-s-the-cause-of-the-meta.amp&ved=2ahUKEwiQtYXJwp_mAhVqg-AKHcPXB0sQFjAIegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0N9oY9xyYrUYqeCnHg6ou5&ampcf=1

>

> My ideas to remove Toxicity is to remove the idea and the mindset of it. In other word, anything which encourages or promotes u healthy gaming experience, eliminate it before it spreads.

>

> Wvw is a perfect example of how Toxicity is given full power to destroy all healthy experiences, including its players heath. promoting and encouraging Toxic behaviors at the extreme and giving hackers and exploiters full refuge to do anything they want at will.

>

> I've never experienced a game which justifies Toxicity especially for 7 years this much.

>

> Toxicity is intended and intentional

>

> **'Dont say you care about me and than intentiomally hurt me in a way that isn't for the best"**

 

Toxicity and hacking are not the same thing. Hackers are a detriment to everyone and they have real effects, economically.

 

Words are just words. When Harassment becomes physical it’s then constituted as a crime...there’s a big difference there and you shouldn’t meld them all into one thing.

 

 

IMO WvW isn’t toxic at all...quiet the opposite. Team chat is informative when it needs to be, and it’s a great place for people to crack jokes...map chat is informative when it needs to be, and a great way to chat with your allies when it’s quiet.

 

If you get siege placed on your corpse, it’s a joke, and if you take it seriously there is something wrong. If you really have an issue with an enemy player (who btw you can’t ideally even conversate with) how does that reflect on theories of censorship?

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> Removing payoffs removes player motivation.

 

Not saying to remove pips, just to only reward them for wins in ranked and not for losses.

 

The point isn't to remove payoffs, but to make a payoff an actual payoff of hard work rather than a participation award that can be given for doing the bare minimum or even nothing at all.

[HardRider.2980]

Sort out balance across the board, not just some classes and see how the rest go.

[Hot Boy.7138]

It's simple. Must toxic players. Let them play, but make the chat inaccessible to them. first offense, muted for 3 hours. Second offense, muted for 24 hours. 3rd offense, muted for a week. 4 offense, muted for a month. And if they go a period of time without being nasty to someone in chat, the penalty should reset. When i say mute, I mean no access to chat whatsoever. No whispers or guild chat or anything. But let them play.

[MrFrusciante.2438]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> I'm not saying this game has any more or less toxicity in PvP than other games. I think the difference between GW2 and other games is we dont really see any big moves from Anet to combat it. They dont really seem to try to encourage good sportsmanship and dont reflect to us any changes they are making (if any) to try to reduce toxic behavior. What are your ideas to deal with? What are some "low hanging fruit" Anet could make changes around?

>

> EDIT:

> I guess I'll give my own opinion too. I think they could take some notes from Blizzard with Overwatch. It's not that they have "solved" toxic behaviour or they have the "best" system but they have taken steps to lessen it and communicated clearly with the community on how they are dealing with it. I would really like to see this effort from Anet.

>

> Let people know when someone they reported gets a ban.

> Have a minor rewards system for getting some kind of "up vote" at the end of matches.

> Have a "down vote" system so that people can see when someone has LOTS of complaints from other players and knows what to expect.

> I would say the system could try to group those with a lot of thumbs down to play together so those who are toxic get stuck with others who are toxic BUT I know the PvP community is too small to make this work.

> Mute those who get to a certain "down vote" threshold automatically.

> These are just some ideas, none perfect.

my suggestion is maybe don't throw around the word toxic so much, baddies often like to cry toxic when you call them bad...

[TheMaverick.6104]

There is only one way to deal with it.. that is to not care so much and dont take it so seriously. Start looking at it as entertainment. Most of the toxicity comes from them being mad at themselves over you being better than them.

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > Removing payoffs removes player motivation.

> Not saying to remove pips, just to only reward them for wins in ranked and not for losses.

> The point isn't to remove payoffs, but to make a payoff an actual payoff of hard work rather than a participation award that can be given for doing the bare minimum or even nothing at all.

 

And why should players bother even trying when the chances are too high not to get any pips?

What about those people who really tried to win, but had no chance anyway because the other team was overly strong?

Should they be punished merely because some **other** people just lazily hop into ranked without wanting to try?

Ever thought about that?

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> What about those people who really tried to win, but had no chance anyway because the other team was overly strong?

> Should they be punished merely because some **other** people just lazily hop into ranked without wanting to try?

> Ever thought about that?

 

yah

 

That's the entire point really is to remove those people who just don't care rather than encouraging them. They aren't going to just go away; especially if nothing changes, but making the entire process a waste of time for them seems like a pretty solid way to dwindle their interest over time.

 

Alternatively or along with making pips exclusive to Ranked wins; pips could be an Unranked reward. The apathy in Ranked is one of the biggest sources of toxicity in Ranked imo, and so long as some sort of effort gets made towards preventing it, or at the very least redirecting it where it should be then I think toxic throwers, farmers, and bots would start to drop off farming ranked as a result.

 

By extension, getting rid of throwers, pip farmers, and bots from ranked would also remove a lot of those perceived unwinnable games. When it comes to the other team being leagues better or smurfing/metagaming, I already made it a point that Duos should play separate to solos.

 

> And why should players bother even trying when the chances are too high not to get any pips?

 

Because Ranked is not meant to be some egocentric pip-farm, and they should try if they're knowingly queuing for the ranked/competitive gamemode. If they're willing to quit a match over some arbitrary added reward then they should be playing the casual mode where the competitive players aren't always clashing with them, and where pip-farming wouldn't hurt others.

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > What about those people who really tried to win, but had no chance anyway because the other team was overly strong?

> > Should they be punished merely because some **other** people just lazily hop into ranked without wanting to try?

> > Ever thought about that?

> yah

> That's the entire point really is to remove those people who just don't care rather than encouraging them. They aren't going to just go away; especially if nothing changes, but making the entire process a waste of time for them seems like a pretty solid way to dwindle their interest over time.

> Alternatively or along with making pips exclusive to Ranked wins; pips could be an Unranked reward. The apathy in Ranked is one of the biggest sources of toxicity in Ranked imo, and so long as some sort of effort gets made towards preventing it, or at the very least redirecting it where it should be then I think toxic throwers, farmers, and bots would start to drop off farming ranked as a result.

> By extension, getting rid of throwers, pip farmers, and bots from ranked would also remove a lot of those perceived unwinnable games. When it comes to the other team being leagues better or smurfing/metagaming, I already made it a point that Duos should play separate to solos.

> > And why should players bother even trying when the chances are too high not to get any pips?

> Because Ranked is not meant to be some egocentric pip-farm, and they should try if they're knowingly queuing for the ranked/competitive gamemode. If they're willing to quit a match over some arbitrary added reward then they should be playing the casual mode where the competitive players aren't always clashing with them, and where pip-farming wouldn't hurt others.

 

Removing the losing pips **will** eventually demotivate and remove people who fed up with trying and losing anyway.

This **will** result in a diminishing playerbase for PvP, with **all** the negative effects that follow.

I'd much rather keep the losing pips and people who hardly care about winning or losing in a mode (that effectively is a joke anyway), rather than losing both **and more**.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> Removing the losing pips **will** eventually demotivate and remove people who fed up with trying and losing anyway.

> This **will** result in a diminishing playerbase for PvP, with **all** the negative effects that follow.

 

Yes, the toxic people who play Ranked selfishly, and superficially for the virtual monetary reward at the expense of people who actually try in the intended competitive Arena. Hence the title of this thread: "What are your ideas to reduce toxicity."

 

It's a relevant idea just like the suggestion to do nothing at all is, admittedly. That being said, miss me with this:

 

> The thread is about removing Toxicity, not removing PvP itself.

 

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > Removing the losing pips **will** eventually demotivate and remove people who fed up with trying and losing anyway.

> > This **will** result in a diminishing playerbase for PvP, with **all** the negative effects that follow.

>

> Yes, the toxic people who play Ranked selfishly, and superficially for the virtual monetary reward at the expense of people who actually try in the intended competitive Arena. Hence the title of this thread: "What are your ideas to reduce toxicity."

>

> It's a relevant idea just like the suggestion to do nothing at all is, admittedly. That being said, miss me with this:

>

> > The thread is about removing Toxicity, not removing PvP itself.

>

 

However, removing rewards isn't likely to remove toxicity.

The people who disrupt PvP **for fun** likely won't disappear.

So, removing payoffs removes people who would want to try, even they had incentives to do it, regardless of the outcome.

for many "toxic" people, "toxicity" is tool and reward in one.

[Megametzler.5729]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> > > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > Removing the losing pips **will** eventually demotivate and remove people who fed up with trying and losing anyway.

> > > This **will** result in a diminishing playerbase for PvP, with **all** the negative effects that follow.

> >

> > Yes, the toxic people who play Ranked selfishly, and superficially for the virtual monetary reward at the expense of people who actually try in the intended competitive Arena. Hence the title of this thread: "What are your ideas to reduce toxicity."

> >

> > It's a relevant idea just like the suggestion to do nothing at all is, admittedly. That being said, miss me with this:

> >

> > > The thread is about removing Toxicity, not removing PvP itself.

> >

>

> However, removing rewards isn't likely to remove toxicity.

> The people who disrupt PvP **for fun** likely won't disappear.

> So, removing payoffs removes people who would want to try, even they had incentives to do it, regardless of the outcome.

> for many "toxic" people, "toxicity" is tool and reward in one.

 

Another point for "removing pips for losing" is: While higher ranked players often have winrates of 60, 70, even 80%, lowest ranks have winrates of far below 50%. So even if you add those 3 pips to the winning reward, layers in silver/bronze will get less rewards, potentially discouraging them.

 

This could be avoided by adding extra pips to bronze. Not to the same rate of high ratings, but to some extent. People should not be discouraged to play at low rankings.

[Metzie.3012]

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said:

> Ban toxic people?

 

If you make the suggestion (rather question) that you should ban toxic players, then you would have to start with the developers or generally with those responsible. Of course, there are (these) players who are basically unfriendly and offensive. That fact is beyond question and should or will be punished.

 

The people in charge are mainly concerned with how the mood is in the game. This includes the general state of PvP and the system. In other words, their optimizations and contemporary adjustments. The current state is (among other things) reflected by the community, based on what the developer pretends or presents.

 

ANet has slept too long, Sleeping Beauty sleep, and wakes up slowly. A lot of work is waiting, ... :)

 

The PvP community could/would actually ... be (even) better if ...

[Metzie.3012]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> I'm not saying this game has any more or less toxicity in PvP than other games. I think the difference between GW2 and other games is we dont really see any big moves from Anet to combat it. They dont really seem to try to encourage good sportsmanship and dont reflect to us any changes they are making (if any) to try to reduce toxic behavior. What are your ideas to deal with? What are some "low hanging fruit" Anet could make changes around?

>

> EDIT:

> I guess I'll give my own opinion too. I think they could take some notes from Blizzard with Overwatch. It's not that they have "solved" toxic behaviour or they have the "best" system but they have taken steps to lessen it and communicated clearly with the community on how they are dealing with it. I would really like to see this effort from Anet.

>

> Let people know when someone they reported gets a ban.

> Have a minor rewards system for getting some kind of "up vote" at the end of matches.

> Have a "down vote" system so that people can see when someone has LOTS of complaints from other players and knows what to expect.

> I would say the system could try to group those with a lot of thumbs down to play together so those who are toxic get stuck with others who are toxic BUT I know the PvP community is too small to make this work.

> Mute those who get to a certain "down vote" threshold automatically.

> These are just some ideas, none perfect.

 

The question is basically easy to answer. Identify the current state of the action and needs, care for the current system (i.e. optimize it at appropriate intervals) and the player community, and they (the community) give it back benevolently (with and among each other).

[Leonidrex.5649]

> @"Metzie.3012" said:

> > @"Leonidrex.5649" said:

> > Ban toxic people?

>

> If you make the suggestion (rather question) that you should ban toxic players, then you would have to start with the developers or generally with those responsible. Of course, there are (these) players who are basically unfriendly and offensive. That fact is beyond question and should or will be punished.

>

> The people in charge are mainly concerned with how the mood is in the game. This includes the general state of PvP and the system. In other words, their optimizations and contemporary adjustments. The current state is (among other things) reflected by the community, based on what the developer pretends or presents.

>

> ANet has slept too long, Sleeping Beauty sleep, and wakes up slowly. A lot of work is waiting, ... :)

>

> The PvP community could/would actually ... be (even) better if ...

 

If people grew a spine, someone pisses you off mute him.

Someone slursand trolls report him, competent management would find a way to have them banned.

This entire wintrading shmuck, permaban them and move on. but no, why would we as players try if developers/manegemment doesnt care?

Im not a sait or even close but I dont throw games, and im not going out of my way to insult people for anything other then banter.

[Lottie.5370]

I think you shouldn't be able to duo queue after a certain rank, say plat 1.

 

I also think there should be an automatic kick from base so that people can't just afk there, e.g. if you spend longer than 30 seconds in base it ports you outside.

 

I don't think that chat should be restricted in ANY way. If someone is being toxic, you can just block and report them and move on. Censoring everyone because of a few toxic people is not really the way to go.

 

[Ashkew.6584]

the new option to remove chat seems an approach :)

 

[Avatar.3568]

Removing communication is generating nothing

 

Maybe we should make it old-school and add some gamemasters, they could easily give chat bans or something like that

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

> @"Megametzler.5729" said:

> Another point for "removing pips for losing" is: While higher ranked players often have winrates of 60, 70, even 80%, lowest ranks have winrates of far below 50%. So even if you add those 3 pips to the winning reward, layers in silver/bronze will get less rewards, potentially discouraging them.

>

> This could be avoided by adding extra pips to bronze. Not to the same rate of high ratings, but to some extent. People should not be discouraged to play at low rankings.

 

Right, i'm all for adding more for winning in general. Wins probably should feel like wins, and there's nothing wrong with that. Adding them to unranked would work too, and in retrospect; they'd probably be placed a lot better there than in Ranked, if not removed entirely.

 

I don't think I necessarily agree with keeping the gains tied to somebody's rank. I mean, GW2 is probably the only game that even needs to deploy smoke and mirrors like pips to keep their playerbase distracted from Ranked's problems and to keep people playing in the first place.

 

If this were literally any other competitive game, your reward might be some cosmetic badge just to show your place on the competitive ladder. Other games aren't different in the sense that lower-rated players have lower winrates, yet... Even without any added reward(like pips) more people still play those games competitively at every level from low-high. They don't need some added grind attached, in fact they usually benefit from not having them.

 

All pips have really done is create a do-nothing generation of players that cannot play Ranked itself without the Dopamine rush of getting pips and reward chests. So much so that actually playing takes a backseat to grinding out the rewards in the **Ranked** mode because the actual Ranked Arena is littered with so many problems that everyone would rather be distracted from than to play into.

 

That being said, keeping pips attached to Ranked wins is the ultimate compromise. Getting more for winning is fine, so long as it's fair to everyone instead of benefiting specific ranks more than others.

 

 

[Thornwolf.9721]

There is a block button for a reason~ Just block/mute them. It's not that hard guys come on...

[rng.1024]

Have someone from the staff watch 10-20 sample games every day (without players knowing), whenever they notice a player being toxic in map or team they qualify them for the "Challenged League", an on demand unranked tournament where the winning team gets to roll the dice on 1 player being able to queue ranked again - until you get lucky this is the only mode you are allowed to queue in :p

[Weindrasi.3805]

This is a good idea, but I think the downvote system should be temporary. Sometimes people get angry and lose their tempers--it's immature, it's dumb, but I don't think they deserve to be branded a PvP pariah for it. Maybe have a system where down-votes last for one week, so if someone is a constant jerk-face they'll keep getting down-votes--but if they had an uncommon bout of anger, it won't mark them forever.

Also, I could see trolls and jerkfaces using the downvote system against someone they're bullying--get multiple people in a game to downvote the victim and such. So A-net would have to make sure the system doesn't allow for abuses.