Curse

Series · Dec 01, 2006, 02:45 AM // 02:45

I'm sure we've all had people quit very early on in your game- in fact, based by the amount of topics similar to "make quitters lose 3194812481290 balthazar faction per quit and a ban for 30 years", I would say this bothers a lot of people. But punishing is lame... just because a few bad apples rage quit in RA when they see no monk on the team doesn't mean people with legit reasons should be punished.

So I suggest that, for Random Arenas/Fort Aspenwood/Jade Quarry at least, if a certain set of conditions is met, the next person in the queue gets to hop into the game. For example...

Team A has a W/Mo, W/E, Rt/Me, E/Me, Team B has a W/E, R/Me, N/Mo, Mo/A. The W/Mo on Team A types in "OMFG WE HAF NO MONK" and quits before the Ritualist can explain that he is a Restoration Ritualist and is capable of giving the team a little healing. When the warrior quits, his spot is *vacated*, his name is removed from the list. The timer is counting down until game start... 10... 9... 8... Meanwhile, in Random Arenas, a Me/Mo hits the join game button. He instantly fills up that vacated slot, allowing both teams to start with 4 people.

Basically, it would work like that. I don't know what limitations there would be (for example, if they could only be replaced before the game begins, or if they could only be replaced if they quit while alive and no dead teammates are on the team, or etc.), I am just talking about the general concept of replacing early rage quitters to benefit the victim. If something like this has been suggested, I apologize, I have used the search function.

gameshoes3003 · Dec 01, 2006, 02:57 AM // 02:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Series

I guess you didn't read my post. I did use the search thing. Tell me what terms I should have searched for to get better results then.

In fact, based on the content of your post, it is safe to assume you didn't read a thing I said. All I can say is, my search results showed nothing like my idea and you obviously didn't read a thing I typed.

Hehe, I'm sorry my eyes skipped over that phrase. I apologize and I have deleted that message.

Series · Dec 01, 2006, 02:59 AM // 02:59

Apology accepted. I didn't mean to be harsh on you, but it did get me a tad annoyed that I was told to use search when I did and pointed out that I did.

gameshoes3003 · Dec 01, 2006, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Series

Apology accepted. I didn't mean to be harsh on you, but it did get me a tad annoyed that I was told to use search when I did and pointed out that I did.

Yep, i had a brain moment

Toutatis · Dec 01, 2006, 03:57 AM // 03:57

I think this is a very interesting idea. and that it's definitely worth a try. I think the only limitation on it should be that slots only get refilled during the countdown before the match starts. I don't think it would be very fair to the person coming in to the vacated slot in the middle of a battle, and having to try to instantly react to everything that's going on.

Zui · Dec 01, 2006, 04:05 AM // 04:05

This feels very odd, but... /signed

Saphrium · Dec 01, 2006, 04:13 AM // 04:13

The fundamental idea is: If you decide to click the button and make a commitment, and then you eat that decision and break that promise, you get punished. Pure and simple.

Punishment is necessary.

Not to mention the coding complexity.

/notsigned

Elemental Cotton · Dec 01, 2006, 04:28 AM // 04:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saphrium

The fundamental idea is: If you decide to click the button and make a commitment, and then you eat that decision and break that promise, you get punished. Pure and simple.

Punishment is necessary.

So now people have to be punished for having crappy internet, having blackouts at the worst time, or having to leave to deal with some real life emergency such a child suddenly got sick, or a family member slipping and spraining his ankle?

However, you got the coding part right, it'd be complex, not to mention the bugs it might cause.

/notsigned for coding complexity.

Saphrium · Dec 01, 2006, 04:31 AM // 04:31

I am sorry, if that happens, I think I wouldn't mind lose 1000 factions for that.

rabbitXcore · Dec 01, 2006, 04:47 AM // 04:47

The idea itself is great but the actuality is not. coding complexity would be...very hard...but i believe that Anet pays a certain amount of people to do that, so perhaps it should be assumed that they can do their jobs. and the testers could find and work out bugs. In such a perfect world.../signed

Happy · Dec 01, 2006, 02:46 PM // 14:46

Would only work for when the game hasn't actually started yet. I think having a full health full energy person joining in the middle of the match is unfair wouldn't you agree?

Also really people go join a TA guild if you care so much you get to 4vs4 have ventrilo communication all the goodies and they don't quit on you.

Pyro maniac · Dec 01, 2006, 06:24 PM // 18:24

/notsigned

For me, if I have to go I quit after won the match, still it isnt great for the others, however they will be still with 4 in next match

Antheus · Dec 01, 2006, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Remove all random grouping pvp.

Make each type of pvp give separate form of rank (just like HA).

Yes, many will never pvp again, but at least all these problems will be solved.

Random - each member is chosen individually. Classes and skills are not considered.

This is also the cause of every single complaint. In addition, since groups are pre-determined, if you act like an idiot, others will remember you, and you won't get in a group ever again.

Every other option simply doesn't work.

Just as a counter point to your suggestion: How many would enjoy being pulled into a middle of a battle? How many, should such a system be implemented, would start quitting as soon as things take a downturn - someone will replace them, who cares?