[ZS] Protection Feature (Out of Date)

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by Smack, Mar 15, 2013.

  1. polishpimp

    polishpimp Well-Known Member

    Yeah...it seems strange that a protection feature is seemingly wide open to abuse, even if its not happening a lot...how long until it is? We all know if theres a loophole....its going to get exploited. Perhaps even stranger is that Kano spent all the time and resources on an update that helps so few, seems like they could have easily dealt with 7 instances on a case by case basis. I could think of quite a few other things that could be implemented that would impact a lot more players
  2. The Protector

    The Protector Banned

    7 in ZS.

    Wonder how many times in all the games.

    I've had it set on me 3x in PC.
  3. Smack

    Smack Kano Krusader

    Dealing with these issues on a case by case basis is a huge drain on resources across multiple departments and involves way more than 7 requests. By having a clear threshold of what we consider excessive we can point players to this feature as a benchmark. It is not a perfect solution, I completely understand that, but we feel it is a step in the right direction.

    For the sake of transparency here are some more stats:
    • Facebook has had 21 Protections set. Out of those 21 there are 2 players that have been protected against twice
    • MySpace has had 9 Protections set, none of which are repeat offenders.
    • Kong has had 4 Protections set, 1 of those attackers is a two time repeat offender
  4. Linda

    Linda Guest

    Top Poster Of Month

    Well I know for a fact one of those on Fb got the protection by being the instigator against a stronger higher level player , and this player also has used other loopholes over and over, one that even changed the way rule is sold , this player is no babe in the woods, needing protection. Again not the type of player your intention is to give a breather to. Rather someone who abuses things within the game. Not mentioning which game, but that does not matter much.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 15, 2013
    AlterEgoT likes this.
  5. polishpimp

    polishpimp Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the reply smack. I kind a figured there was a lot of complaints about being griefed that actually didnt meet the criteria yet would still need to be investigated anyway which would eat up a lot of your guys time.

    But what about the abuses this update has created? How are these to be dealt with? It seems pretty reasonable that they will continue to become more common place. I suppose players could put in a ticket to support to have it investigated....but doesnt that sound a whole lot like the original problem?

    Seems to me that were just trading in one abuse for another which is kinda like saying that one is ok . The only real difference is that the original problem is players doing exactly what the game is designed for and allows for players to do within the rules....and the players abusing this Griefing fix are actually purposely skirting around the rules to do exactly what they are being protected from. Basically I think youve just opened up another can of worms that was worse than the first one. My guess is that eventually players will be complaining about this new type of abuse in the same way they talk about alts, bots and unfair limits and restrictions
    Last edited: May 15, 2013
  6. Just Dreym

    Just Dreym Member

    So how this works. A level 900 takes me off the hitlist. I go to take my 41 or straight shot him whichever comes first. I get 1 hit in and the rest are all ambushes. So I list him 15 times /shrugs and he gets full protection for 3 days. He can take me off the list all be wants but for those 3 days I cant punch attack or list him. My squad makes him their chew toy because im anoyed that he continues to further take me off the list and i cant defend myself. After a week he retires the game. If you take someone off the hitlist you should take your beating and move on. Or as they say if you cant take the heat get out of the kitchen? Anyways Kano should just remove the player protection feature cause not only does it not work (I was griefed first having to deal with 40 losses) but when players like him abuse the feature the other player will end up getting the last laugh..had he been smart he would have taken his 41 losses and I would have been on my way...
  7. Jonathan_X

    Jonathan_X New Member

    although it's an awesome Idea it doesn't really do what you guys are trying to accomplish Only being able to protect against 1 doesn't cut it I protect against 1 and than another lists me 19 times after that...
  8. AlterEgoT

    AlterEgoT Well-Known Member

    The time has come for just that polish. Same as the ambush system. But hey whatever. Let's have more vault achievements that'll solve it ;)
  9. AlterEgoT

    AlterEgoT Well-Known Member

    So a player punches hourly. sets ambushes.
    and it is considered un-retaliated because they didn't place a hit?

    So a slayer retaliates each day for 15 day say and gets protection slapped on them. Never mind that said the one being ahem griefed is sitting in wc being pervy.

    Yeah great feature.

    That being said if we must give the jerks one more way to hide could we at least have some sort of timer so we know when we can resume fighting. as it stands you have no idea when the thing runs out except 3 days. Which if you aren't watching when it is placed you have no clue when 3 days is up.

    I'd really like to see this tweaked at least where the hits are consecutive and the person setting the protection hasn't provoked it by say griefing the faction and just not listing the one account.

    Would appreciate if some thought went back into how this works. Thank you.

    ETA: while I don't have the example handy since it's somewhere along the 3rd day here is a stat example....

    276 attacks,170 hitlist attacks,4 hits,86 punches,19 booby traps in 20 days
    Attacked first: 21 days ago
    Last attacked: 13 hours ago
    Attacks from: 276 attacks,170 hitlist attacks,4 hits,86 punches,19 booby traps in 20 days Attacked first: 21 days ago Last attacked: 13 hours ago
    Attacks against: 9 attacks,45 hitlist attacks,1 hit,1 punch in 2 days Last attacked: 13 hours ago

    That is not the best example since it's close to my level so probably not eligible However it does show the type of real world stats we deal with daily. And while this one is close in level it looks the same from smaller accts as well.

    This is why I say we really need a new way to define griefing.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
  10. I have to agree with her on this one. We had a guy who went after the entire faction with one exception, the one person that could actually do something against him. So chain away in retaliation for my faction I did and poof, up comes player under protection. So now he had the ability to grief the lower faction members and the people that could help out had the ability stripped and could just sit there and watch. I get the concept behind it, but it's working the opposite right now. The people who should use it dont because this is a fighting game after all. The ones that shouldn't EVER have the option are the first to use it and then laugh about it.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
    AlterEgoT and Kirsten like this.
  11. AlterEgoT

    AlterEgoT Well-Known Member

    As the use of this becomes more prevalent I can only say. I HATE this feature.

    Could we perhaps revist this as it was released as a beta?

    I am finding it really hampers the factions supporting their members.

    When factions are warring or a larger account goes after a smaller account in a faction as retribution to one their level It leaves all the smaller accounts completely at their mercy. Since they can't afford to defend themselves against the larger account with the disparity incomes and the same or higher level is quickly put under protection.

    I still contend that max negative accomplishes what this was meant to anyway. But if it's such a necessary component then could it at least be tweaked so that there is some consequence for punches and such? Or something?
  12. Jon Thomas

    Jon Thomas Member

    How about you just change it so you can go invincible for 24hrs and you can't attack and no one can attack you so your restricted to BOSSES, World Bosses, and Outbreaks for the 24hrs while everyone drops off your hitlist. Then you can't use it again for 3 days.

    I mean it's fairly easy for a high level to punch kill a low level and blocking 1 person doesn't do much. I remember in about the lvl 660 range there is a certain person many of us known who doesn't ever level up and just finds people to attack and in 3 days i had over 100 attack sand over 30 hitlists from this person. There's tons of people liek that out there and if you attack them back or do anything they just sick their squad mates on you.

    Immunity from attacking or being attacked for 24hrs at least lets your rival squad list drop off.
    AlterEgoT likes this.
  13. Kirsten

    Kirsten Well-Known Member

    I doubt that would keep that type of player away, prob gonna just make them more aggressive, most of the time as it is someone that uses the protection feature, will just become a target as soon as the 3 days is up. Then next time the person attacking will be careful not to list or attack to the limit so the feature will not be available, I know I count the amount of time I list someone ,just for that reason.
  14. Jon Thomas

    Jon Thomas Member

    This is why i think a manually activated safe shield would be nice. At least you could get your daily done.. someone's targetting you then you can't do even do boss fights due to constant healing.
  15. Kirsten

    Kirsten Well-Known Member

    If kano ever did that the rebellion would be unreal:eek:and rightly so ;)
  16. Jon Thomas

    Jon Thomas Member

    I don't see what the big deal woudl be it would be for 1 day and you couldn't attack other players and they couldn't attack you and would be at least 3 days before you could do it again. It would help a little, but not make a big difference
  17. Kirsten

    Kirsten Well-Known Member

    Besause these are fighting games, if Kano did that we might as well grow crops and if you could do that I guarantee you would become a target like nobodies business,just play your game get strong and have fun.
  18. Jon Thomas

    Jon Thomas Member

    What if we set a hard limit of you being listed for hits no more then 10 times a day. and you cannot list anyone more then 10.

    That seems like a reasonable direction to go with this.
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2014
  19. Kirsten

    Kirsten Well-Known Member

    yeah okay keep hoping , these are PVP games Player vs Player not hide for a day and then play in peace for that day, if these games are not your thing, then play something else that is, don't come into a game ,a well established game that everyone knows how it is and plays and gets ahead and want to change it cause you are getting interrupted while doing dailies ,please lol go enjoy your game or go play something else that is fun
  20. Jon Thomas

    Jon Thomas Member

    Ohh don't get all mad.. i'm not even having a problem with the game, play everyday and I enjoy it. Obviously Kano themselves and enough players have found there is a problem. So no matter if you like it or not they are (read first post) already implementing a device to help players with being bullied.

    I'm just trying to suggest some direction. You obviously don't like it and that's fine, but were sort of past the is this a good idea phase i mean they have the thing implemented. You don't have to like my ideas, but you sure aren't offering up any better ones. So why not stop negatively attacking my posts and give us a real suggestion to make the process better. Being a negative Nancy doesn't do anything but rouse tempers and start name calling.

    And to be fair you just joined in March your fairly new too.

Share This Page