Improvements for "Investigations"
complete
antidotess
Add Elo/Elo range/Division of the accused player - as I see it, adding exact elo might breach the privacy of the player, so elo range or at the very least their division would suffice - some guesses are incredibly suspicious for a Gold or Master player, but make perfect sense for a 1500+ rated player.
If several rounds are reported from the same game, let the reviewer view all of the rounds - a guess can be written off as lucky, but if a player systematically gets "lucky" guesses, it can help the reviewer better evaluate the game as a whole.
If a Team Duel is reported, let the reviewer view POVs of both players - in moving duels, for example, if the reported player is NOT the one who found the information, yet they plonk first, it might look incredibly incriminating. Let the reviewer be the judge of that by allowing them to view both POVs.
If a Team Duel is reported, make it say it in the "Game Mode" - in its current state, it's not fully obvious when you're reviewing a TD, second player's pin is often too transparent to even notice, so it should be explicitly marked as a Team Duel to avoid false "Guilty" verdicts.
Up the elo-range (or whatever other metrics you are using) of people who have access to Investigations. As of now, some Master division players have reportedly said that they have access to the feature. With all due respect, Masters may not be knowledgeable enough in some cases to be trusted with this feature. Same goes for new accounts who have already reached high elo.
Make it possible to move the mini-map while reviewing the replay - if a player plonks with the map pretty zoomed out, without the reviewer being able to move or zoom in on the map before the final guess is made, it's hard to gauge if the player's plonk is even in the correct country - something that could give away scripting from a mile away.
Filip
complete
Thanks for all the feedback! Really appreciate it :).
Some of these features we are working on (ELO range is out for instance), and will keep iterating on in the upcoming months. Therefore I will put this ticket to "Complete".
For the future, it would be great if the features can be broken down into separate requests. Just thats is easier to see if it something that stands out voting wise compared to multiple features within one.
antidotess
Filip noted!
Filip
Merged in a post:
Add a compass to investigations
KennyDie
Including a compass would allow the reviewer to see the same orientation the player had during the game, providing a more accurate perspective when analyzing the player's guesses and behavior. This would help better understand whether the player's decisions made sense based on their field of view and direction at that moment.
Filip
Merged in a post:
Investigations Elo and Nation Reveal
Blackburne
I think we should see the player rating and where he/she is from to judge it better. Sometimes it seems very obvious where it is to me so it doesn't look suspicious but player can be Bronze and might be cheating. Or player can be much better than me which seems quiet doubtful, but it can be completely legit. It doesn't fair how we evaluate it.
Geekwhitenorth
Down vote
Based on the videos on youtube of people reviewing more or less the same cases.
I saw a lot of inconsistencies and interpretations of what was cheating and what was not.
I think the Devs need to give some basic guidelines and guidance of what is expected and give a small test of what you expect so that the persons checking know what to look for.
I have thought about this and initally agreed that more information was required but I think that the Devs have it right, more information will bias people.
As long as the person knows or is educated on what to watch for and how to enter the result then it should be OK.
The idea that someone who is rated higher is automatically not cheating is biased towards the higher ranked people and basically would lead to being lenient on people who are higher level.
The thought that no-one cheats at higher levels is probably not true.
The people who are higher level could have reached there honestly or could have been using scripts or googling.
I think that the view should be exactly the same as the rewatch of the person who reported it with the team names removed.
If you think about it carefully you are not supposed to be judging the person but the incident in question.
Mr. Pi
The country of the player would also be helpful. While it is not always the player's correct country it should work most of the time. Knowing a tiny town in for example Denmark is quite weird and would suggest cheating - except if it is a Danish person. Most Danish people who play GeoGuessr would probably know over 100 different towns and especially many in their own region. Same goes for a lot of other places.
Filip
Merged in a post:
For the new Investigation system, give us information on the rating of the player
2
It’s difficult to tell if someone is (for example) guessing on a road without coverage in Australia because they’re a gold player and don’t know where the coverage is or are a high rated player who would know which roads are covered and guessing out of coverage indicates that they are cheating.