In terms of the leaver penalty I think it just hurts the players trying to run content. I used to play my healer in just about any type of random except when I needed to use one of my other toons to complete a quest or something.
For me the leaver penalty means nothing and presumably it hurts the DPS players more so than the Tank or Healer that actually gets the penalty as that is one less tank or healer that cannot do the queue for at least an extra 30-minutes and from the way the system works then if the Tank has to wait then most likely so does everyone else.
That being said, I used to just leave a random after a few minutes of doing nothing or if I got something I did not want to do. At the time I did not care and presumed I would probably get it done eventually or not all.
Now, I no longer do randoms at all unless the alliance advertises for a Healer or DPS for RTQ or RDQ and I am not already doing something else.
I no longer do RADQ at all and I only consider it on occasion when viewing the quest line requiring you to do RADQ 5x to complete it.
I believe their inclusion of seal requirements for boon points is necessary as a way to keep players interested in doing randoms for a little longer as I know I would not be doing them at all if it were not for some of the free stuff I want from the battle pass and the fact that my alts need seals to get their boons and other campaign items associated with the seals means I am also taking my tanks and other healers into it as well.
In terms of the leaver penalty I think it just hurts the players trying to run content.
Pretty much.
When the "stacking debuff" joke was originally made, keeping the leaver penalty was in mind. Removing the leaver penalty (queue lockout) could prove beneficial... though for "balance", still thinking that reducing the bonus AD (to a certain degree) for leaving could work to deter leaving. Let's say the current 36k for completing a RDQ is the maximum and after leaving it is reduced by "x%" RAD up to "y" times while the reduction can be removed by up to one tier per day.
For example:
- 36k BRAD for not leaving a RDQ. - 34k BRAD for leaving 1 RDQ. - 32k BRAD for leaving 2 RDQ's. - 30k BRAD (maximum reduction) for leaving 3 RDQ's. - Once per day the reduction can be removed by 1 tier by completing a RDQ. - Each RQ type would have it's own "bonus modifier".
In the example up to 6k isn't a whole lot of BRAD to miss out on (though it would add up over time lol) and players can freely leave queues if they don't like the content, potentially resulting in less groups being held hostage.
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
In terms of the leaver penalty I think it just hurts the players trying to run content.
Pretty much.
When the "stacking debuff" joke was originally made, keeping the leaver penalty was in mind. Removing the leaver penalty (queue lockout) could prove beneficial... though for "balance", still thinking that reducing the bonus AD (to a certain degree) for leaving could work to deter leaving. Let's say the current 36k for completing a RDQ is the maximum and after leaving it is reduced by "x%" RAD up to "y" times while the reduction can be removed by up to one tier per day.
For example:
- 36k BRAD for not leaving a RDQ. - 34k BRAD for leaving 1 RDQ. - 32k BRAD for leaving 2 RDQ's. - 30k BRAD (maximum reduction) for leaving 3 RDQ's. - Once per day the reduction can be removed by 1 tier by completing a RDQ. - Each RQ type would have it's own "bonus modifier".
In the example up to 6k isn't a whole lot of BRAD to miss out on (though it would add up over time lol) and players can freely leave queues if they don't like the content, potentially resulting in less groups being held hostage.
6K penalty is virtually no penalty. Cryptic may as well get rid of the penalty because it is relatively low programming cost comparing implementing a new penalty system. It is a "6K fee" to de-select the "random" dungeon of your choice.
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
6K penalty is virtually no penalty. Cryptic may as well get rid of the penalty because it is relatively low programming cost comparing implementing a new penalty system. It is a "6K fee" to de-select the "random" dungeon of your choice.
6k was an example, it could always be higher LoL.
Kind of like when making a trade, the seller usually wants the buyer to present an offer first and vice versa for the buyer wanting the seller to present a price. 6k is a starting point, it gives room for adjustments
Personally wouldn't mind if it were higher because when RQ'ing the intent for this player is to run the content regardless of what is selected.
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
Don't think that the quoted post above was directed at the OP...
Posting a thread on the forums makes it available for users to post/respond. Forum topics are not a personal portal to engage with the devs and no one else, that's what private messages are for...
People can and will respond to topics, especially suggestion topics and especially if someone can see potential issues within and are making the effort to be constructive.
oh hell no. The only reason I'm posting here is because the support people told me to because supposedly this was the way to get the devs to see my problem. I'm not interested in any of your commentary. If you tell me the devs aren't going to look at this then I guess I'll email cryptic directly.
I reported a spam post yesterday and it's still there today. We ask for responses to things in here from the current CM and get nothing. Tbh I think at the current time and with the current employment crisis issues in the company this forum is not even being monitored. I noticed the other day that while he seems MIA here, the CM is very active on the Discord channel so I suggest going there. This place seems to be the last thing on their agenda right now.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
What if there was a "vote to re-roll" option to choose another random dungeon or trial? Maybe with a cost attached... It would make choosing the dungeon like playing a fruit machine
1
plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,451Arc User
What if there was a "vote to re-roll" option to choose another random dungeon or trial? Maybe with a cost attached... It would make choosing the dungeon like playing a fruit machine
In this case, why should they bother to have the random queue? They may as well just set different rAD amount for different dungeon and get rid of the RQ system. This is much simple without doing all the complicate things that cost time and frustration such as voting, choosing, hating the voting result, etc.
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
1
greywyndMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 7,158Arc User
What if there was a "vote to re-roll" option to choose another random dungeon or trial? Maybe with a cost attached... It would make choosing the dungeon like playing a fruit machine
Keep in mind that someone in that party may have direct queued for the content and you're just there to fill up the party.
I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
What if there was a "vote to re-roll" option to choose another random dungeon or trial? Maybe with a cost attached...
Theoretically it sounds good, though it involves voting and if a player doesn't get their way then stands around doing nothing/teleports out of the instance then what?
They may as well just set different rAD amount for different dungeon and get rid of the RQ system. This is much simple without doing all the complicate things that cost time and frustration such as voting, choosing, hating the voting result, etc.
So far this makes the most sense though may probably result in even longer queue times with players queuing for various content, but still makes the most sense overall in regard to ease of implementation.
The leaver penalty currently is heavily flawed due to the way it can be circumvented by forcing the group to vote kick the offending player. If all vote kicks resulted in a penalty then unfounded vote kicks will affect legitimate players. If players were somehow attempted to be forced to keep up with the group, the offending player could just follow along and not contribute.
Unfortunately for a "penalty" system to function it would essentially have to work the majority of the time without circumvention, if possible at all lol.
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
Comments
For me the leaver penalty means nothing and presumably it hurts the DPS players more so than the Tank or Healer that actually gets the penalty as that is one less tank or healer that cannot do the queue for at least an extra 30-minutes and from the way the system works then if the Tank has to wait then most likely so does everyone else.
That being said, I used to just leave a random after a few minutes of doing nothing or if I got something I did not want to do.
At the time I did not care and presumed I would probably get it done eventually or not all.
Now, I no longer do randoms at all unless the alliance advertises for a Healer or DPS for RTQ or RDQ and I am not already doing something else.
I no longer do RADQ at all and I only consider it on occasion when viewing the quest line requiring you to do RADQ 5x to complete it.
I believe their inclusion of seal requirements for boon points is necessary as a way to keep players interested in doing randoms for a little longer as I know I would not be doing them at all if it were not for some of the free stuff I want from the battle pass and the fact that my alts need seals to get their boons and other campaign items associated with the seals means I am also taking my tanks and other healers into it as well.
When the "stacking debuff" joke was originally made, keeping the leaver penalty was in mind. Removing the leaver penalty (queue lockout) could prove beneficial... though for "balance", still thinking that reducing the bonus AD (to a certain degree) for leaving could work to deter leaving. Let's say the current 36k for completing a RDQ is the maximum and after leaving it is reduced by "x%" RAD up to "y" times while the reduction can be removed by up to one tier per day.
For example:
- 36k BRAD for not leaving a RDQ.
- 34k BRAD for leaving 1 RDQ.
- 32k BRAD for leaving 2 RDQ's.
- 30k BRAD (maximum reduction) for leaving 3 RDQ's.
- Once per day the reduction can be removed by 1 tier by completing a RDQ.
- Each RQ type would have it's own "bonus modifier".
In the example up to 6k isn't a whole lot of BRAD to miss out on (though it would add up over time lol) and players can freely leave queues if they don't like the content, potentially resulting in less groups being held hostage.
“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
Kind of like when making a trade, the seller usually wants the buyer to present an offer first and vice versa for the buyer wanting the seller to present a price. 6k is a starting point, it gives room for adjustments
Personally wouldn't mind if it were higher because when RQ'ing the intent for this player is to run the content regardless of what is selected.
“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 make choosing the dungeon like playing a fruit machine
The leaver penalty currently is heavily flawed due to the way it can be circumvented by forcing the group to vote kick the offending player. If all vote kicks resulted in a penalty then unfounded vote kicks will affect legitimate players. If players were somehow attempted to be forced to keep up with the group, the offending player could just follow along and not contribute.
Unfortunately for a "penalty" system to function it would essentially have to work the majority of the time without circumvention, if possible at all lol.
“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