Curse

The Stealth Ranger · Jul 28, 2005, 02:52 PM // 14:52

I noticed that a lot of people are irritated here about people who ruin missions/quests by running blindly into a group of monsters, endangering the group and polluting communication with foul language. Loose monkeys, so to speak. I don't know if this has ever been discussed, but obviously there must be a solution to this.

Right now it's not possible to throw people out of the party. Why not build it like this. Whenever a rotten apple is in the group, the person who started the party can select that character and suggest to the others to throw that member out of the group. By means of a democratic process the group can decide to delete him or keep him. Everyone gets a dialog box with a yes/no option to delete that member. If 50% or more wants it, the guy/girl is history (so with a tie, he also goes). If the vote was no, it can't be suggested anymore. The human character gets replaced by computer controlled character (sort of henchman) with the same professions and level. Voila.

There could be variations, like that every member can suggest the removal of a character, but I don't think that's a good idea because those same annoying people will get the time of their life then

You can also decide if henchmen in the party are allowed to vote or not. Like, if they can vote, that they vote the same as the party starter. Not sure what is wise here though.

The only problem that I can think of would maybe be how to name that new computer character. I suppose all names must be unique in GW? But I'm sure ArenaNet has some very smart people who can solve that technically.

Somebody call ArenaNet, because I'm really getting sick of my missions

John Bloodstone · Jul 28, 2005, 03:05 PM // 15:05

What you're referring to is a kick vote system, which has been suggested quite a few times already I think. Plus this is the wrong forum - you want sardelac

The Stealth Ranger · Jul 28, 2005, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Damn, and I was thinking that I would get the Nobel prize for this

What's keeping ArenaNet then? I mean this is one of the biggest problems. Should be easy to implement for them.

Aniewiel · Jul 28, 2005, 03:24 PM // 15:24

I'll put it in Sardelac but you really should do a search. There have been at least 3-4 threads in the last month or so about a kick/ban system.

The Stealth Ranger · Jul 28, 2005, 03:25 PM // 15:25

Okay, thanks. Couldn't find it. It's a jungle out here

Mugon M. Musashi · Jul 28, 2005, 04:47 PM // 16:47

just a little simulation :
Just before the mission is finished, the leader kicks everyone else
He finishes while the others have to do it again...

Azreal911 · Jul 28, 2005, 05:11 PM // 17:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mugon M. Musashi

just a little simulation :
Just before the mission is finished, the leader kicks everyone else
He finishes while the others have to do it again...

it's not really too much of a problem at all if they make it a vote system. but when you kick them out you should kick them out to their own instance instead of back to town. that why you can't grief others like that.

The Stealth Ranger · Jul 28, 2005, 05:11 PM // 17:11

Quote:

just a little simulation :
Just before the mission is finished, the leader kicks everyone else
He finishes while the others have to do it again...

No no my friend. Like I said, it has to be a democratic process. More than 50% has to vote yes.

But it could be that 2 or more players make a deal to do that. But I don't think that will happen a lot. Certainly not as much as monkey behaviour, that seems to be normal in missions. Everything has its disadvantages. But I think the advantages of a kick/vote system greatly outweigh the current disadvantages. You can also make functionality to choose beforehand if you want to do a kick/vote mission or a regular one. So much is possible.

Does anyone know if ArenaNet is working on something like this? And is it useful to get in contact with them about this? Or do they behave like superstars in an Ivory Tower? (which I don't expect BTW). I would hate to write an e-mail to them for nothing...

Rodelm · Jul 28, 2005, 05:32 PM // 17:32

my solution as of now to the problem is to whisper everyone else and when everyone has decided, we agro a mob that All of us can handle but the problem child alone can't...then we all back off let the problem child get killed and leave him whining on the ground with ignore whilst the rest of us finish the misson without them.

Cap'n Hoek · Jul 28, 2005, 05:58 PM // 17:58

A vote to kick a troublesome group member should mirror the vote to skip a cut scene.
Of course the person in question wouldn't get a vote. Not much room for abuse there.

chaos dragoon · Jul 28, 2005, 06:07 PM // 18:07

id like some vote kick system.and yes u shouldve done a search there have been other threads on this topic

Mugon M. Musashi · Jul 28, 2005, 06:22 PM // 18:22

ok then what about :
in a group of 8, there are 5 persons from the same guild
they have almost finished the mission and then the leader and his 4 guildmates vote to kick out the 3 other players (you know just for fun)

Izzy Izumi · Jul 28, 2005, 06:31 PM // 18:31

Personally, Mugon, everything is exploited by the regular jerks and wads of Guild Wars. That's probably why they didn't feel it would be right to implement it. If something can be taken advantage of, it will be. The problem is, they also take advantage of not being able to kick people out of parties by AFK'ing the whole mission.

That was a problem too. Let's face it, alot of Guild Wars players are here to exploit "loopholes" in the interface between characters.

I say a kick-vote system will be abused, yes, but not being able to kick-vote is being abused already anyway. However, to keep with that fact, make some stricter rules about being able to kick-vote a person out of the party. Make it 60-75%. Yes, that means if two people are in "cahoots" so they could be dicks in-game, you won't be able to kick them...but you should really group a little better than that anyway, right? =P

emil knight · Jul 28, 2005, 06:43 PM // 18:43

You also have to look at it this way...

What happens if you get into a party where you are the only person NOT in the same guild as the rest... they felt they needed a body to fill a spot...

Near the end of the mission, they all decide to boot you... not necessarily because you failed the party, but just because they are jerks and didn't want anyone other than their guild completing said mission at that time. This would stagnate the PUG situation (not that it's very good sometimes, but whatever), and cause alot of people to ONLY join guild parties to do thier mission... and those not in a guild would shy away from guild lead parties...

This idea would need more safeguards that just a /vote system.

John Bloodstone · Jul 28, 2005, 06:55 PM // 18:55

The problem is that a kick-vote system being abused is far worse than non-kick vote abuse. Look at the scope for problems from both perspectives:

1)Non-Kick vote

People afk'ing at the start of the mission; a mild inconvenience in quests, rather annoying in missions, but can usually be rectified easily enough.
People afk'ing in the middle of towards the end of a mission; quite annoying, but assuming only one person does it (and it's rarely more) the mission can usually be completed.
Griefers or idiots that get the party killed; very annoying, and can ruin a long mission very quickly. Person can be kicked when the party gets back to the outpost, but the damage is done. This is by far the most compelling reason to have a kick-vote system in place.

2)Kick-vote

Players in the same guild recruiting help from other players just to kick them for fun; very upsetting for the kicked player and would result in a lot of anger and frustration, particularly if the mission was a toughie. Probably the most compelling reason NOT to have a vote-kick system.
Newbies getting kicked by unforgiving team-mates; everyone makes mistakes. How much fun would it be knowing that you make an error and get yourself kicked for it? talk about pressure.
Misunderstandings; What if a player goes afk for a few minutes (phone call perhaps) and the rest of the team thinks he's idling and kicks him. A kick-vote in this situation hurts both sides, and nobody wins.

I'm sure there is a way to control griefers without opening up avenues for abuse, but I think kick-voting could cause more problems than it solves...

KuTeBaka · Jul 28, 2005, 08:19 PM // 20:19

omg rare firey dragon sword, kick the guy who it dropped for!!!!!

Aniewiel · Jul 28, 2005, 08:38 PM // 20:38

The Stealth Ranger · Jul 28, 2005, 08:47 PM // 20:47

Pesonally I never do missions with a group that belongs to the same guild. If you don't trust that with a kick/vote system, simply join another party. Practically all parties I did where of different players from different guilds. Would also be simple to spot a guild party.

Like I said if necessary ArenaNet could make something to choose if you want a kick/vote system with a party or a regular party.

And I wouldn't call loose monkeys a mild inconvenience. So many times they completely destroyed the mission because it's impossible to use a strategy and others tend to follow them into battle.

I don't think that newbies who make mistakes will get kicked out that easily. Most persons on missions are nice, normal people who want to finish the mission. It's usually one, or maybe two, rotten apples.

And if someone goes away from his computer for a few minutes and puts his mates in danger, yeah well sorry, he deserves it. I'm sure he can handle the phone business after the mission. I mean what kind of battle partner is that? And like I said, you should get a same computer controlled character when you kick someone.

John Bloodstone · Jul 28, 2005, 10:29 PM // 22:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stealth Ranger

I don't think that newbies who make mistakes will get kicked out that easily. Most persons on missions are nice, normal people who want to finish the mission. It's usually one, or maybe two, rotten apples.

I'm sure you've heard the saying that a few rotten apples spoil the barrel. Why give them the means to do it?

Cnegurozka · Jul 29, 2005, 12:30 AM // 00:30

You don't give, you take it away!

If you have a party of 8 ppl, and you'll have it often, and lets say we got 1 bad guy, you have a 1/8 chance he is the leader of the party and can kick, but you most probably wouldn't have joined him anyway, cause you interviewed him, right? And you'll have a 7/8 chance that anyone else is the leader and kicks the bad guy as soon as he starts screwing around.

This is definetly a win/win situation, since atm 1 bad guy has 100% chance to screw everything up....