“Avoid” player feature

Competitive Discussion
49

Yes. Now people all think it’s the same feature we want back, but it’s not.

Here’s the problem:

They don’t want to have people, who are not breaking the ToS, get longer queue times because of a system function governed by players.

So what have have now as the norm (since it was put it so casually) is this -

Which means that the annoying minority, who are not breaking the ToS, are influencing queue times and causing frustration for the majority, who are also not breaking the ToS. In some cases, the decent people are not playing the game they also payed for to avoid this minority, who are not decent.

The fact that it’s suggested to friend these people to avoid them (a suggestion I’ve seen a few times) shows how silly not having the avoid feature in a limited sense is.

50

every single tier has one tricks from 0 sr to 5k sr
…

51

I had a thread on this but it got buried and it was quite popular. People don’t like hearing about ‘avoid player’ options at all sadly when it could combat toxicity.

52

They always think we want the old system back and state that “They removed it for a reason”… Smh…

53

It doesn’t matter if you’re the minority or majority. Players should not have direct control over other people’s game, especially when players have already proven that they will abuse the system when given the option.

Avoid player directly affect other people’s game play (queue time) without them having a say in it. That’s bad.

Friend queue-dodging only affects queue time of the picky person and is opt-in. It’s a personal choice to increase their queue time, so it’s ok.

54

They already do though…

No, we haven’t. We were never given the feature we’re requesting for. The system you’re referring to was for both teams. We just want to avoid team mates.

Also, this shouldn’t really effect queue times as they can still be matched against you.

1 Like
55

Not since they removed avoid player. Now no one has any direct control over each other’s queue time without opt-in such as grouping.

And when one player on each side happen to avoid the same player, now that’s a game that the avoided player got locked out and have to wait longer. It’s not any better.

56

That was a different feature.

That would be such a rarity. Let’s be honest.

1 Like
57

So what do you have now where you can directly affect someone else’s queue time?

Given how many games I get where the same two team just get players switched, it won’t be as rare as you think.

Not that it matters how rare it is. If it’s possible at all, then it’s not appropriate.

58

Reporting.
Throwers/trolls leaving a game after load in.
There are ways… It’s a multiplayer.

I haven’t had that happen except for sometimes when a match got cancelled and we all searched again. And I play alot.

Everything is possible, so nothing is appropriate?

Why not just implement the system and see what happens? We’ve never tested this properly.

59

No one gets punished off one report, so you don’t have a direct control.
Trolls also don’t prevent you from playing either, unless they’re doing already reportable things like Mei walls.

It’s not appropriate if you can keep others from playing.

We had the system. It was abused. It was removed. It doesn’t matter if you want to only avoid teammates, like I said above, it’s the same effect.

60

You contradict yourself here. Well done.

This is untrue.

The only issue was that good players were being avoided, so that people didn’t have to play against them.
There was no issue with avoiding team mates…

1 Like
61

No I didn’t, it supports my proposition that Blizzard does not approve of players directly inhibiting other’s play.

Blizz took away avoid player because they don’t want you to have this type of control. Blizz extends this idea in game by punishing abuse of abilities that inhibits other’s play. Keep trying.

People want avoid others for every reason under the sun, like the endless threads on forcing voice. That’s just a bunch of mass avoids if avoid gets brought back.

I already pointed out the issue this is going to have: It’s going to have the same effect as the original avoid player, so it’s bad idea.

62

Then just make it limited to 3 that timeout after a day or something.

63

Or they can just not bring it back, and not deal with creating another abusable system covered in bandaid exceptions, which will also lead to forums threads wanting more exceptions, longer list, and longer ban times.

64

Yup. One of the two.

rather they do something than nothing :wink:

I don’t think it would cause as many problems as you think it would. That’s a difference of opinion I suppose.