Curse

xenoranger · May 25, 2006, 03:17 PM // 15:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by KIDGOOCH

seems it could be misused, if majority are guildies, they could eject non-guildies at end of mission at payoff (Tombs comes to mind). If you ejected non-guildies there with only The Darkness' left, who could stop you, and your guildmates would take all the spoils. An alternative would be for anyone AFG (away from group to recieve a notice to rejoin group within 3 - 5 minutes or be kicked (though this could work against runners as well).

Could also have a point of no return set on certain missions and such. This way you can't boot after # enemies in UW or # levels in tombs.

Sphinx2k · May 25, 2006, 03:28 PM // 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenoranger

Could also have a point of no return set on certain missions and such. This way you can't boot after # enemies in UW or # levels in tombs.

Then what would stop that person from just going afk after u hit that point of no return sure they would have to help out for a bit but then could just go afk

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenoranger

They could always divy points out based on actions performed.

Say,

Attacking, casting, maintaining enchantments all have points given.

what about ppl who do the flag/relic running who r not in the battle most of the game etc, Another way u could get around it sit there and spam heals and enchats on your self your still casting so tech u still gain these "preformace points" as u put it which is evern wors then just going afk as u could probably gain more "preformance points" this way then actually fighting making this the new wave of faction farming for those ppl that sit in aspenwood/jade quarry. IMO very horrible idea and if anet ever did somthing along this line it would be off my pc faster then you could blink an eye.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenoranger

Plus, fi the player fails to make so many actions, they would fail the quest/mission and not get credit for it.

So what would happen if i had a lvl 5 or some other low lvl char and get 3 of my lvl20 guildies to help me out with say Fort Rank since mostly the whole time they will end up killing the enemy b4 i get to them to land an attack i would only have one option left sit there and spam skills on myself again so as to meet this QUOTA of having to preform so many action so as i can still get credit for it just becuz some guildies wanted to help me out.

Markaedw · May 25, 2006, 03:33 PM // 15:33

/not...it is already a problem in FoW, UW and ToPK where a player gets the good drops then gets killed and the rest of the team vultures the drop.

Any kick feature would be abused far more than not.

Tarun · May 25, 2006, 03:35 PM // 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

so what? If you can make a bot to keep clicking "enter mission" button, you can make same bot take a step forward and cast healing sig every 30 seconds. "Idle timer" will only create problems for legimate players, thats it.

Regardless if some bot was made to do as you mention, a votekick for idle people would still reduce the freeloaders.

felinette · May 25, 2006, 04:47 PM // 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

Most players have no clue of what is going on on battlefield. They are too busy with they characters.

This is absolutely true. I'll often only notice after a battle that someone has said something in chat, and sometimes I have to scroll up a while to catch the beginning of the conversation. And organize a vote during a mission? Most of the PUGs I've been out with can't even agree on which mob to attack first.

I like the idea of the group leader getting a "bootafk" after a player has been inactive for a certain amount of time, but what happens if it's the leader who is afk? That's happened to me a few times.

Again, it's only a game. If someone gets credit for a mission they didn't actually play, it's not the end of the world. If someone screws up and you have to repeat a mission, it's not the end of the world. I'd rather shrug it off than put a system into place that will allow honest, well-meaning players to be kicked out of groups just because the rest of the group felt like it.

Silvergun Superman · May 25, 2006, 05:07 PM // 17:07

I still have no idea why Anet hasn't implemented the vote system. The "bootafk" option given to the group leader is an ok idea but as Felinette said, what if the leader went afked. Like yesterday when I was doing Vizunah Square, 5 minutes into the mission the group leader starts to complain how he's lagging and can't move, etc etc. Everyone knew he was BSing but we couldn't do a thing about it since we didn't want to screw over the other team by leaving so he got to leech and get this mission completed without doing a damn thing.

nimloth32 · May 25, 2006, 05:37 PM // 17:37

well, hence, i think it is better if someone type /boot 'a player's name' and needed support from the other in order to make that command works..so that the decision will not lie on solely one player

Kiros Calmhand · May 25, 2006, 06:01 PM // 18:01

Every little helps,
Well maybe not everything. i'm a little worried playing as an asassin because there is quite a bit of sin hate going about and I see a situation where a leader willing to give an asassin a chance is then pressured into kicking the person out because they get spiked by an ele or something and someone shouts,

Guy: asassin's are crap, kick him!
Other team members: Yeah, kick him!
Leader threatened with multiple quitters, in best interests of mish kicks sin out

I don't know about other places but in Aspenwood or similar, if the person doesn't move for X amount of time they are automatically kicked, if they were afk for too long (toilet etc...) then it happens and the person just has to do it again, life is sometimes unfair

I would love a /kick command but it has too many opportunities for abuse unfortunately, if it was anything less than perfect it would probably have a negative effect on gameplay imo.

As long as there are less leeches because of it then I would probably go for the idle meter as it has less chance of affecting innocent people who enjoy playing the game.

Probably a bit long for my second ever post

xenoranger · May 26, 2006, 05:33 PM // 17:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sphinx2k

Then what would stop that person from just going afk after u hit that point of no return sure they would have to help out for a bit but then could just go afk

well.. true. There really is no perfect system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sphinx2k

what about ppl who do the flag/relic running who r not in the battle most of the game etc, Another way u could get around it sit there and spam heals and enchats on your self your still casting so tech u still gain these "preformace points" as u put it which is evern wors then just going afk as u could probably gain more "preformance points" this way then actually fighting making this the new wave of faction farming for those ppl that sit in aspenwood/jade quarry. IMO very horrible idea and if anet ever did somthing along this line it would be off my pc faster then you could blink an eye.

Holdling Flag/Relic/Ashes/whatever is an action

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sphinx2k

So what would happen if i had a lvl 5 or some other low lvl char and get 3 of my lvl20 guildies to help me out with say Fort Rank since mostly the whole time they will end up killing the enemy b4 i get to them to land an attack i would only have one option left sit there and spam skills on myself again so as to meet this QUOTA of having to preform so many action so as i can still get credit for it just becuz some guildies wanted to help me out.

It could be configured to take level or radar into effect..

again there is no perfect system.

But you could have the action points require you to be within radar of 1-2 other party members... it's just a thought.

Ninna · May 26, 2006, 06:38 PM // 18:38

I think an Idle meter with Vote system would be a good balance

if someone is Idle more than 10 minutes,
the party is given the opportunity to VOTE em out

I dont like the vote system by itself but I would happily support voting for booting people that have been inactive for more than 10minutes

priabirch · May 26, 2006, 09:30 PM // 21:30

I like the idea as much as the next.
Personally I like the away from group option.
I think the option to kick should only be available when someone is away from the group for more than 5 minutes.

If someone is afk or using the toilet, and they let the group know, the group can wait and that person isn't away from the group (compass/radar based). In this case the option to kick shouldn't be available since they aren't away from the group. Group controlled.

If someone sits somewhere for 5 minutes and does nothing and doesn't let anyone know they are afk before they go, then the group should have the option to kick once they give up waiting and move away from said person.
After 5 minutes of said offender being out of everyone's radar range the kick option becomes available for that person only. Majority rules. This is group controlled and should take care of the majority of PvE issues. Now you'd just have to watch for parties of 5 ragers together... which brings up my next suggestion.

for PvP instances:
If someone is raging and opening gates for the other team, they're moving AND they may be in the group's area. In this case I like the option of being able to double click on their name in the party bar and checking a box of some sort.
If the person gets his box checked say ... 50 times ( or whatever - you'd have to guess at a good ratio x times per hour or x times per day etc.) in a certain period of time, they should have one of those titles (like "im not a team player") automatically inserted under their name for 1 week or something. This should carry across the whole account and should not be removeable by the player and should over-ride ALL other titles across the account for it's duration.

You may not be able to completely stop ragers but you'd slow em down a bunch by identifying them to the community. This way the community would have a little control over the situation instead of unrealisticly expecting anet to be able to keep track of all of the freeloaders.

I would be against having a positive checkbox since they could just have their guildies/friends check them back up into a good standing. I think you'd only be able to vote for someone once per mission... this way if you go into a random area and are unfortunate enough to get stuck with the same guy you could vote again speeding up the process, yet wouldn't be able to spam check one person by yourself for spite.

This option should only be available during missions of course to stop people from party hopping in towns and spam checking all the mebers then moving on. I think a week is a good time that way if they have a change of heart and decide to play right they get another chance. You could either just have them wear the title itself or you could put a number after it that slowly goes down over the week. Let's say you get in a group of eliteists and they call you a noob and say you're stupid or whatever... they all check your box.
you have 7 to 11 checks but not 50 so you wouldn't have the title.
I think if you get NO additional checks in a 24hour period your number should start going down 1 point every three hours.

You could even add the title to your title bar under the hero option so you could check your standing. Again, the title wouldn't be defaulted to your character until you reach the magic number (50 in the examples). This would stop your "funny" guildmate from causing damage when he checks you and laughs.

For example... john is a rager... eventually he gets 50 checks by party members over a period of two days. Now all his characters have a title saying "I'm not a team player" and in his title menu it has the number 50 after it. After 24 hours of no additional checks his number goes down by 1 every 3 hours. Code it in that people with the title couldnt enter random PvP or cooperative missions.

Add it to the terms of service so you don't get sued for not letting people play the game they bought. Have them electronically sign that if theyre turds they will lose certain priviledges for a short period of time. Once they sign that... we're golden.

Either way you would be able to identify people who you wouldn't want in your party, and hopefully wouldn't get stuck with a rager in a random mission. Offenders would still be able to do PvE missions with guildies/henchies or anyone WILLING to take them into their party (the first suggestion for PvE freeloaders would still come into play) but would be stopped from ruining PvP for other players.

There may be an even better way, but this is what came to mind on short notice. Sorry it's a little here and there, I was distracted a little.

AlyssaMarcia · May 28, 2006, 12:21 AM // 00:21

/signed

xenoranger · May 30, 2006, 12:23 PM // 12:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by priabirch

I like the idea as much as the next.
Personally I like the away from group option.
I think the option to kick should only be available when someone is away from the group for more than 5 minutes.

Abbreviated....

Quote:

Originally Posted by priabirch

There may be an even better way, but this is what came to mind on short notice. Sorry it's a little here and there, I was distracted a little.

Not sure if I read it correctly, but the tile of non-team player shouldn't be one you can choose to or not to display. It should always be visible IMO if they went with a concept such as yours. . Again, I think someone mentioned the message board karma rating earlier on. This'd tell who's helpful and who's hurtful in conversations. Well, it'd be nice to see that as well.

Once again, I'll say that any system can be abused. Although thte chances are slim, if you end up in a group with the same person more than once, they could tell others that you stole from them and they could get the odds stacked against you. Some will say, oh, that's not likely, but it is in Random Arenas. I got the same guy in my group 5 times in a row. It's funny, but the things you think can't happen do at times.

Fitz Rinley · May 30, 2006, 01:24 PM // 13:24

But, but, but - you can't do this. The poor hard working bots will starve if they can't farm faction and gold by going AFK on parties. The idea is horendous.

Fitz

xenoranger · May 30, 2006, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

But, but, but - you can't do this. The poor hard working bots will starve if they can't farm faction and gold by going AFK on parties. The idea is horendous.

Fitz

Meh.. do it the old fashion way and have people in a Chinese sweat shop farm for you. Then you can sell the goal for real cash.

=p

Ggraphix · May 30, 2006, 05:51 PM // 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Majority of other players to kick someone?

Scene: A 2 man UW run

Ecto drops for player 1
Player 2 (100% of non-player-1) kicks player1 for being 'afk'
Player 2 picks up an Ecto

Now if it was made in a way to prevent anything of that sort happening, then /signed

You wouldn't be able to kick people from a group of less than 4. You couldn't get 3 votes.

If a player is chosen to be kicked he/she should get the end mission option of taking his/her items.

but kicking would be good for afkers, /boot(playersname), and at least 3 have to do it

llsektorll · May 30, 2006, 05:54 PM // 17:54

2 scammers come into terrorize a party... how are you going to boot them if you need 7 out of 8 votes?

xenoranger · May 30, 2006, 07:23 PM // 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by llsektorll

2 scammers come into terrorize a party... how are you going to boot them if you need 7 out of 8 votes?

majority
5/8 to pass a vote