Curse

Pleikki · Mar 02, 2008, 08:24 AM // 08:24

/signed though it would be abused someone says "Wc" and then 7 other ppl does that and he got banned for going wc

Kiasyd117 · Mar 04, 2008, 01:02 AM // 01:02

/notsigned

maybe someone already mentioned this or not but if you give people the ability to boot mission mates for purported inactivity, wouldn't this lend itself to abuses such as kicking a person after he opens an end chest but before he grabs his drop?

Back in the day people would snipe drops left and right lending to the assignment system, I mean parent nerfs do happen, let's not add anymore sour grapes to the already overly shakey task of PUGing missions.

Shayne Hawke · Mar 04, 2008, 01:40 AM // 01:40

Clarification: You're saying that when you're in an explorable area and a person goes inactive for five minutes, you can report the person as "Inactive", and they'll no longer gain loot, exp., title points, etc.?

I love that idea, but you'd need to make sure what you define "Inactive" as. I would so no skill use and no character position change. A person that wanted to abuse the system under a "no keys pressed" system could just have something hold down a key while they left.

/signed. PvP got a leeching solution. I hope PvE gets one too.

Edit: Took another look at the OP. I wouldn't support a person marked "Inactive" being subjected to a timer that they're kicked after. I would much rather have them not gain look, or experience, or something like that. I think when someone in PvP is declared a leecher, they don't gain any more faction or experience unless they go out and start smacking something, and I'd like it to be more along those lines.

As far as the point system, if it were something like the Dishonorable system, that would work just fine. There's no need for a ban.

Yuhe Ji · Mar 04, 2008, 02:04 AM // 02:04

/signed
I have encounted this problem a few times and it is quite annoying. It occurs mainly when point farming. When your group is done making a run, people normally just /resign so that they can all go back to the outpost. Having an afk screws this up and PUGs typically won't be meeting up together again at the outpost.

Snow Bunny · Mar 04, 2008, 02:18 AM // 02:18

/notsigned

Hero Hench please

You can't see me · Mar 04, 2008, 03:26 AM // 03:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

/notsigned

Hero Hench please

If you actually read any of the previous posts, you would come across the statement "Ignoring the problem is not the answer".

Let's say we forget about balancing GvG for a while, eh? See how many people start complaining then because the problems are ignored. Minority problems still exist, even through useless generalizing statements such as the one quoted.

Shasgaliel · Aug 08, 2008, 01:54 PM // 13:54

I put leechers on ignore list and it got full after few DOA runs. I think leeching is serious and annoying problem. The solutions like "go back to the outpost" do not work because most of the leechers start to leech not immediately but after some time, like after 2-3 quests in UW or after first area in DOA. Those guys run 3-5 accounts and leech on all of them except one to which they transfer all the loot. I think time banning will not help. They will switch account and start again so you may get the same leecher in your next run and friend list will not help to recognize him. Arena net would need to have someone going through logs of trade transaction, IP addressess etc to trace it. However if one is caught then bans should fall on all leecher accounts not only leeching one. Then he will act and play a victim saying that "but this account was not mine, it was my younger brother" etc etc. Life ban on leeching account will not help since in most of the cases it is hacked account or one bought from other player. I do not think many guys out there are stupid enough to risk leeching on their GWAMM account or such...

Ate of DK · Aug 08, 2008, 01:57 PM // 13:57

Leechers in PvE...

Anything else we can QQ about. I've never encountered a leecher in PvE in 3 years and I pugged quite a lot just for fun. I don't think some penalty system is needed for Leechers in PvE.

Kanyatta · Aug 08, 2008, 03:47 PM // 15:47

I still stand by that a lot worse things could be happening. You hardly need 6 people for most stuff in NM, and in HM (besides DoA), you can zone back to the town and only lose about 5 minutes of your time, at most.

glacialphoenix · Aug 08, 2008, 06:33 PM // 18:33

I've actually had PvE leechers in dungeons like Slaver's, where it is incredibly annoying because in the event of a wipe, you won't resurrect. Which wastes a great deal of time for the group. When I say leechers, I mean the people who sit at the entrance and AFK without 1. saying anything to that effect, 2. not using any skills, 3. not in chat.

DarkGanni · Aug 08, 2008, 06:42 PM // 18:42

/halfsigned

Yesterday was on a fow run and I said: brb getting a fan (room was hot), someone called me a leecher. If they have to implement this should be well thought.

Votekick like fps games should do the trick I think.

- Ganni

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 08, 2008, 06:50 PM // 18:50

/notsigned

Just remove the hero limit, then we won't need humans at all.

I Is Special · Aug 08, 2008, 07:40 PM // 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ate of DK

Leechers in PvE...

Anything else we can QQ about. I've never encountered a leecher in PvE in 3 years and I pugged quite a lot just for fun. I don't think some penalty system is needed for Leechers in PvE.

I call bullsh!t.

"Back in the day i used to RA all the time and i NEVER had a person leave my group because we didnt have a monk, or ever have a leecher or anything like that lawlalwl. they fixed it anyway, i mean wtf? I could beat those noobs with 3 people in my party, easy ! lawl i'm pro."

/signed

That idea where they stop gaining any benefits after being afk for 5 mins was good. But the way to determine if they are afk, which cant beat cheated, will be hard to come up with.

Jae Onasi · Aug 09, 2008, 05:35 AM // 05:35

How do you determine whether someone is leeching vs. whether someone who had a legitimate real-life issue that had to be addressed then? I have kids, and if they get hurt or have some other crisis, they are of course going to take precedence over a game. Now, I almost never Pug because I might have to leave abruptly. My guild understands that, since a lot of our members have families. We all know that any one of us at any time may have to leave abruptly to handle a family situation, and we just wait for the person to return. However, I'd hate to be with my guild in the middle of FoW or something, have an issue come up with my kids that my guild was perfectly OK with me leaving to attend to briefly, but still get penalized because I didn't come back within the 5 minute time period to jiggle the mouse enough to get my character to do something.

upier · Aug 09, 2008, 06:23 AM // 06:23

As I always like to say in leeching-debates:
Dwight has been leeching at Aspy for MORE then a year.
His account still works.

And you are suggesting to implement a solution that mimics that system?
Eventhough it clearly fails?

I don't care for it.
So /notsigned

Marverick · Aug 09, 2008, 06:22 PM // 18:22

When someone goes afk for more than 5 minutes just have hero AI take over that person until he comes back.

dragonx1013 · Aug 09, 2008, 06:35 PM // 18:35

I usually work with my Guild, however, this will work half the time. If I just didn't want to do work, id sit here and everytime i see the box, I just click on "Im here" and continue on.

Now, making a button that replaces someone (only the team leader can do) with a henchie of the same profession if the other player does not respond in 30 seconds? That might work (or even if someone goes out of the minimap from the party leader, they automatically get replaced. Also have the option to turn this OFF for runners). The most annoying part isn't they are getting points (for most of the stuff, drops included, the player needs to be nearby) I'm well aware these have plenty of flaws, but lets shoot some ideas around and I hope I can get some started.

I wouldn't care so much as making ap layer inactive, as they are taking up a slot in my party and that can be used for someone. I tend not to pair up with people for two reasons, one being that no one ever really listens and lets one person target and cooperates, usually people are off doing their own thing, die, and blame it on the party for not following them. The second is this reason, I did play once with a party of 8 while farming, and 3 went AFK! All at seperate points so the people are scattered throught the map and its 5 people working in an 8 man area.

I agree leeching (or mid game AFK's as some people are not intentionally doing this) must be stopped one way or another, maybee then I will play with real people again!

/Signed for the idea, the method is gonna need some hard thought.

crazybanshee · Aug 09, 2008, 06:57 PM // 18:57

Problem is, a lot of these people are not completely gone, they're just not playing. They may be sitting there doing homework, watching a movie, whatever. If you grab their attention and say hey are you active.. course they are. I don't see how this will help the problem, but there is a problem that /report doesn't really cover. /Report only works if more people do it, but most people don't bother.

illidan009 · Aug 10, 2008, 01:16 AM // 01:16

All things considered this will be generally beneficial(poor ppl with sudden diarrhea gtfo)

/signed

Lady Raenef · Aug 10, 2008, 02:43 AM // 02:43

In missions like Hell's Precipice where it takes longer than ten minutes to complete, I can see where the feature comes in handy. However, bans? No. I'd say, Dishonorable for PvE, yes. Make it 40 minutes. You must stay in the outpost and doesn't wear off if you logout.