Curse

arcanemacabre · Jun 21, 2007, 04:48 AM // 04:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

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.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s....php?t=3072386

Quote from link:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

As to AFK leechers, you may find that behavior unsportsmanlike or irritating -- many of us do -- but where is it a support issue? We are not taking action on AFKers at this time, and reporting to support will probably garner a response that confirms that fact.

Bryant Again · Jun 21, 2007, 04:51 AM // 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

so I thought it might give an incentive to, you know, play instead of loll around?

Nope, because it's still much, much easier to leech.

A better step in the right direction would to be remove rewards for losing, period. What does a leecher have to lose, anyways?

@ Arcane: That quote is so depressing...I hate how she dismisses it so simply, like it's totally unimportant.

NekoZ · Jun 21, 2007, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Question- Is there anyway possible Devs can overlook AB matches at all, like an observer modes just for devs? If not, then why not make one and once in awhile check in of a couple matches here or there? When you see someone standing around, PM them and if you get no response or they still don't move, /temp ban or something. Won't completely solve it but it would be nice to know that Devs are looking out for those looking to enjoy the game.

Mysterial · Jun 21, 2007, 05:02 AM // 05:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Nope, because it's still much, much easier to leech.

A better step in the right direction would to be remove rewards for losing, period. What does a leecher have to lose, anyways?

That's bad because then you're punishing plenty of real players who aren't winning for whatever reason. It's never fun to watch somebody else get all the rewards and nothing for yourself, especially in a team game where you aren't necessarily responsible for your defeat.

The only suggestion I can think of for Fort Aspenwood and Jade Quarry that's even mediocre is to deny Faction from kills for players in their main base. Since you have to exit the base in order to be useful, the impact on real players is minimal (a couple faction points lost here and there due to respawning at the wrong time and that's about it). Of course, that's not a whole lot of faction denied even for the leechers, so it may not be significant enough to be worth the effort.

Gaile Gray · Jun 21, 2007, 05:02 AM // 05:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3072386

Quote from link:

Yep, that's what I said, but if you read it, that sure doesn't say that we don't feel that leeching is a problem, or that it's ok! All is says is that Support cannot handle reports of leeching. It's true that we weren't, and still aren't, taking action, but I still think that at some point we might. (And because it is a continuing issue, I know it's still being discussed in the designer room.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

A better step in the right direction would to be remove rewards for losing, period. What does a leecher have to lose, anyways?

I personally agree with you. We don't give points to those who lose in other situations. However, I don't know if that's a choice that the designers will or would make, but I'll ask.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mysterial

The only suggestion I can think of for Fort Aspenwood and Jade Quarry that's even mediocre is to deny Faction from kills for players in their main base. Since you have to exit the base in order to be useful, the impact on real players is minimal (a couple faction points lost here and there due to respawning at the wrong time and that's about it). Of course, that's not a whole lot of faction denied even for the leechers, so it may not be significant enough to be worth the effort.

Do you think that fewer people would play if they didn't get points for losing? Don't most people go into a match expecting to win? Anyway, the outside-main-base idea seems like a "can't hurt, might help" idea.

Phantom Gun · Jun 21, 2007, 05:03 AM // 05:03

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.

Fine life lesson there, Pwny Ride.

Extra faction to those who participate may make the actual "players" happy, but I don't think it will stop or even reduce the leechers. It's obvious that in places like Fort Aspenwood that if you win, you gain more faction. These leechers don't care though. They are lazy and their main purpose is simply to farm faction for their alliance without putting any effort into it at all. Well at least it was until the new skills came out. Now you have more leechers that are farming faction for those skills.

Honestly while I think extra faction for those who participate would be great, I don't think it's the solution for leeching. However if this extra faction idea were to be added to the game, at least the people playing would be rewarded for it. Which in my opinion is better then nothing at all.

EDIT: Oh by the way I don't think granting the losing side no faction at all is a good solution either. It's like punishing both the leechers and the real players. That just wouldn't be right. If you were to do this, I would at least increase the faction you get for kills during the match to help balance it out some. However since everybody on the team gets faction for each kill, the leechers would still gain something. I'm not sure if it's possible, but if you made the faction only count for the players who were attacking the opponent, that would pretty much make leeching useless if the losing side gains nothing idea was added.

Bryant Again · Jun 21, 2007, 05:16 AM // 05:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mysterial

That's bad because then you're punishing plenty of real players who aren't winning for whatever reason. It's never fun to watch somebody else get all the rewards and nothing for yourself, especially in a team game where you aren't necessarily responsible for your defeat.

No, it's not fun, not at all...But if you will always benefit, even if you lose, then how do you learn?

Turbo Wombat · Jun 21, 2007, 05:51 AM // 05:51

It might take a bit of coding work, but this is an idea that me and my room mate came up with that would probably help with the leeching/leaving problem without being too unfair to those who might have emergencies for whatever reason:

1 - If a person is afk in a PvP instance for 3 minutes or more (for longer matchers like AB/FA/etc.), they are kicked out into the lobby of that area and are not allowed to join another match again for ~5 minutes. Anyone who winds up scripting something that uses a skill/skill combination at regular intervals without moving can be banned for botting.

2 - If a player leaves a PvP instance before the round is over, they won't be able to join another PvP instance for a set period of time. This, of course, can scale so that people leaving from those never-ending RA battles won't be punished nearly as heavily as those who leave before the round even starts.

3 - For areas like FA, add another join button in the lobby. With this we will have a "Join New Battle" button and a "Join First Available Battle" button. If a member of a team is kicked or leaves early, this will still give that team a chance at a fair fight by giving them a substitute player. If a player wants to play a full battle and not risk coming into a half-over match, they can just hit the "Join New Battle" button. For players who are disconnected, the game will wait until their reconnect timer runs out or they confirm that they don't want to re-enter the instance when they reconnect.

While this may not completely remove leeching, it will definitely require leechers to pay more attention to the game and not just leave it up in the background or go afk. Implementing a system like this would basically make successful leeching more of a bother than it is worth, which is all that really needs to be done.

For those who might bring up the old arguments about D/C's and emergencies, I offer these rebuttals:
*You weren't playing, and therefore deserve no reward.
*If it truly was an emergency, chances are it will take longer for you to sort it out than it will take for the punishment timer to hit zero. If you are trying to take care of both at once, it either wasn't an emergency or you have seriously screwed up priorities.
*If you get D/C'd and can't log on again to reconnect, chances are that the punishment timer will hit zero by the time you can reconnect. If you are still on a timer when you reconnect, I'm sure you can find something useful to do in the few remaining minutes of time-out.
*If you left because of a never-ending battle, chances are that you will still get into another match much sooner than if you were to fight it out.

Also, if workforce is the only thing holding something like this back, hire my room mate. He's almost graduated with a major in CS and often finds better and more efficient solutions to programming problems than his professors can. On top of that, he's interested in going into game development when he graduates

Gaile Gray · Jun 21, 2007, 05:59 AM // 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo Wombat

It might take a bit of coding work, but this is an idea that me and my room mate came up with that would probably help with the leeching/leaving problem without being too unfair to those who might have emergencies for whatever reason:

1 - If a person is afk in a PvP instance for 3 minutes or more (for longer matchers like AB/FA/etc.), they are kicked out into the lobby of that area and are not allowed to join another match again for ~5 minutes. Anyone who winds up scripting something that uses a skill/skill combination at regular intervals without moving can be banned for botting.

2 - If a player leaves a PvP instance before the round is over, they won't be able to join another PvP instance for a set period of time. This, of course, can scale so that people leaving from those never-ending RA battles won't be punished nearly as heavily as those who leave before the round even starts.

3 - For areas like FA, add another join button in the lobby. With this we will have a "Join New Battle" button and a "Join First Available Battle" button. If a member of a team is kicked or leaves early, this will still give that team a chance at a fair fight by giving them a substitute player. If a player wants to play a full battle and not risk coming into a half-over match, they can just hit the "Join New Battle" button. For players who are disconnected, the game will wait until their reconnect timer runs out or they confirm that they don't want to re-enter the instance when they reconnect.

While this may not completely remove leeching, it will definitely require leechers to pay more attention to the game and not just leave it up in the background or go afk. Implementing a system like this would basically make successful leeching more of a bother than it is worth, which is all that really needs to be done.

For those who might bring up the old arguments about D/C's and emergencies, I offer these rebuttals:
*You weren't playing, and therefore deserve no reward.
*If it truly was an emergency, chances are it will take longer for you to sort it out than it will take for the punishment timer to hit zero. If you are trying to take care of both at once, it either wasn't an emergency or you have seriously screwed up priorities.
*If you get D/C'd and can't log on again to reconnect, chances are that the punishment timer will hit zero by the time you can reconnect. If you are still on a timer when you reconnect, I'm sure you can find something useful to do in the few remaining minutes of time-out.
*If you left because of a never-ending battle, chances are that you will still get into another match much sooner than if you were to fight it out.

Also, if workforce is the only thing holding something like this back, hire my room mate. He's almost graduated with a major in CS and often finds better and more efficient solutions to programming problems than his professors can. On top of that, he's interested in going into game development when he graduates

I'll pass this along. Oh, and tell your roommate to appply -- we're always looking for exceptional programmers, and if he is one, well...

arcanemacabre · Jun 21, 2007, 06:03 AM // 06:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Yep, that's what I said, but if you read it, that sure doesn't say that we don't feel that leeching is a problem, or that it's ok! All is says is that Support cannot handle reports of leeching. It's true that we weren't, and still aren't, taking action, but I still think that at some point we might. (And because it is a continuing issue, I know it's still being discussed in the designer room.)

Sorry, I thought the original quote was saying that you said it wasn't a support issue, which you did. Nice to know that you're at least considering it. Some kind of automatic function or active banning of repeat offenders, like what's in place for spammers. I personally feel it's a bigger issue, thus my first post about priorities. I don't personally spam (in local or trade - ever), and I'm not a leaver/leecher, but of the two problems, leaving/leeching is by far worse for the playability of the game of others, IMO.

Im Using The Force · Jun 21, 2007, 06:14 AM // 06:14

The only place where leeching would be a problem is AB.
AB has much greater concerns at this time than leeching.
Good Luck getting Gaile to come comment on why the AB maps havent been updated since Factions preview or why the AB Kurzick to Luxon Ratio for either side can be completely skewed by guest invites. The real concerns of AB have never been addressed....I posted about it & we got an AB weekend & an update to Faction workings. Leeching....man Its not even a problem. btw Its Grenz Its about a 50 to 1 ratio right now.

Executioner · Jun 21, 2007, 06:15 AM // 06:15

Well, i think the only solution to this is organized groups, that way you remove the the random player factor.

I remember AB's when in beta were groups of 12, which i think was allot better, but broke the skill mech's at the same time, if you could combine groups to 8/12 before entering but still keep a 4/4/4 setup it would drop the ratio of leechers, or at least you would find out if someone is leeching or afk/brb.

Sadly thou i don't think AB will get a change.

Serenitude · Jun 21, 2007, 06:33 AM // 06:33

Hmmm.

Around 3 weeks ago, I got a call that my mother-in-law had a stroke and was in ICU, in mid-game. The phone call lasted about 30 minutes, in total, as I was on the phone with my wife, waiting for her to arrive, and together we would leave for the hospital.

I apologize. During the conversation in which I was nervously wondering if my MIL would live through the night, I selfishly made GW suddenly my second priority, and somehow finishing, typing, quitting, etc... became of lesser importance.

My bad. How terribly inconsiderate of me. We'll all try terribly not to let things like sudden death and tragic accidents interrupt your GW experience.

Nice to hear, though, that from your point of view, as an otherwise long-time, upstanding, exemplary member, I should have returned home from the hospital to find myself banned, along with the ton of other crap placed suddenly atop me. Lucky me, that there are kind-hearted souls like you ;-)

/unsigned

spellsword · Jun 21, 2007, 06:57 AM // 06:57

They can't ban or punish people for leeching, as standing around doing nothing isn't against the rules.

No rewards for losing wouldn't really help, as you can still win with one man down, for all you know, the other team might have one too.

The only solution I can think of is to have the players talk to a NPC after a battle to get a reward or something like that.

Hyper.nl · Jun 21, 2007, 07:34 AM // 07:34

A solution could be an image with a short random word or code that you have to enter in a text box in order to join. Similar to the anti bot protections some websites use.

This will instantly disable any button click macro's. You can still leech manually, but if done manually you can rather play the mission to have a better chance of winning. I think this will fix the whole problem. And players with 'heart attacks' while playing aspenwood will not get banned for afking.

spellsword · Jun 21, 2007, 09:05 AM // 09:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyper.nl

A solution could be an image with a short random word or code that you have to enter in a text box in order to join. Similar to the anti bot protections some websites use.

This will instantly disable any button click macro's. You can still leech manually, but if done manually you can rather play the mission to have a better chance of winning. I think this will fix the whole problem. And players with 'heart attacks' while playing aspenwood will not get banned for afking.

Having to put that in each time would be annoying, and bots can get around those things anyway.

Brother Andicus · Jun 21, 2007, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Sadly, I don't think leeching can be detected by coding. Most people just load into the map and stand at the spawn point, but others are rather more cunning about it.

There is however quite an easy method for solving the problem.

Day 1: Advert in local paper. "Local computer games company has game policing position - 2 Month contract - Minimum Wage". Read as summer-job for high-school chess club captain.

Day 8: Interview some candidates, explain what the job is about.

Day10: New employee starts playing FA/AB, every time he spots a likely leecher, he notes the time/map/character then plays the rest of the game as usual. At the end of the day they wander down to their bosses office and present the list. Boss says "Wow, this Xx Leecher Xx character seems to be trying to leech faction in 15 games today. I've no idea how we didn't spot that before"

Day11: Boss spends a little time checking the logs to check that our leeching friend is indeed leeching. Adds them to the banstick list.

Day14(end of week): The temp-banstick is wielded and the people of AB/FA rejoice.

GodofAcid · Jun 21, 2007, 09:29 AM // 09:29

This is simple to solve. Have a function that checks location every 60 seconds or so. If you haven't moved, boom, you get kicked right out of that AB. No faction for you. Right there, that becomes a major pain for leechers as they can no longer just go afk. Will some people be upset that they get kicked because they had to go afk for legit reasons? Yeah but they'll get over it. As long as they're not going afk every other time, it shouldn't be a big issue. If they ARE going afk every other game, well now they'll have to be ready like everyone else when they decide to play. Some may whine but they'll have to learn to suck it up. For those who sit there and move a step or two every now and then to evade being kicked by the timer, add a votekick function if it becomes necessary. Again something that might be abused somewhat, but it's a better option than we have now, which is being able to do absolutely nothing.

Patrick Smit · Jun 21, 2007, 10:42 AM // 10:42

VOtekick will get abused, teams of "kurzicks entering on a luxon invite, sabotaging players from the luxon side to give wins to kurzicks. Nah can't do.

Leechers are a very difficult problem, like "(rage)quitting" in RA.

Servant of Kali · Jun 21, 2007, 10:47 AM // 10:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildMouseX

leaching, while bad, only affects people who are doing a mission/PvP area..

You mean, unlike WTB WTS spam which only affects people in a district? When i play PvE spamming in no way decreases my ability to find a group and get "help". I use party window, and find groups if possible, or by other means. We get out to instanced zone and have fun.
Leeching on the other hand makes the game UNPLAYABLE. Sure, i can chat in district without spam, but oh wait, isnt the point of the game playing instead of chatting? Chatting is just a side-effect. People who only want to chat use MSN ICQ Skype or whatever is popular nowdays.

Seriously, i cannot believe in my wildest dreams that someone like you would come up with an argument such as "..it's only bad in mission and pvp area". And what is outside of missions and pvp areas? Nothing. People leech missions, they leech pvp areas etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathode_Reborn

sk a few people there if they can remember some of the leeches and I'm pretty sure you'll get a few names.

Yup. Im actually not annoyed that much if someone leeches one game. OK. It sucks, but i can live with it. What im annoyed with is when the same people leech whole day, week, months. I can name some, but it's forbidden and besides ANet wouldnt do anything. Now, i dont even have to wait for timer to run out to see who is leeching, i login, see the name of a guy(s), sigh, and leave.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff Mon

But that only impacts the immediate group, and you can always leave if you don't like it.

Im sorry, come again?

You do understand that WTB WTS spam *only* impacts the group in that district which is spammed, and it's usually one of the few game towns. Considering that i dont linger in those game towns, WTB WTS spam is totally irrelevant to me, just as leeching is irrelevant to you.

Let's be blunt. Your comment shows you know nothing about leechers but you do like having an opinion about it. I suggest you go to YouTube, search for "Talking to Americans", to see how it looks like when people talk about stuff they know nothing of.

To the audience: you CANT leave if you dont like it. Why? Because almost every game has at least 1 leecher. What am i supposed to do, restart a game all the time? What if i said that PvE missions needs to be re-entered 10x each time? Would that be ok? Of course not, everyone would complain and say it's silly. But when someone says login 10x to PvP, that's suddenly ok because hey, it's not you playing there so who cares.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flubber

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..

Another person who has no clue about the issue. See above.

1) You cant resign regroup, leechers are in 95%+ groups.
2) Making their name known solves.. what? It's not like they need your promision to leech, they just hit Enter Mission button.
3) Spare me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sindex

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.

And those methods are...? Come on Sherlock, tell us.

Of course one should ban people for doing idiotic things. That's how life works. In real life you get either beaten on the street if u do idiotic things, or you get put into mental institution, or you get put into prison. Or you're left to dig channels with a shovel while others go to cinemas.

Let me get this straight, you're saying none should be banned in GW, not even bots, because then there would be no people in GW? Wow incredible, well guess what, bots and leechers dont contribute to the gameplay anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swift Thief

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

To someone who doesnt play the game where people leech, it's entirely possible that these people are ..lagging, emergencing, scratching their n*** or digging their nose

To people who do play with leechers, it's quite obvious when you see a guy named "Leeching for Faction", standing idle at spawn, that he is really leeching for faction. You know what i mean?

Quote:

Originally Posted by evenfall

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.

Fort Aspenwood
Alliance Battles
Random Arena (when they used to leech for balth faction but less so because they moved)
PvE missions where players go AFK waiting for others to do the mission, and you can't kick them, so you either have to do the mission for them, or restart which is tedious. Yes i play the whole game so im well aware of problems everywhere

Yes you're right, not a lot of people are annoyed with leeching to make a difference. Still it's nice to see that design team had time to make "cancel button" in last update. If someone can tell me how huge was a GW population which wanted that button, i'd appreciate it..