Curse

Undivine · Mar 18, 2006, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henchman

1. During an SF farm or the Tombs farm, you use a full group to get to the bosses- once you get to them, a full team is not needed for the kill. The leader kicks you- more green weapons for them.

The kick system, as it is proposed by the original poster, requires that the majority of the team votes in favor of the kick. It's not just the leader, but the entire group that agrees to it. In a team of 8, the odds of getting 5 people to agree to boot someone for that shady purpose is unlikely. Even if that was the intent, such a thing can be screenshotted by the kickie and reported, as the kickers would likely have to communicate their conspiracy in team chat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henchman

2. Just as there are jerks who aggro for no reason, abandon the group, and endlessly curse, there will be jerks who kick for no reason.

And they will need the agreement of the rest of their group to do so. For that matter, why do you make such a jerk your leader?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henchman

3. When entering the Underworld, or FOW, after paying the fee, the leader kicks you.

Again, they need the agreement of the rest of the group to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henchman

4. Everyone is new to the game at the beggining. Newbs will be kicked because the are not good enough.

At the beginning of the game, Newbs are understandable and they won't affect the mission very much, since those missions are easy anyway. I doubt people would kick the prolific Newbs at the beginning of the game. At the end of the game, they shouldn't be Newbs by that point. If they are, what's wrong with kicking them?

Your suggestions for improvement capture a very small number of cases in which a team needs to kick someone. A person can be an ass or just plain annoying without swearing. "N00b" is not a swear word, but is perhaps the most annoying word anyone can use on another. They can also use the various leet speak ways of getting around the filter.

An AFKer can simply be a bot, programmed to follow someone. Or if they don't have a bot, the AFKer can perform the minimal effort of targeting someone and pressing the spacebar so often while they eat their dinner. And in the end you are not preventing someone's supposed potential abuse of the kick system because someone who is dead, and whom the team monk refuses to res, will be outside of the radar eventualy.

The ability to kick someone has been in many, many games; and with even less restrictions than is being proposed here. In fact, a lot of these games don't have automatic loot distribution, but most people divy them up properly, using their own team agreement. I think you are being a bit alarmist and your lack of faith in humanity is unrealistic. There are jerks, but the majority of us have some level of respect for others. The only way to defeat this system and be a jerk with it is to have many jerks ban together and plan this ahead of time, and in the end, not really achieve much gain from it anyways.

echo envitas · Jun 04, 2006, 09:28 PM // 21:28

Agree with ^...
This feature is in most MMORGS, with no restrictions as have been proposed here, and it is not abused.

Even if it was sometimes abused, I would see it as being rarer than the abuse we take now by AFKers and such.

And I haven't been to these areas yet, so correct me if I'm wrong... But this would fix the whole AFKer in Fort Aspenwood problem, right?

GW needs this!

/signed

death fuzzy · Jun 05, 2006, 12:12 AM // 00:12

One thing I thought of when someone mentioned 'guildies +1'...

Say for example you have a group of 7 guildies and one outcast.
maybe you're doing a mission...or a hard quest...

not that it would happen very often, but there is a possibility of harassment

imagine being near the end of a mission or quest.
the leader, deciding to be mean, tells everyone to kick out the outcast just for laughs or because they just wanted to use him then take the credit for yourselves and get rid of the other person.

imagine what chaos might happen after that.

I sign this as a good idea, but perhaps you can do something about the above concern.

jummeth · Jun 05, 2006, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Mr. Big Bad Monster drops a rare Crystaline Sword which your party reserves for Jummeth.
**You have been kicked from party***

WasAGuest · Jun 05, 2006, 01:33 AM // 01:33

There's some good reasons for adding a kick system, however; I'm still against it for various reasons. One being the griefing it will cause in some missions.

With the addition of faction and the PvE alliance vs alliance (not faction vs faction) - rival alliances would have the ability to kick members of rival alliances from faction gaining missions (to lessen competition).
This also opens up the ability to send spies into rival areas in numbers and just vote kick out other for easier wins. May not happen each time, but it could.

Note: As the kick system is theory so is the above mentioned situations. And as Undivine pointed out with that link, there are many "jerks" playing the game.

Another form of abuse could just be out of spite. If someone in your guild kicked someone from a group for being a jerk, chances are he will say something in guild and next thing you know, your being kicked out of spite for him being kicked.

I wish I could sign this, as many have said, I would love to kick some of the jerks and afkers many times. I feel there is just way to many forms of possible abuse.

/not signed

Im Perfect U Aint · Jun 05, 2006, 02:16 AM // 02:16

/signed but only for areas that dont have anything to do with farming items gold..basically used for places like jade quarry fort aspenwood for leechers there that dont wana do anything

o0o..btw u should only b allowed to do it on ur side,,therefore luxon can only kick luxon and kurz only kick kurz

(Edited by moderator: Glued two posts together. Please don't double-post. Use "edit.")

furiousfunk · Jun 21, 2006, 03:52 AM // 03:52

/signed

So many people against this are talking about extreme and rare instances where it would be abused but they seem to forget that people are CONSTANTLY abusing the game by being jerks, leeching and being AFK. I do not see how anyone could be against this unless they are leechers, AFKers or Jerks. If a group kicks you when a green or ecto drops then when you go back to town all of the unclaimed drops for you are available for pickup, just like it does with missions. It can't be that difficult to imagine such a feature when they already have it. If a guild team kicks you at the end of a mission for no reason, then REPORT them, you can easily get a screenshot of the chat log. The main occurrence is AFKers and Leechers. I agree 100% with the "A Player has been AFK for 5 Minutes, Press 1 to initiate Hench Replacement or Press 2 to give them Another 2 Minutes". That way the system initiates the kick procedure and how can there be abuse there? If you are AFK for 5 minutes then you deserve to be kicked anyway, seriously, why should anyone else have to wait 5 minutes on you? Exit the game if your mama calls you to take out the garbage.
Again, AFKers and Leechers are a constant problem. It's been 10 matches at Fort Aspenwood since there wasn't a leecher on my side, there is always a leecher there on both sides.

AlyssaMarcia · Jun 21, 2006, 09:48 AM // 09:48

/signed

This idea is a necessity. I am surprised it receives any sort of backlash. The OP covered everything including rare drops that would be given back to the player in town. Let me list a few reasons why I have wanted to kick someone.

1. Rudeness/profanity/perversion ... being a girl and having girl names I get a lot of perversion and sexually explicit attention that is unwarranted and unprovoked. I'm asked to cyber, dance naked (for their own behind their screen reasons) and they even ask for personal information for some sort of meeting in real life to fulfill their perverted desires. This perversion and immaturity is not something I play the game for and I do not deserve this type of treatment I am for this ability to rid myself of such harassment.

2. Afk players camping the mission so that the group beats it for them... enough said.

3. Players who cause the group to fail. Considering how there would be a vote system the group could agree that the member in question went kamikaze and argued too many and nearly lost the mission.

Are these not valid reasons? I especially think that #1 is important. I receive enough sexual harassment in the real world, why should I have to tolerate it in a game?

-Aly

TheOneMephisto · Jun 21, 2006, 03:14 PM // 15:14

/signed a million times

I think most people have covered the reasons why

bobrath · Jun 21, 2006, 03:33 PM // 15:33

I agree completly with the leader initiated vote kick system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by furiousfunk

The main occurrence is AFKers and Leechers. I agree 100% with the "A Player has been AFK for 5 Minutes, Press 1 to initiate Hench Replacement or Press 2 to give them Another 2 Minutes". That way the system initiates the kick procedure and how can there be abuse there? If you are AFK for 5 minutes then you deserve to be kicked anyway, seriously, why should anyone else have to wait 5 minutes on you? Exit the game if your mama calls you to take out the garbage.

It would be fairly easy to abuse this... I could set up a bot program that does the bare minimum to keep my from being flagged as afk - i.e. move every 4 mins. Any sort of automated criteria for a system initiated kick can be abused like this. That's why I favor the leader initiated vote kick system. You're asking a human to make the judgement - there's no system that can predict this.

furiousfunk · Jun 21, 2006, 09:50 PM // 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobrath

I agree completly with the leader initiated vote kick system.

It would be fairly easy to abuse this... I could set up a bot program that does the bare minimum to keep my from being flagged as afk - i.e. move every 4 mins. Any sort of automated criteria for a system initiated kick can be abused like this. That's why I favor the leader initiated vote kick system. You're asking a human to make the judgement - there's no system that can predict this.

again, this is RARE INSTANCE. most people do not have a bot program or even know how to get one. I am not opposed to a group Vote/Kick but a simple easy to implement is the auto AFK kick and replace with hench. Of Course, have a vote/kick but little jerk kids will abuse it, if they add the Vote/Kick that's initiated by the leader then we need a report button next to everyones name(that will be abused by jerk teenagers). I want to instantly deal with the AFK people first while the 1 in a 1000 that has a bot slips by.

AnnaCloud9 · Jun 22, 2006, 05:24 AM // 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowspawn X

Horrible idea, would be abused no matter how you slice it. You all have played the game and know what many of the players in the community are really like, the maturity just isn't there to handle such a feature. Just would make the game all the more worst if not unplayable in the long run.

This is my sentiment as well. Though the feature, in theory, is splendid, proper utilization I strongly believe would fall to the wayside. As soon as I helped my group get from point A to B, my character isn't needed anymore, the 'guild' or 'buddy' group then proceeds to cast out whoever isn't needed to then multiply their odds of getting that really great green item they've had their hearts set on - now that the grunt work is done.

Former Ruling · Jun 22, 2006, 07:32 AM // 07:32

1) I /sign the overall idea of a fair kicking system.

2) I /not sign the idea of automatic AFK Logouts everywhere. Other games have done this and it just turns into a COMPLETE annoyance to every law following citizen of the game.

A MUCH BETTER idea that I'm ripping straight from Runescape's "Pest Control" (game sucks, but some of their design ideas as of late have been good) is to have a condition for getting the reward. See, in there, you join a random group of people, and fight enemies/whatever, and if you win, you get gold and "points" you can spend on experience and such (much along same ideas of Fort Aspenwood and Faction earned there). Of course there were people that just jumped in, and stood there hoping the team would win and they could leech the points off them. To fix this, It was simple. They said you had to deal 50 damage (which is a respectable amount in Runescape compared to the match lengths) to get the points, otherwise when you win they'll see you didnt help enough and you get no reward.

Obviously this cant be dmg for Guild Wars (supporting classes exist), but there can be similar restrictions made that are equal among classes. like: "You have to do [this] [that] many times, or you don't get faction". Their can even be requirements by class, like different options of what you can do. "You can either deal [x] damage, or heal [y] health of allies" or something.

Aarroe of Gilgamesh · Jun 22, 2006, 08:25 AM // 08:25

im all for the kick feature. i honestly don't think that inexperienced players will get kicked as often as the nay sayers have brought up. there is a definite difference between a person ignorant of guild wars and an ignorant person.

example: back when i had a decent pve monk, i would help out with missions. helping a guildie with THK i came accross a ranger that refused to camp the king, prefering to "man the catapults" not even attacking enemies that were attacking him. onesies or twosies of the party kept stragling over to help the boner out. since there is no kick feature me and the other monk just stopped healing his self. 20 minutes of "i m the 1337," "f u munks" later, his dead self got a free ride thru the mission.

a person that did not know how to play the game would ask questions if they dont understand. no0obs arent the new players, they are the ones that have been around and not learned. a kick feature would definitely implement a behavioural learning curve. so this person gets pissed that he has gotten kicked from 83 parties and quits the game; a-net already has his money this only benefits us.

and only kick afk by vote. auto afk disconnects could definitly be problematic for runners, or a guild giving a dude a mission run or something.

nugzta · Jun 22, 2006, 09:03 AM // 09:03

/signed, same reasons as earlier posts ... GW definetely needs this.

Stupid Shizno · Jun 22, 2006, 09:32 AM // 09:32

I do wish there was a leader implimented kick system. But it should be "smart"

Leader
Warrior 2
Ele 1
Monk 1

Warrior holds aggro as ele nukes. Monk dosnt do much healing, just healing seed. group goes great after a while, ele goes afk no reason giving. group waits, then gets annoyed.

Leader impliments a vote kick for Ele for reason: AFK

since we have windows already in the game that are hidden, there should be a new party window. Since if your leader of group in a town, the leader can add or kick as well, those buttons should stay in the instance, he can kick the person by vote kick, then from the invite he can choose the hench he wants.

I also wouldnt mind being able to add real people to replace the kicked, aslong as they have the bonus and mission completed. This way, the team is getting a real player for a real player, the addie isnt gaining anything except condolences.

edit: for major questing missions like fow and uw, either allow real people but they can not benifit from quests (so you cant kick out 2 people at forgemaster cause they forgot money and bring in people and all they have to do is talk to the ghost and they got fow) or just allow henchs.

Vahn Roi · Jun 22, 2006, 02:09 PM // 14:09

/notsigned.

The Ragequit would have a new companion; the "RageKick."

Not only would this become an issue if someone rubs the leader the wrong way, but say a really decent drop happens to fall in someone elses name. The Leader could kick that person and grab the item.

No-way-in-hell

:EDIT:

Finally read the whole idea. Seeing as we can't even get a whole team to /resign when it's needed, I don't see how often people would agree in a timely manner to kick someone

/undecided

Dumbassturtle · Aug 05, 2006, 02:59 PM // 14:59

I was watching my roommate/guildy do a mission in the ring of fire (don't remember which one) but one of the monks went afk. they waited a bit then went on without him, they were struggling though and kept asking if he was back (somewhere around 30 minutes). Finally when they got to a particularly hard part and everyone died, IMEDIATLY after the last person dropped the monk "came back" and asked which way to go to find them. He got everyone rez'd and they finished the mission, basically he got a free ride through without having to do any dirty work except near the end. I have a sneaking suspicion that he was chatting with his pals in pms.

I can't sign as of yet though even though people like this make me want to smite them in the real world, there isn't a totally fool proof way to make this fair and non-abuseable.

Kendar Muert · Aug 06, 2006, 05:14 AM // 05:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damon Windwalker

I think that something should be done - the problem is, keeping it from being abused.

Someone said "there's no real reason" - what about the AFKers, as has been mentioned? The idiots that cause problems to the team by intentionally causing agros? The kid that won't quit trash talaking? The one who feels the need to contantly draw the ol' twig 'n berries on the mini-map?

Another (semi-related) thing I'd like to see would be to have a "sh1t-list" feature built in. Example:

I have been famring SF for about a month now. I have run across people who will get to a certain point in a mission, and if they haven't gotten anything, they leave. Yes, I know there are a lot of reasons this might happen - in one case, I went with the same person 3 different times, and each time, he left at the exact same point.

So let's say I can put him on my list. From then on, any time I form a party and he requests to join, I never even see the request. If I get an invite to join a party that he is in, I could have a message warning me that this person is in the party before I decide to accept the invite.

I like this idea and the other one about kicking players. Both would be useful.

/signed

Killaya · Aug 07, 2006, 03:35 AM // 03:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesh

leechers

YES. For this reason, I would love to see this put into action. I am so tired of leechers. The vote system seems fair to me. I doubt that it would be abused, unless you're in a party with 7 very spiteful people who all want to turn on you for no apparent reason. (Highly unlikely.)