So either rework IG (maybe like if you enter by queueing directly its the gold version, if you get in by RQ its bronze)
IG is pretty old mod 11 content. They are not making any changes to it other than moving it around. And that they did for mod 14 into the leveling queue. Which is great. I love this change.
Now that vote-riggers can't take 11K players from epic queue, all the vote-rigging shenanigans should mostly be a thing of the past. They can still do it, but leveling queue is full low-geared players, some as low as 3K, who won't mind getting taken. Of course there will still be a few well-geared players who dip into leveling queue and will use their special set of afk skills if they get taken! FWIW, I think these people should do gold for the newer players because the stay vote is more likely to be organic instead of rigged.
There is no such thing as vote rigging. Also, AD should only be rewarded for Gold Completion, just like any other skirmish.
Except that there is literally NO dungeon/skirmish that you have to complete with gold to get the AD reward for daily RQ. Geez, you even can fail svardborg and still get the daily AD! You can lose STC and it still counts as completed!
Complete also does not require success. In SVA, if you run out of time, you failed and get no reward. But you still completed it and are paid for your time. IG is the same. You wipe, you failed and get no reward. But you still completed it and are paid for your time.
Do people always have a successful outcome in the tasks they do at work? No. But they still get paid for their time.
but leveling queue is full low-geared players, some as low as 3K, who won't mind getting taken.
Scratch that. I was in IG today and I saw three level 20s with 600 iLvl. Then there was a 9K, and my 1.3K OP. Before we went in, I put in chat that we should just wipe. Once we got in, the others fought hard to stay alive. So I was like, okay, I can use the XP. After 10 minutes, we finally finished.
Then the voting. Me and the 9k voted leave. Two of the 600 had gone down and didn't bother to release to vote. The third 600 took his time before voting leave. He had to think about it LOL.
There is no such thing as vote rigging. Also, AD should only be rewarded for Gold Completion, just like any other skirmish.
Groups of threes queue up for IG with an agreement to go gold. That looks like a conspiracy to vote rig to me.
The run can end with bronze, silver, and gold reward. That looks like a complete to me.
Complete means complete. There is no special meaning of complete for IG.
Make your own group of three and the you can "rig the vote". Simple. If you want certain outcome to result, make the effort to get that result. Instead you choose to AFK, because you didn't get way.
Make your own group of three and the you can "rig the vote". Simple. If you want certain outcome to result, make the effort to get that result. Instead you choose to AFK, because you didn't get way.
Not so simple. I feel rigging the vote is a bit dishonest and unfair to the other two players. I won't use the "want a certain outcome" to rationalize it. I AFKed mainly to serve as a reminder that some victims do fight back.
Since mod 14 landed, I haven't AFKed in IG because I don't do it. I still queue for leveling queue, but only for MotH/DL. I leave on dungeons or IG as I don't want my 14Ks to deal with low-level players for too long. With MotH/DL, I just smash everything in a small area and leave for easy RAD and seals. I'm not even bothered by AFks there because I'm so grateful to get MotH/DL I will gladly solo it in three minutes.
I do queue directly for IG on an OP I am leveling up. It's a great place to level up. Most of the time, its an all lowbie player run. But that's ok, I'm there for XP, and usually they are not interested in gold runs. A few times a well-geared player shows up and, surprise surprise, the others are interested in gold. It's funny when I see ranting AFKs. I always vote leave but will continue to participate as there is still XP for me. Well-geared players that stick around for IG, they shouldn't be surprised when a bunch of lowbies want gold.
...I think if you allow just a little bit of leaway with regard to not constantly forcing people to play stuff they don't want, you'll see less toxic behaviour from players.
That's true for some, but there's a substantial number of players who specifically join certain queues because they're ideal for AFKing, and they can make a tidy profit from purples.
Dread Legion's a perfect example. They want to be there. They don't particularly want to get kicked. And they very rarely are unless the average IL happens to be lower than usual, and the skirmish drags on long enough - but it's not such a big deal to them. Five minutes later, and they're back in queue leeching off the next group. They farm the same queue for hours at a time.
This is why I think the most perfect solution would be to find some way to incorporate our block list when compiling queues. The more people these toxic players annoy, the more they're blocked, and the more difficult it will be for them to queue up. If only one other player in a queue has blocked them, they're not getting in.
If someone AFKing the 3 or 4 minutes of Dread Legion is a problem then its one I can live with.
If everyone has a block list associated with the Random Queue selection, its going to get very messy with the logistics and implementation. Its worth remembering that people can very indiscriminate with blocks. "Guy just sped past me to get to the boss first... block!" "That one just won the last five loot rolls... block!" "Oh, God... she's in that Guild I used to be in...BLOCK!!!!"
I know that doesn't apply to normal people, but... there's a lot of people who play games on the internet who wield their block button like its some Divine Avenger sent to descend on the slightest offence, even when none were intended. I would hate to think that NWO would introduce a feature that actually gives these people power.
I don't know how difficult it would be to introduce a kind of proximity AoE to loot pick ups? That way if you are in the same room, everyone gets the roll. But if you Flashed off down the tunnel to kill the next room full of monsters while your loot mules collect your goodies, tough luck.
I don't know what its like on PC now, but won't the availability of the same +4 & better +5 Companion Gear from the new lockbox (That is also unbound and therefore available on the AH) reduce the number of people wanting to go Gold in IG?
I know there will still be people who, either can't afford the gear or are masochistic enough to enjoy three rounds of mind numbing wave battles, but It will be a lot fewer than currently. So if you want to go Gold, group building in PE first is probably going to be the best way.
When you join any Random Queue you know there's a chance you might end up in your least favourite element of that queue. If that happens to be IG (either Bronze or Gold) thats part of the deal. There was probably some logic involved in making it vote based, but I think that whoever made that decision now realises that its not exactly won many fans. If it appears again on any future content I would be very surprised.
If everyone has a block list associated with the Random Queue selection, its going to get very messy with the logistics and implementation. Its worth remembering that people can very indiscriminate with blocks. "Guy just sped past me to get to the boss first... block!" "That one just won the last five loot rolls... block!" "Oh, God... she's in that Guild I used to be in...BLOCK!!!!"
I know that doesn't apply to normal people, but... there's a lot of people who play games on the internet who wield their block button like its some Divine Avenger sent to descend on the slightest offence, even when none were intended. I would hate to think that NWO would introduce a feature that actually gives these people power.
Which is part of the reason at least the vote-kick system functions as it does currently, abuse.
"Less likely" (however much that is) to queue with those on your block list doesn't sound like a bad idea, even if people are put on someone's block list for petty reasons it wouldn't effect the group matching as adversely as not matching with them at all.
Abuse arguably is in part why the player base can't have good things, the other part is the seemingly minimal direct effort the publisher/developers put in to help maintain a positive environment.
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
If everyone has a block list associated with the Random Queue selection, its going to get very messy with the logistics and implementation. Its worth remembering that people can very indiscriminate with blocks. "Guy just sped past me to get to the boss first... block!" "That one just won the last five loot rolls... block!" "Oh, God... she's in that Guild I used to be in...BLOCK!!!!"
People can block as indiscriminately as they like, and most well meaning players who've been blocked for silly reasons will never notice any difference.
It would take hundreds, maybe thousands of blocks for it to be felt. Even an abusive player will take some time to pile up that many. Though I don't doubt that there are people who've been so awful over the years that they're already on that many lists - botted accounts too. If they haven't already, they'd earn those numbers inside of a month.
It only takes one block to have a positive effect for a player who uses it for legitimate reasons.
But if it's such a huge concern, perhaps an in-game block list with limited space could work. Every player gets 10 or something.
The point I'm trying to make is that if a random queue function has to correlate all the combinations of every player queuing's block lists it will eventually cause bottlenecks and logic function glitches that can change, "you queue, you wait, you play" into something that can potentially lock people out for nothing more than one guy deciding their Healer wasn't buffing enough last time they ran together. Cos, and this might be hard to believe, those indiscriminate blockers may have blocked YOU for some trivial perceived slight.
Yes, I understand, it would be lovely if we could pick and choose who we do and don't end up with in Random Queues and general PUGs. But I would be very surprised if the devs, given the fact that RQs are intended to speed up the queueing process, would introduce an additional selection factor that actively slows that process down.
Surely no one would abuse the block feature by using it on weak players and players who votes IG gold.
Of course not. Everybody in NW loves each other and everyone strives to help one another...
Neither would the possibility ever arise that if it became a feature that you could block players from your queues that a guild of typically high IL players decide that there are too many 10k plebs slowing down Epic Dungeon runs down now that said plebs can access those dungeons through Intermediate RQ for daily rAD. And obviously such a guild would never ever encourage members to block said plebs on principle. And they would never ever ever share the tags of those blocked with guild mates so they can block them too, and avoid having to run with "hangers on".
Sarcasm aside... Microsoft prefer people to befriend rather than block as shared social networking helps their data harvesting capacity to monitor and improve the X Box Experience. I don't play many MMOs so don't know if it is a typical feature to use tag blocking of Gold accts in group play within a game, as anything that encourages mass blocking is detrimental to the MS business model. Not sure they'd be too keen...
Who cares if people mass block. Let them. It's a two-edged sword. Someone with hundreds of blocked players on their list is going to wait longer for queues. Besides, the idea that normal players are going to be blocked out of existence at the drop of a hat is ludicrous. And no, I doubt very much that I'm on many blocked lists because I don't treat other players like garbage. I don't leech. I don't AFK, and I don't look for carries. All these doomsday - sky is falling predictions are a waste of time. Everything is open to abuse. Doing nothing is open to abuse.
Besides, it's hardly anybody else's concern why someone's blocking a person. The point is. If they don't want to play with someone, why are they being forced to? Look at how a lot of players respond now when they queue with someone they don't like - they: vote to kick, leave, afk, disconnect, put up with it, or they stop playing - meanwhile, nobody in that situation's having any fun (except maybe the annoying player).
This claim that blocking players is detrimental to business models is also silly. For every single negative player developers allow to prosper, they lose bucketfuls of players who are tired of dealing with that individual. The last time I played, I ran into a deadbeat from my block list, endured the same garbage behavior that I initially blocked that idiot for, and then logged off. That was going on three weeks ago. That's not the only reason why I haven't been playing, but it's one of them. The one thing I can't stand about this game is being forced to deal with social incompetents that I've blocked.
If I block someone because I think they're a wretched person, that's my prerogative, and that should be the end of it.
Blocking players doesn't seem to work in NW, I have blocked people for being Douches in NW (bullying other players, blocking exit doors, camping out chests that sort of stuff) and they still show up in dungeons, they don't show up in other games such as COD so it works there however it never seems to work in NW.
Comments
Now that vote-riggers can't take 11K players from epic queue, all the vote-rigging shenanigans should mostly be a thing of the past. They can still do it, but leveling queue is full low-geared players, some as low as 3K, who won't mind getting taken. Of course there will still be a few well-geared players who dip into leveling queue and will use their special set of afk skills if they get taken! FWIW, I think these people should do gold for the newer players because the stay vote is more likely to be organic instead of rigged.
The run can end with bronze, silver, and gold reward. That looks like a complete to me.
Complete means complete. There is no special meaning of complete for IG.
Do people always have a successful outcome in the tasks they do at work? No. But they still get paid for their time.
Then the voting. Me and the 9k voted leave. Two of the 600 had gone down and didn't bother to release to vote. The third 600 took his time before voting leave. He had to think about it LOL.
Since mod 14 landed, I haven't AFKed in IG because I don't do it. I still queue for leveling queue, but only for MotH/DL. I leave on dungeons or IG as I don't want my 14Ks to deal with low-level players for too long. With MotH/DL, I just smash everything in a small area and leave for easy RAD and seals. I'm not even bothered by AFks there because I'm so grateful to get MotH/DL I will gladly solo it in three minutes.
I do queue directly for IG on an OP I am leveling up. It's a great place to level up. Most of the time, its an all lowbie player run. But that's ok, I'm there for XP, and usually they are not interested in gold runs. A few times a well-geared player shows up and, surprise surprise, the others are interested in gold. It's funny when I see ranting AFKs. I always vote leave but will continue to participate as there is still XP for me. Well-geared players that stick around for IG, they shouldn't be surprised when a bunch of lowbies want gold.
If everyone has a block list associated with the Random Queue selection, its going to get very messy with the logistics and implementation. Its worth remembering that people can very indiscriminate with blocks.
"Guy just sped past me to get to the boss first... block!"
"That one just won the last five loot rolls... block!"
"Oh, God... she's in that Guild I used to be in...BLOCK!!!!"
I know that doesn't apply to normal people, but... there's a lot of people who play games on the internet who wield their block button like its some Divine Avenger sent to descend on the slightest offence, even when none were intended. I would hate to think that NWO would introduce a feature that actually gives these people power.
I don't know how difficult it would be to introduce a kind of proximity AoE to loot pick ups?
That way if you are in the same room, everyone gets the roll. But if you Flashed off down the tunnel to kill the next room full of monsters while your loot mules collect your goodies, tough luck.
I know there will still be people who, either can't afford the gear or are masochistic enough to enjoy three rounds of mind numbing wave battles, but It will be a lot fewer than currently. So if you want to go Gold, group building in PE first is probably going to be the best way.
When you join any Random Queue you know there's a chance you might end up in your least favourite element of that queue.
If that happens to be IG (either Bronze or Gold) thats part of the deal.
There was probably some logic involved in making it vote based, but I think that whoever made that decision now realises that its not exactly won many fans.
If it appears again on any future content I would be very surprised.
"Less likely" (however much that is) to queue with those on your block list doesn't sound like a bad idea, even if people are put on someone's block list for petty reasons it wouldn't effect the group matching as adversely as not matching with them at all.
Abuse arguably is in part why the player base can't have good things, the other part is the seemingly minimal direct effort the publisher/developers put in to help maintain a positive environment.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
It would take hundreds, maybe thousands of blocks for it to be felt. Even an abusive player will take some time to pile up that many. Though I don't doubt that there are people who've been so awful over the years that they're already on that many lists - botted accounts too. If they haven't already, they'd earn those numbers inside of a month.
It only takes one block to have a positive effect for a player who uses it for legitimate reasons.
But if it's such a huge concern, perhaps an in-game block list with limited space could work. Every player gets 10 or something.
Cos, and this might be hard to believe, those indiscriminate blockers may have blocked YOU for some trivial perceived slight.
Yes, I understand, it would be lovely if we could pick and choose who we do and don't end up with in Random Queues and general PUGs. But I would be very surprised if the devs, given the fact that RQs are intended to speed up the queueing process, would introduce an additional selection factor that actively slows that process down.
Everybody in NW loves each other and everyone strives to help one another...
Neither would the possibility ever arise that if it became a feature that you could block players from your queues that a guild of typically high IL players decide that there are too many 10k plebs slowing down Epic Dungeon runs down now that said plebs can access those dungeons through Intermediate RQ for daily rAD.
And obviously such a guild would never ever encourage members to block said plebs on principle.
And they would never ever ever share the tags of those blocked with guild mates so they can block them too, and avoid having to run with "hangers on".
Sarcasm aside...
Microsoft prefer people to befriend rather than block as shared social networking helps their
data harvestingcapacity to monitor and improve the X Box Experience.I don't play many MMOs so don't know if it is a typical feature to use tag blocking of Gold accts in group play within a game, as anything that encourages mass blocking is detrimental to the MS business model.
Not sure they'd be too keen...
Besides, it's hardly anybody else's concern why someone's blocking a person. The point is. If they don't want to play with someone, why are they being forced to? Look at how a lot of players respond now when they queue with someone they don't like - they: vote to kick, leave, afk, disconnect, put up with it, or they stop playing - meanwhile, nobody in that situation's having any fun (except maybe the annoying player).
This claim that blocking players is detrimental to business models is also silly. For every single negative player developers allow to prosper, they lose bucketfuls of players who are tired of dealing with that individual. The last time I played, I ran into a deadbeat from my block list, endured the same garbage behavior that I initially blocked that idiot for, and then logged off. That was going on three weeks ago. That's not the only reason why I haven't been playing, but it's one of them. The one thing I can't stand about this game is being forced to deal with social incompetents that I've blocked.
If I block someone because I think they're a wretched person, that's my prerogative, and that should be the end of it.