Curse

Mr. Undisclosed · Aug 29, 2008, 04:31 AM // 04:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stc95

A better idea would be a system to kick the leader. You know.. when your party leader is either afk/stupid... mainly for afk, a 5 out of 8 majority vote would be able to kick him. Certainly not what the OP said.. that's just silly.

I actualy kinda like that idea

Woop Shotty · Aug 29, 2008, 04:50 AM // 04:50

Absolutely not. I don't think anyone putting a party together wants to wait for the AFK "bio" guy to get back to his computer to be the last veto. You shouldn't end up being stuck with someone or all leaving and reforming a group in order to work around a terrible system that favors politeness over all else.

Anyone who has a problem with party leaders kicking them, they should try to get better at the game or form their own party.

/NOTsigned

HawkofStorms · Aug 29, 2008, 04:57 AM // 04:57

/notsigned

If the leader couldn't kick somebody, then they'd just leave the group and reform a new one w/o the "kicked" person, resulting in the same thing but wasting a lot more time.

DarkEnzanArikado · Aug 29, 2008, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Lmao, best trend I have seen today. Remove kicking, what are you high?

/notsigned

Brimstonez · Aug 29, 2008, 05:21 AM // 05:21

This would cause mass problems, in the way of trading, and reordering teams.

/not signed

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 29, 2008, 05:52 AM // 05:52

Guys, come on, sign this idea, it will allow for absolute hilarity ingame.

-Lotus- · Aug 29, 2008, 06:38 AM // 06:38

did any of you read the OP? most of you obviously didnt. its not for a compleat removal of the kick function. its a rework to a vote-kick. obviously you dont need 7/8 votes to kick someone. thats stupid. the idea would have to be refined, but some of you are simply not thinking or reading at all.

if you cant be bothered to read the OP why the hell are giving your opinions, which dont even make sense...

Nian · Aug 29, 2008, 06:44 AM // 06:44

Except in GW most people are so out of it they wouldn't understand they have to do something like that. PuG's are usually there just for the "ride". They don't understand why and when they have to do something, listen to teammets, not aggro something, ignore some mobs, /resign etc. because they have no idea what they are even doing and what's good for them. I have seen many team leaders not kicking a warrior with a mesmer bar or whatever because they have no idea it's bad for them including most of the team usually. GW is too fast paced for thought.

This is why we have "leave" button.

upier · Aug 29, 2008, 06:49 AM // 06:49

How many times did other party members leave the party you were just kicked out of and join you in making a new party?
My guess is that that's how many times they actually care and that's how many times a majority vote would be beneficial.
I pretty much don't remember a single time that happened.
And that is why /respect mah kicking powerz111111!!1!!!1
Pew pew pew!

Cebe · Aug 29, 2008, 07:39 AM // 07:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante the Warlord

Alright, I have been thinking... the kick function has been more negative than positive. In PUGs they generally start terrible arguments of "u noob yd u kick me" and "OMG noob build KICK!!!!". My way around this is veto, like they have in Halo, where most people need to agree that person needs to be kicked. After a person has been vetoed, they will be given 5-10 seconds before being formally booted (this gives them a chance to leave themselves).

Why does every little thing have to be "positive"?

There should be a greater understanding of PuG etiquette generally, but to suggest removing a feature which is required for a whole plethora of situations is simply rediculous and not well considered.

It's PuG members who fail to help each other better their builds and succeed at the game, but that can't be "fixed" with an update. Removing the Kick option is simply not viable.

I'm locking this thread for the simple reason that the idea itself is ludicrous, and the quality of discussion it has generated so far is less than acceptable.

/Locked.