Curse

Servant of Kali · Jun 20, 2007, 11:02 PM // 23:02

Am i the only one not seeing logic here? Why is leeching OK for ANet, and as Gaile said "we dont see a problem with it", and on the other hand WTB WTS spam isn't ok?

Let's put it this way, if people in some PvP maps spammed local and ALL channels like hell, if they flooded it like there was no tomorrow, it would be 3x better than leeching. I mean, you can still turn the chats off. Whereas with leeching, well you just can't kick leechers.

Just don't tell me how it's difficult to discover leechers unlike WTB spammers. Yea right, it's a perfect excuse, it's like fixing corruption and crime in my country. Everyone can cover eyes and say "oooh we can't find anyone" while suprisingly enough everyone else can.

Moral of the Story: This attitude is immoral.

assassin_of_ni · Jun 20, 2007, 11:07 PM // 23:07

/signed to the power of 9834926354786589899837 i despise leechers to all holy hell.

Servant of Kali · Jun 20, 2007, 11:13 PM // 23:13

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.

XvArchonvX · Jun 20, 2007, 11:21 PM // 23:21

I don't recall A-net ever saying that leeching was ok and not punishable. 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.

arcanemacabre · Jun 20, 2007, 11:31 PM // 23:31

100% agree. Leeching actually hurts players who want to play the game normally. Spamming hurts players who simply don't want to turn off chat or move to a different city/dist.

Anet, this is for you:

assassin_of_ni · Jun 20, 2007, 11:42 PM // 23:42

i think maybe not banning them from first or second offenses since yes....real life sometimes may get in the way and unexpected things happen. But typical leechers will do it many many times in a row so if a character is being reported several times by several people on different instances then action should be taken. only way i can see that being feasible.

Bryant Again · Jun 20, 2007, 11:42 PM // 23:42

Kali rolls: 50000
Kali scores a critical hit on: Nail

They also don't do jack shit to scammers, either.

assassin_of_ni · Jun 20, 2007, 11:57 PM // 23:57

oooh wait what about...if a player isnt actively moving in a match of any kind (moving attack healing casting) they wont receive any faction towards balth, lux, or kurz. it would be kinda hard to implement ide imagine but if it worked the way i think it should work it would do away with power lvlers and leechers. also...also...make it so if someone disconnects but doesnt reconnect till 90% of the way through they still have the ability to earn faction. what im thinkin, in a short way of putting it, is a percentage of the time that your actually on the map is required to gain the faction at the end. and i mean somethin like 5 or 10%...and since some matches may be longer than others its impossible to really gauge what the 10% is and then just stop. just an idea *whistles*

Servant of Kali · Jun 21, 2007, 12:21 AM // 00:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

I don't recall A-net ever saying that leeching was ok and not punishable.

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

Quote:

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.

How do you know spammer did it on purpose? Maybe he turned the ALL chan off and didnt see his own messages, so he thought his internet connection is lagging and thus he kept spamming it. Sounds as a good excuse? Yea, as much as your excuse of leeching.

We've beaten to death these "emergencies" which happen in PvP. Yes, even i can be afk for 1-2min sometimes. But suprisingly enough, there are people who have emergencies 3days straight, or more. I'm sure you can think of an excuse for them too.

Can you tell me, when you watch GvG matches on observer mode, how often do you see these emergencies emerging? I've played this game for 2yrs. I don't remember a SINGLE emergency in GvG nor HA. A single one. Im not saying there wasn't, but in 2yrs i have not seen any, in my team, or in opposing team, or in any team in Obs.
For comparison, we see 2+ of these "emergencies" in Fort Aspenwood in every game. Maybe because of global warming sun hit their heads and they need to see doctor, urgently. Oh wait, they are playing comp games indoors.

I would perma ban people who consistently leech, and i would give 3 day ban for 'emergencies'. I mean, if they do have an emergency, it's good to pay attention to the emergency instead of playing comp games. Right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by assassin_of_ni

i think maybe not banning them from first or second offenses since yes....real life sometimes may get in the way and unexpected things happen.

If unexpected things happen, a 3 day ban will help them solve those issues.

On a more serious note, an average wait time in FA in the evening is 30sec-1,5min. That's nothing. Are you telling me that people press enter mission button and in 30sec there's some emergency which takes 5+ min to solve? But, when people GvG or HA or TA, suprisingly enough these emergencies are non existent.

There's always a PvE or offline games where you can press Pause.

Quote:

it would be kinda hard to implement ide imagine

Sadly, it wouldn't be hard to implement. Actually, if im not wrong, a similiar system is in the game ALREADY, and based on that system a lot of people mistakenly got banned once on Nine Rings game. But it's used against bots in PvE.

Seriously, there are zillion of ways to deal with leechers. Here's one:
ANet employee logins to Fort Aspenwood once a week on average for ....20min or so. Really not much, if Gaile can play PvE all day long, im sure someone can play PvP. Then, upon seeing people who stand idle for 5+ min, ANet RESETS their Kurzick/Luxon track and bans em for 3days as well. Trust me, just few bans a week would scare the **** out of leechers. Instead of the situation we have now, when leechers are 'not a problem'.

Dr Strangelove · Jun 21, 2007, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Unfortunately, it is significantly harder to nail leechers. To be sure someone is leeching and not lagging/sucking/heart attack, you have to follow individual players over a series of matches. If they stand around and do nothing in several matches consecutively, you know they're leeching. This requires a fairly large time investment, so it's not really practical.

For spammers, you can just look at a chat log and see who posted the same message 1000 times in 5 minutes. Takes a few seconds at most with the help of a computer.

Sergeant of Marines · Jun 21, 2007, 12:32 AM // 00:32

One thing that I have found out, is that Anet has implemented measures to try and stop leechers from somethings...i.e. remember the snowball fights from wintersday....it did not take them too long to figure out everyone and their brother was trying to leech...It will happen no matter what in any game, there will always be scammers, leechers, bots, annoying people that make the game less enjoyable for others!

iridescentfyre · Jun 21, 2007, 12:33 AM // 00:33

I don't see a problem with it. If they added consequences for so-called "leeching," it will make Alliance Battles very unpopular as we'll all be afraid we'll lag or something and get hit with anti-leeching consequences. There is no way to differentiate between players truly leeching and those who are away for a legitimate reason. Honestly I think the number of players who truly leech is extremely small, seems to me pretty much anyone who takes more than 5 seconds to move gets labeled a leecher, sometimes.

Furthermore, who cares? Think about it... its one loss. In Alliance battles, you have control over the three other people who enter your group, and past that, it is 100% luck. You're going to lose a lot of them regardless of how many people "leech" or not, so just start a new one and hope for the best. More often than not, people use leeching as an excuse for their losses, when in reality they need to just suck up and deal with it, take their 300-500 Faction points and try again.

Mysterial · Jun 21, 2007, 12:39 AM // 00:39

If they tried to detect leeching, somebody would just make a better bot to get around it. It's not worth the trouble.

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.

Servant of Kali · Jun 21, 2007, 12:48 AM // 00:48

OK, let's say someone had to go away for 20min. Just disable his access to random arenas (RA FA AB JQ) for a month. Problem solved :>

Quote:

If they added consequences for so-called "leeching," it will make Alliance Battles very unpopular as we'll all be afraid we'll lag or something and get hit with anti-leeching consequences.

That's just BS. What kind of lag keeps you standing still for 5min? You can always close the game and quit if you lag too much. Quitting is better than leeching.

Quote:

If they tried to detect leeching, somebody would just make a better bot to get around it.

And? That's great actually, because bot can get them permabanned.

Besides, come on, let's be realistic. How many people know how to run bot, find a bot, or dare use one? Leeching on the other hand is piece of cake. Bots only pay off when they earn enough money to repay for themselves. You're not gonna do that with leeching.

Anyway, im going to stop replying. Whenever i see people defending leeching and promoting AFKing in ***PvP*** it makes me very sad. As if those people leech themselves so have to defend it.

iridescentfyre · Jun 21, 2007, 12:50 AM // 00:50

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.

Granted, but again it would suck pretty bad if your PC crashed or you had net problems. These are the kind of things that can kill AB's for the rest of us.

iridescentfyre · Jun 21, 2007, 12:56 AM // 00:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Servant of Kali

That's just BS. What kind of lag keeps you standing still for 5min? You can always close the game and quit if you lag too much. Quitting is better than leeching.

Well, there's been times I've been stuck in one place for several minutes with 45,000+ ping. It happens. And please don't accuse me of defending leeching, you're pulling that out of your @ss. I've AB'd for well over a year and would never leave a game even if I were the last one standing on my team, let alone leech.

NekoZ · Jun 21, 2007, 12:56 AM // 00:56

Maybe instead of banning people, just throw in a code that kicks inactive people after they don't move for 2 minutes or so. Then temp ban repeat offenders.

Servant of Kali · Jun 21, 2007, 01:08 AM // 01:08

OK, what i dont understand is -

- If you lag for several minutes
- If you have an emergency
- If you feel like making an excuse for leeching

.. why not just close GW? And restart? How often does someone have such an emergency that he doesn't have a time to close GW in 20min? Perhaps, here and there, but it's the same chance that someone got wrongly banned for WTB WTS spam.

Quote:

Well, there's been times I've been stuck in one place for several minutes with 45,000+ ping.

Then quit FA. Restart GW. Problem solved. The worse you can do is stand there idle for several minutes, not doing anything for your team, and just demoralizing them because they have to watch you do nothing while they are trying to do their best to win.
And if your lag doesnt go away, play PvE. It's not like ur going to do much if u lag for several minutes. The battle can be over by then.

Mysterial · Jun 21, 2007, 01:17 AM // 01:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by iridescentfyre

Granted, but again it would suck pretty bad if your PC crashed or you had net problems. These are the kind of things that can kill AB's for the rest of us.

No one said they had to permaban you for quitting. They can prevent you from playing in that area for 10 minutes or something like that. Sure, every once in a while you'll have a net hiccup, reconnect fails, and you get hit "unfairly". Guess what? Your crappy net connection ruined other players' gameplay experience. Suck up the consequences and get over it.

Pwny Ride · Jun 21, 2007, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mysterial

If they tried to detect leeching, somebody would just make a better bot to get around it. It's not worth the trouble.

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.

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.