Curse

Mysterial · Jun 21, 2007, 01:37 AM // 01:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pwny Ride

Yep. Thats right, punish people for leaving. Then they wont leave and will instead just be pushed towards leeching instead, since leeching would have no penalties. Logic ftw.

Most people don't leave because they want more rewards. Leaving and rejoining for the purposes of getting rewards faster is only at all useful if you're trying to farm Gladiator points and it's highly unlikely that you'll successfully leech those. They leave because they don't like the people in their party, think they're going to lose, or because they just like griefing. If these types can't do the leave/rejoin cycle, the most likely negative thing to result is that they stop playing the game, in which case the rest of us that are left have that much more fun without them.

WildmouseX · Jun 21, 2007, 01:40 AM // 01:40

WTB spamin all chat interfere's with people trying to find a group, trying to find a guild, trying to ask a question etc..... when peope are forced to turn off all chat, these players are no longer capibile of geting the help they need. it screws with everyone walking around a town.

leaching, while bad, only affects people who are doing a mission/PvP area.. the group can always kick the player next time their in a town.

forceing entire towns of people who are going about their own buisness > screwing a grou out of one player for the one map.

- however, it would be nice of A-Net to gives the option to kick vote leachers in the mission map's to make sure they no longer profit from it.

Pwny Ride · Jun 21, 2007, 01:41 AM // 01:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mysterial

Most people don't leave because they want more rewards. Leaving and rejoining for the purposes of getting rewards faster is only at all useful if you're trying to farm Gladiator points and it's highly unlikely that you'll successfully leech those. They leave because they don't like the people in their party, think they're going to lose, or because they just like griefing. If these types can't do the leave/rejoin cycle, the most likely negative thing to result is that they stop playing the game, in which case the rest of us that are left have that much more fun without them.

I understand that, but what you're proposing would crate the following scenario~

Leecher: These players, suck, i want to leave, but if i leave, ill get penalised. My other option is to leech and get a benefit regardless, whist not wasting time fighting with these idiots.

Random Ally: Leecha n00b!

Cathode_Reborn · Jun 21, 2007, 01:53 AM // 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

. One difference between the two things for better or worse, however, is that it's easier to catch spammers than leechers. How do you know that some emergency didn't just pop up after someone entered a battle? When you see someone spam in chat, you know they did it on purpose.

That's somethin that gets brought up when it comes to trying to catch leeches - what if they just had to go afk to do something?

One thing about leechers is, they don't afk a match only once....they leech for multiple rounds and on a few occasions, they leech for months. I rarely AB, but I do Fort aspenwood very often which is somewhat similar to it. It's much easier to keep track of the people on your team there since it has a smaller team-setup so it's easier to find the leeches since they sit right there at the spawn point for everyone to see when they res.

Some leech for so long that that there names become known and that's when the players start becoming frustrated and quit....you team with a leech one round, and think "1 leech alone won't cost us the match"...then the next match starts and the same leech is there again. As I said before, some of them leech for months. From what I remember, there's 2 leeches that keep coming back to Aspenwood. Ask a few people there if they can remember some of the leeches and I'm pretty sure you'll get a few names.

The only way I can think of right now to stop leeches without reporting an innocent person is by taking multiple screenshots and reporting them. Someone from anet themselves would have to go investigate to make sure it's legit.....if they continue going afk and someone from anet sees it, then they're busted.

But then again, I really doubt anet would even go out of there way to do somethin like that.

Griff Mon · Jun 21, 2007, 02:16 AM // 02:16

I am glad they are doing something about the local chat WTB crap that has been going on. Forcing people to the trade channel with bans is good. Lions Arch D1 was impossible to follow local chat because it scrolled by so fast.

Leeching is a pain, just like bad/annoying/stupid players in a PUG are a problem. But that only impacts the immediate group, and you can always leave if you don't like it.

gone · Jun 21, 2007, 02:28 AM // 02:28

Learn to /resign...regroup when leechers are encountered. fight back the passive way. Make their name know in a polite way (to outpost) they are there to leech..

spamming has nothing to do with leeching. (other than the fact they are annoying.)

if alot of the retards who do/did spam realized that all they really have to do is EXTEND/EXPAND their chat window there prolly would never even be a problem.(other than the machine-gun spammers)

sindex · Jun 21, 2007, 02:31 AM // 02:31

I know I hate lechers myself, but I think if we continue down the path of banning people for doing these idiotic things; soon there will be no one left in GW. There are other methods to be done, instead of permanent banning people for being idiotic.

Swift Thief · Jun 21, 2007, 02:40 AM // 02:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Servant of Kali

There, i just ran into GUILDIES leeching. Great. Let's promote town ownership mechanism and skills linked to leeching titles. That will surely solve the issue. At the same time let's announce in public that leeching is OK but WTB spamming is not.

Are you sure they just aren't lagging? I personally think all chat spamming is worst than leeching.

Risa · Jun 21, 2007, 02:41 AM // 02:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mysterial

Quitting, on the other hand, can easily be handled automatically with a variety of consequences of varying magnitude and there's really no excuse why they don't have such a thing.

So, by your logic, if I were in an RA battle, and the opposing team has an E/D tank, a Restoration Rit, and two monks, and the battle has been going on for ten minutes, I should be punished for quitting a battle that will never end?

Mysterial · Jun 21, 2007, 02:44 AM // 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pwny Ride

I understand that, but what you're proposing would crate the following scenario~

Leecher: These players, suck, i want to leave, but if i leave, ill get penalised. My other option is to leech and get a benefit regardless, whist not wasting time fighting with these idiots.

Random Ally: Leecha n00b!

First, if that's your worst case, then the system is a net gain because the worst case isn't any worse than having nothing in place (i.e. the player leaves).

Second, if you have people like that in large numbers, then the game is not fun to play when losing and there is something wrong with it. Of course, nobody likes to be utterly crushed and everybody prefers to win. But most games should be fun regardless of the side you're on.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risa

So, by your logic, if I were in an RA battle, and the opposing team has an E/D tank, a Restoration Rit, and two monks, and the battle has been going on for ten minutes, I should be punished for quitting a battle that will never end?

I didn't mention specific conditions. You could only hit people that leave in the first two minutes of the match, which is not significantly more complex and catch 99% of the people leaving in RA.

evenfall · Jun 21, 2007, 03:19 AM // 03:19

The probable reason why Anet don't see leeching as a problem is that it occurs only in Fort Apenwood, which is played by a fairly small GW population.

And leeching works in Fort Aspenwood because there is a reward for losing and there is no repercussion.

RA - teams with leechers usually lose, and quitters are so common that a leecher will probably end up 1v4 and won't even get any balt faction.
TA, HA, GvG - organized team, any leechers or even afkers will get kicked.
AB - team of 4, leechers get kicked unless the whole team leeches which is very rare.

1 up and 2 down · Jun 21, 2007, 03:30 AM // 03:30

Banning someone for 3 days when they have a problem in real life is just plain wrong. I know that I will occasionally have a problem when I am playing FA while the timer is going to start a match. When I finally get back(usually within a couple mins of the match) I will say I am sorry.

The reason you don't see things like this happening in GvG and HA is people make sure they have nothing to stop them from playing before they start.

Gaile Gray · Jun 21, 2007, 03:34 AM // 03:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Servant of Kali

Gaile said it herself, on GWO website last year. It was a widely known quote.

Hmmm... could you show it to me, please? To my very best knowledge, I've never said that leeching is "ok" or that "we don't see a problem with it," because that is not something that I think, and it's not something that ArenaNet thinks, either. We don't like it at all. It's difficult to combat though, and we don't feel that player reports is a good system for doing so, because it would be difficult if not impossible to verify or it would take a lot of time to catch just one person.

I'm more than willing to listen to your ideas about how to combat leeching and AFKing. I've been told that "vote to kick" has been rejected by the designers, and "remove after X time without movement" was considered ineffective because the worst offenders obviously bot a lot of processes, including movement, when they're not there. Also, the real life issues mentioned above could bring action on a person who had no intention of leeching or going AFK at all.

In the recent weekend, the rewards system was changed. Do you think that's an effective anti-leeching measure? Do you have other suggestions?

Puebert · Jun 21, 2007, 03:39 AM // 03:39

Well, I remember someone posting something where in FA you would get extra faction points per Luxon Squad/Gate Repair you did.

So it wouldn't fix leeching, it would just give extra faction for those who participate.

Pwny Ride · Jun 21, 2007, 03:41 AM // 03:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

In the recent weekend, the rewards system was changed. Do you think that's an effective anti-leeching measure? Do you have other suggestions?

Hm , how do you mean? The only rewards system upgrade that i was aware of is the factuion donation (double towards title for faction spent, eg. donate 5k to alliance, get 10k towards your title).

Unless i missed something

evenfall · Jun 21, 2007, 03:49 AM // 03:49

Fort Aspenwood is the only place where leeching is a problem. A simple solution is to remove the reward for losing.

Pwny Ride · Jun 21, 2007, 03:55 AM // 03:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by evenfall

Fort Aspenwood is the only place where leeching is a problem. A simple solution is to remove the reward for losing.

Yea! Teach all those kids that WINNING IS EVERYTHING! YOU SUCK IF YOU LOOSE. YOU SUCK!...*ahem*

Gaile Gray · Jun 21, 2007, 04:07 AM // 04:07

The weekend I was talking about was the one on June 8th. It greatly increased the rewards for winning but didn't increase the rewards for losing, so I thought it might give an incentive to, you know, play instead of loll around?

Extra faction to those who participate, like Puebert said, exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pwny Ride

Yea! Teach all those kids that WINNING IS EVERYTHING! YOU SUCK IF YOU LOOSE. YOU SUCK!...*ahem*

Fine life lesson there, Pwny Ride.

evenfall · Jun 21, 2007, 04:23 AM // 04:23

Unfortunately i can't think of better solution to combat bot leechers and a penalty for afkers is even worst. People however will stop leeching when there is no reward.

On a side note, the bugfix on 7th June on Fort Apenwood Luxon Warriors is terrible, please revert the bugfix if no better solution can be found.

1 - The luxon warriors are running back and forth most of the time and not attacking anything.
2 - They glitch by themselves at one corner and prevent respawn when the turtle dies, saving the kurzicks the trouble of luring them.

pork soldier · Jun 21, 2007, 04:36 AM // 04:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

The weekend I was talking about was the one on June 8th. It greatly increased the rewards for winning but didn't increase the rewards for losing, so I thought it might give an incentive to, you know, play instead of loll around?

Extra faction to those who participate, like Puebert said, exactly.

It's really likely that most of the aspenwood leeches are using a mouse macro to click the enter button every time it comes on screen - no amount of incentive is going to get them to do something they can do without any work at all.

Here's how I'd handle those guys: look at the data stream received from the client, cache it for some period of time and analyze that data set for very high repetition of patterns. Kick people who send nothing but repeated patterns over a large-ish time interval, keep them from relogging in for ~5 minutes or so.

Here's another option - allow people to flag others within the game itself. Yes, you're going to have griefers abusing this, however if you temp-ban griefers as well as leeches you've fixed both problems