==conatins the profile link of those players who are:
1.noob.
[only and only noobs NOT newbie because noobs will most probably always remain noobs but newbie could be new impaller or mian or x or y or z in future ...
those who don't know who are noobs:who played more than 300 games but still don't know well how to play .]
[yes we can set min win %age a player must have , but that is not practically good.
reason:
suppose x played one 1vs1 game and he accidentally got booted then his winning %age would be 0% in 1vs1 games.

but on the other hand x played 1000 FFA games where his win % is 100% ; but if i make a good settings 3vs3 game with setting of having those players with atleast 30% win rate in 1vs1 then it will be bad that x can't join it .]



2.drags out the game.
[perrin had said "while annoying at times.. It is each players job to surrender when they feel they've lost.. "
solution: reporter must have the link of the game in which the offender had written in public chat that "Ha ha ! vote to end or I will take as much time as i can " or something like that :P ]

3.those who don't vote to end when someone booted before 1st turn i.e 0th turn.
[by 0th turn i mean : the game does not have random distribution , and at the time when player choose where to place his starts]



==this page will not contain those who

1.boots immediately after turn.
[f you don't want people to be booted at the boot time in games you make.. make the boot time longer?]

2.set higher bonuses in a map for their advantage.
[because its your mistake that you did not checked out the settings before joining]

3.abuses.
[because we have a report feature for that , for those who don't know: fizzer can suspend/ban accounts ]

4.don't take their turn when they start losing and get booted .
[because we can set at most boot %age a player should have , while making the game]

-----
procedure of adding a player to that wiki page:
the owner of that wiki page page must have at least 3 reports from warlight community with game links.

-----
benefits of this idea:
1. good gaming experience.
2. people will try to listen what their team-mates are advising them , so that they don't do silly mistakes and make their name in the list of noobs.
3. once this page will be popular then people will not drag games unnecessarily and try not to be a noob , as they will have fear of getting blacklisted "officially".
4.people will vote to end "unfair games"
-----
if you think there is no need for this then looks @ this :
http://warlight.net/Forum/Search.aspx?q=blacklist
-----

sorry if i am "missing out something" or i am "wrong somewhere " or we already have a "wiki" page related to it or this idea is "already declined" by the warlight community ...

if you want then you can vote for this idea by doing +1 @

http://vostro56.my3gb.com/vote.html

Point 2 and 3 seem fine enough, but adding a group of people who are just 'bad' seems wrong. Prerequisites deal fine with that, and publicly humiliating people who are bad for one reason or another is not a nice thing to do.

These are probably just younger players who can't quite grasp tactical play anyhow, which makes humiliating the poor kid even worse.

Set minimum percentages for all settings in your games and you'll weed out the bad players regardless.

After re-reading your proposal, the idea seems too hard to implement, and to easy to abuse. Anybody can edit a wiki, and the terms that somebody gets put on the list is subjective.

It's best as it is. If somebody behaves badly, it can be reported on the forum and everybody can make up their individual mind about them.

@Set minimum percentages for all settings in your games and you'll weed out the bad players regardless.
-----
repeating again :
[yes we can set min win %age a player must have , but that is not practically good.
reason:
suppose x played one 1vs1 game and he accidentally got booted then his winning %age would be 0% in 1vs1 games.

but on the other hand x played 1000 FFA games where his win % is 100% ; but if i make a good settings 3vs3 game with setting of having those players with atleast 30% win rate in 1vs1 then it will be bad that x can't join it .]

"here x is a good player but still it will be my bad luck that x don't have option to join my game."

For that minority who have only played one 1v1 game, and lost it, is it really such a shame that they don't get to play in your non-noobie game untill his stats have changed? He only needs to win one more to qualify afterall, and the playerbase is big enough that even the largest of games can fill up with these settings regardless. Plus, there are plenty that wont use those requirements, so those that don't match up to your requirements wont be starved of games either.

@Anybody can edit a wiki.
-----
oh yeah i forgot that anyone can edit wiki ...
we can have a facebook page Or html page , under any good active warlight community member .



@If somebody behaves badly, it can be reported on the forum and everybody can make up their individual mind about them.
----
suppose yesterday i drunk alcohol ... and in a warlight game i started attacking my own team... then it does not concludes that i am a "noob" / "bad player" / "someone who needs to be black-listed" ...

reason:"it was only 1st time i did this" "and it happened mistakenly"

but if we have a proper html page for this problem then as i said it would be must to have atleast 3 reports in different games ...

then in that case i could not say that it happened mistakenly because it is proved that its my habit .

-----
the main idea is : it is to prevent innocent players to not to be black-listed .

@playerbase is big enough that even the largest of games can fill up with these settings regardless.
-----
that's not true , it takes a long time if you make a good game with good requirements.

and sometimes/most of the times the game is no more advertised in public .

Should it be a one off, you could explain that in the forum. The majority of times you wont be reported, so a one off is all it takes for somebody like me to blacklist you.

Our experiences differ with games it seems. Only very rarely will a game fail to start, and that's during the very slow periods. Perhaps your less-than-splendid past is preventing more people from playing with you. I personally have avoided games with you for that very reason, so it may be a factor.

I don't think there's anything more to debate between us, I disagree with your points, but good luck with your idea.

Making a game with very strong prerequisites can make a game start slowly. Setting a necessary 80%+ win rate can make the game never start, for instance.

That said, most sane levels of prerequisites will not cause any problems. Min 50 games, 40%+ win rate, 10% or less booted, will never cause a game to not start.

Also, I'm confused as to why 1v1 win rate matters to your FFA games? They use very different skill sets. This is even worse as a metric when you are talking about 3v3 (which is neither 1v1 nor FFA). Just use prerequisites based on the game type you are actually playing. For instance, 30% win rate in 3v3. If they don't play 3v3 then you are weeding them out for good reason. It doesn't really matter to 1v1 or FFA if you are looking for decent 3v3 players.

Stupid Vostro shows up again. Just ignore him, don't feed the trolls!

we need a wiki page for a list of forum trolls. qadaffi/whatever his name is now; alpha/vostro; the copyright infringement guy; doushibag (campaigning for ron paul); the 3200 territory map guy; etc.

^ Or Blacklisted players have their posts removed, just like in the ingame chat.

"stupid" ?
"troll" ?
it was a good idea which i wanted to represent in public through my post, which can result into good gaming experience.

and people want to put my name in the list of forum trolls...

cool , thanks.

The Duke of Ben wrote:
|> Also, I'm confused as to why 1v1 win rate matters to your FFA games? They use very different skill sets.

Isn't a 1v1 essentially a 2 player FFA?

Like Duke said, 1v1's use a different skill set to FFA's. You probably can't tell playing AI's, as they just wander around attacking anything they see :P.

So ehm, what **is** the difference between a 1v1 on the one hand and a 2-person FFA on the other hand then...? Now I'm confused. :|

Well a 2 person ffa would be 1v1. Only they're not called that :P. FFA's have 3 or more players.

on a "2-player ffa" you have two even teams of one. its like calling a 9-player ffa the same as a 3v3v3.

and you might set 1v1 prereqs as 1v1s are considered the most useful stat for telling how good a players is. its easy to get an artificially inflated 3v3 rating by joining only good teams, booting players on the opposite team without voting to end, etc. obviously the % wins are never a perfect indicator of the skill of the player, but 1v1 is preferable to ffa %s or team game %s.