Player A offends Player B, provoking a response from which both players got banned, plus a case of unsportsmanlike behavior

  • First and foremost, let me pave the context of this case.

    (edited by CM)

    I'm not here to discuss confidentiality subjects, but to debate what has been publicly stated, hence what can be used in the debate, while also proposing a way to sanction deliberate unsportsmanlike behavior.
    (edited by CM)

    I for one think that such methods of sanctioning both players when one of them acted as a catalyst can hurt the way people react to such incidents on a long run, for such people can ultimately decide NOT to report said incidents on the fear of being sanctioned as well. Moderators should think twice before hastily deciding a ticket's resolve.

    Moreover, unlike other dare I say bigger games and more representative of online player conduct (a few examples that come to mind: League of Legends, World of Tanks), Rail Nation should have a reporting criteria for deliberate unsportsmanlike behavior. This criteria can be fine tuned and concrete examples be given for when it should apply. Such examples may include:

    - deliberately ruining wait times during the end-game phase;

    - deliberately breaking of majorities held by an association, after a consesus has been reached regarding their distribution;

    - deliberately spamming the forum threads in order to cause confusion;

    - deliberately sending private messages to multiple association members with the purpose of spreading misinformation;

    And I'm sure other examples can be given, keeping in mind the "deliberate" aspect that must be met.

    I await your considerations and can provide additional feedback, if needed.


  • Mihai I can understand your thoughts. And I do not want to contradict to any of your points, but I would like to add some thoughts .. and maybe get a view to the bigger picture.

    Players A and B

    If they debate, if they point at each other, if they blame each other ... what can we do?

    We might try to de-escalate, but most of us will try their best, but they are not skilled mediators, and others will fail on the restrictions, written communications brings in.

    Plus: we (almost) never know, how it started. The anger might have started 3-4 rounds ago, which is more than a year. And even if the debate is fresh and just a week of age ... can we really be sure, which was the first step?

    And that is, why we are annoyed about such situations, annoyed about one or both of the players, but we never can point out who is right and who is wrong. And when it comes to report and support people: neither can they.

    Reporting, judging, banning

    I always think of RL judges. They take years to learn the rules (law) but also to learn about mediation, about deescalation, about considering situations and contexts, about getting to know the intellectual background of persons to judge about.

    Poor supporters have to do the same job: judge about wrongdoing and even sentence them by banning or editing. And they get so much less of information, compared to a judge: they just see some written communication, and they see the PNs and tickets of complainers. From my experience: that's an awful job, as you can never be sure to have judged correctly.

    Plus: RL judges are used to be corrected, when the sentenced guy starts an appeal. RL judges regularly get corrected by the appeal judge, who again gets corrected on next level. They are used to it, and it works, because the next level is a different court, a different team of judges.

    If supporters of a company judge, the appeal will be worked on by a colleague, maybe a boss, but probably by a human, who they will meet tomorrow again. This is, why we should accept the supporters, and not discuss their decisions ... cause the judgement of a company supporter will always be final. Otherwise two supporters would meet in the cafeteria tomorrow and would start their debate with: "You told that customer my judgement was wrong ..."

    I always try (if doing support for a company) NOT to ban, warn, edit, but to moderate, to deescalate, to calm them down ...

    Deliberately ruining, sending, breaking ...

    Yes, I enjoy RN, because it is team play, it is community. My objectives are to help my group, team, region, city, friends by obeying to their suggestions, what has to be done.

    On the other hand, the published objective of the game is to be the winner, to gain rank 1, to get more prestige points than any other. If players go vor points, is there a better way than to take the majority? If they want to be quickest hauler, is there a better way to break majority and be the one to wait for the shortest time?

    Yes, I am sad, annoyed and a bit angry, when my team/group made up a great plan and we have to change strategy, because a few haul different goods or someone breaks the majority that we need so urgently.

    But that is all with the rules. The published game goal asks for behaviour like that. If THEY want to win, they must do something that makes sure WE DO NOT WIN.

    So yes, those deliberate actions annoy me too ... but then I think on: this is ALSO a simulation of RL economy. And in RL it often happens that someone buys the majority of shares, then appears to kick the CEO and put in a friend as the new CEO.

    If we really agree to play a simulation of RL economy, we must also agree to majorities taken over (friendly or also as a hotile takeover) ... not nice for many, but it's part of the game.

    Just some thoughts, from a slightly different perception.

    Frei nach Führungscoach Sandra von Oehsen. Zwei Fragen, die sich Unternehmen stellen sollten:

    Was können unsere Kunden von uns lernen?

    Und was können unsere Kunden von uns lernen, was sie gar nicht lernen sollen?

  • Another topic on this topic ;)

    The biggest problem. Trolls!

  • Mihai I can understand your thoughts. And I do not want to contradict to any of your points, but I would like to add some thoughts .. and maybe get a view to the bigger picture. Just some thoughts, from a slightly different perception.

    Hey Klabbauter, your perception is not only different but valuable too, for which I appreciate your effort.

    I can't comment anymore regarding the case at hand since it has been moderated, no further reason to pursue.

    On the subject of instituting a sanction motive under the unsportsmanlike conduct criteria, your assertion is correct, at least from my point of view. From a player's perspective, the game's objective is to score as many prestige points as possible and, as such, actions opposing the purpose of teamplaying must be taken (example: be 1st in investments, hauling first during the end-game phase, etc).

    However such conduct may occur from a player not targeting a top 10 position. I myself, having played several end-games, came across players that situated somewhere around 50-100 in rankings and engaged in ruining the wait times in several sites. Moreover, they didn't seem to do it for prestige gains, just to deliberately sabotage a city's strategy. If this behavior is accepted and/or tolerated then I rest my case. I for one, as an association chair, never condoned such behavior and stated that whoever appeals to such methods shall be kicked from the team.

    During my experience I've came across many times a situation where my association needed to share an industry with another one, less eager to co-operate and reluctant to a diplomatic approach. Of course we ultimately ended up having a majority war and, to my surprise, it was fun. But this is something else and, as you already stated, it simulates a real economy which I also want to have in the game.

    What about the deliberate sending of private messages with the purpose of misinformation, or the deliberate spamming of the city forum threads? What's your take on these scenarios?



  • Lets face it this game was made incredibly wrong.

    it pits people against each other in a team game.anything one team does is a negative for any other team there.

    add to the fire the prestige system which is broken when adding prestige to team than player.

    Every server I have been on has these alt characters starting @level1 added to your city by some other person that is across the map an a rival city to constantly take maj. in facilities you are hauling from for no other reason than to sabotage you and your city.(it isn't coincidence )

    So many bad things and people in this game it has become really bad so many people have left not to come back due to the lack of real authority. when a player PM's you and say all kinds of things about your account an the accounts of others on your team telling you you all have similar accounts an other things is scary to say the least.

    (edited by CM)