CO had a rash of similar discussions when they added Alerts. They functioned like skirmishes but some where timed and as such had a chance of failure. Needless to say, if folks felt the mission was going to be a no-win some would just bail. This obviously caused frustration.
Problem is, while bailing is annoying. There are also legitimate reasons for it. You couldn't kick anyone out of an alert, you were not even grouped. So you would get trolls, leeches, bots, ect. Put simply, there were a lot of ways folks could ruin others fun. And no one should have to be punished for not wanting to accept that.
Its a similar system here. Granted some of the rules are different. Some of the ways folks could annoy others is not the same. But there are other new ways introduced as well. No one should feel the need to be compelled to stick with a bad group or bad personalities simply because of a game mechanic. You cant always kick them, you arn't always in change, the option to remove ones self from a bad situation needs to remain. Or you are simply going to punish people for not wanting to be punished by others. its a loose loose.
Besides, penalties rarely end up as something anyone is happy with. Some accept them as a means to an end. Some resent them. But they are hardly ever the best solution. There should be mechanics to empower and reward players for playing well and socially. Rather then to punish them when they fail to meet some standard not everyone might agree on.
I am glad sockmunkey at least gets what I am saying.
I use to pug a lot in DDO and I i am not very difficult on who joins my lfms but on the occasion I run into an arsehat I want to be able to reform without them without being penalized for it.
Oh and the whole account suspension thing for leaving a group no matter how many times you do it is frigging ludicrous.
I don't care what they do with pvp anymore but when you say give a penalty to leavers in pve what happens when your in a pug and the team isn't good, either not the ideal team make-up or the team just isn't working well together and can't defeat the end boss and his countless adds?
Most peeps in pugs will leave after a few tries and wipes rather than waste resources (pots and kits) so what happens they all get a leavers penalty?
Sorry but for the pve side this doesn't seem well thought out.
You will end up with peeps wasting time to avoid the penalty when the team has no chance or peeps with a penalty because some of the pug wanted to glitch and exploit and some don't want to do it that way etc etc
Sorry but any punitive system put in place, especially like what teykos suggested, will make even more people leave the game.
Dunno but the game has enough problems and issues without adding in more.
I've reached dungeons which the team simply can not do, which is fine. A system for the team to agree to quit is necessary.
However if the team doesn't want to quit then a leaving penalty is necessary.
Not for times where the boss is hard...
But for the time that you get to the end of a dungeon and the person says "I have to go, bye!" before reaching the boss or after only one attempt.
As I said the system needs to be forgiving to rare occurences...
And punish those who consistently leave parties when the group doesn't agree to leave.
It's a basic necessity in any group game since as a group event players are relying on the members of the team to remain with the group.
If you do not then you are, in fact, hurting other players which is not something I take lightly.
*note as a part of being forgiving I don't care if you leave in the first few minutes. But if you leave past 5-10 minutes into the dungeon I view the chance to leave as already passed.
I've reached dungeons which the team simply can not do, which is fine. A system for the team to agree to quit is necessary.
However if the team doesn't want to quit then a leaving penalty is necessary.
Not for times where the boss is hard...
But for the time that you get to the end of a dungeon and the person says "I have to go, bye!" before reaching the boss or after only one attempt.
As I said the system needs to be forgiving to rare occurences...
And punish those who consistently leave parties when the group doesn't agree to leave.
It's a basic necessity in any group game since as a group event players are relying on the members of the team to remain with the group.
If you do not then you are, in fact, hurting other players which is not something I take lightly.
*note as a part of being forgiving I don't care if you leave in the first few minutes. But if you leave past 5-10 minutes into the dungeon I view the chance to leave as already passed.
Sorry but you are way way off base here what this amounts to is becoming a "hostage" to the majority of the group which is insane.
This would be in effect be a in game name and shame mechanism with very little actual control over how it is used. There is no way to really police such a system which is why the name and shame is a big no no in these forum yet you want to essentially add this in game.
The fundamental problem is the queuing system and you guys are trying to invent/add ludicrous rules to make up for its fail.
GO back to basic, KISS and fix the queuing system.
Sorry but you are way way off base here what this amounts to is becoming a "hostage" to the majority of the group which is insane.
This would be in effect be a in game name and shame mechanism with very little actual control over how it is used. There is no way to really police such a system which is way the name and shame is a big no no in these forum yet you want to essentially add this in game.
The fundamental problem is the queuing system and you guys are trying to invent/add ludicrous rules to make up for its fail.
GO back to basic, KISS and fix the queuing system.
I did say that I didn't think the thought would fly with people.
However, claiming the queuing system as the fundamental problem is just as ludicrous. It's never just one main problem. Fixing the queuing system isn't going to make more people want to play Guardian Fighter or Devoted Cleric, for example. But if it wasn't obvious enough from my previous comments, it WOULD be nice to have that overhauled before any sort of penalty assessment about queues goes in.
I've reached dungeons which the team simply can not do, which is fine. A system for the team to agree to quit is necessary.
However if the team doesn't want to quit then a leaving penalty is necessary.
I shouldn't be penalized for leaving a group that is participating in exploiting. There is no way to design the system to be intuitive enough to distinguish between legitimate practices within the group and illegitimate.
The best course of action is to design a replacement system where members can be easily replaced (i.e. entering the queue for a dungeon while being inside the dungeon searches for replacements to fill the party, the party is 'placed on top of the stack' as far as building the group from the queue).
This solves both the problem of people not being a hostage to the happenings of their group, and gives the groups the ability to quickly and painlessly refill their group after a departure.
I did say that I didn't think the thought would fly with people.
However, claiming the queuing system as the fundamental problem is just as ludicrous. It's never just one main problem. Fixing the queuing system isn't going to make more people want to play Guardian Fighter or Devoted Cleric, for example. But if it wasn't obvious enough from my previous comments, it WOULD be nice to have that overhauled before any sort of penalty assessment about queues goes in.
The main problem IS the queuing system, we have no control over what class we want when we queue, no way to add people once in and someone drops, no control over who we accept into our groups and when in dungeons the leader can kick people which should be a no no etc etc. All this is from a pve point of view btw.
There are other problems with the game sure but plenty of people play guardian fighters. I in fact play a TR and GF and favor my GF. Balance issues are not to be confused with grouping issues which this ludicrous leavers penalty is all about.
Penalties are not the way to go but rather control over your own lfm.
I shouldn't be penalized for leaving a group that is participating in exploiting. There is no way to design the system to be intuitive enough to distinguish between legitimate practices within the group and illegitimate.
That's a different issue altogether.
The exploits need to be resolved, no debate there, but exploits won't be commonplace for long and hopefully would be fixed before any such punishment system was implemented.
The exploits need to be resolved, no debate there, but exploits won't be commonplace for long and hopefully would be fixed before any such punishment system was implemented.
Even if every piece of content is fixed for the current content, new content will always be released and it's safe to say it will generally always have a degree of bugs that allow for exploitation. Punishing legitimate players will be a recurring problem if a punishment system is implemented as the 'solution' to losing players in dungeons.
A way to quickly and efficiently replace players will solve both the desire to leave and the desire to continue for the parties involved. Simply making it a punishable offense doesn't get the group to finish any faster.
Implementing a re-queue option to replace leavers is better for both the group and the leaver.
The part of this system that fails is that it doesn't take into account bad parties. What if you get an absolutely horrible group that wipes on adds and can't even clear the first boss? This is so limited and awful in scope. It's not like you can solo dungeons by yourself, or one persons efforts really amount to much in the face of an entire team of incompetents. You can instruct and lead, bargain and plead, but some people just aren't very good at their classes. End game bosses are going to be harder than ever with the new balance patch coming out that essentially eliminates the pug groups. This system is just going to make long queues even longer, because the few pugs people like me who even bother attending won't be attended anymore. It'll be 99.99% guilds only that ever clear end game content. Why should anyone be penalized and burdened with people who can't play? Or taking this a step further, what if you meet someone on a party who just outright harasses you and some party leader who doesn't speak your language or just doesn't care? Should you be penalized for leaving? No, it's wrong. This whole system is wrong on principal and I will not agree to it on any level.
0
bioshrikeMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,729Arc User
edited June 2013
Perhaps, as some others have mentioned, a "disband group" vote option should be added - if at least 3/5 people agree, then the group is disbanded and you are taken out of the dungeon, without anyone getting penalized.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Even if every piece of content is fixed for the current content, new content will always be released and it's safe to say it will generally always have a degree of bugs that allow for exploitation. Punishing legitimate players will be a recurring problem if a punishment system is implemented as the 'solution' to losing players in dungeons.
A way to quickly and efficiently replace players will solve both the desire to leave and the desire to continue for the parties involved. Simply making it a punishable offense doesn't get the group to finish any faster.
Implementing a re-queue option to replace leavers is better for both the group and the leaver.
Amen!
How about we stay with a "Innocent until proven guilty" method rather than a "guilty until proven innocent" method which this leavers penalty would be.
You know this would not really solve anything this leaver penalty, I mean whats to keep the person that wants to leave for w/e reason from just alt tabbing and watching his favorite tv show or movie etc or simply logging out.
degraafinationMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited June 2013
Another devil's advocate:
1. You get in group and people want to either speed run or cheat.
2. You don't and decide to leave.
3. You get penalized for doing what you think is right?
How about we stay with a "Innocent until proven guilty" method rather than a "guilty until proven innocent" method which this leavers penalty would be.
You know this would not really solve anything this leaver penalty, I mean whats to keep the person that wants to leave for w/e reason from just alt tabbing and watching his favorite tv show or movie etc or simply logging out.
Hows that going to help with pugs?
Personally, if there ends up any kind of punishment system. Not that I think one is likely. Id simply stop running pugs. Punishment always has a way of bringing a chilling effect that discourages interaction. Why take the chance?
Personally, if there ends up any kind of punishment system. Not that I think one is likely. Id simply stop running pugs. Punishment always has a way of bringing a chilling effect that discourages interaction. Why take the chance?
That's my solution as well. If a system like this is implemented, I will just drop pugs all together go with guild runs only. I think there are a lot of people who already do this anyway though.
That's my solution as well. If a system like this is implemented, I will just drop pugs all together go with guild runs only. I think there are a lot of people who already do this anyway though.
Aye some of us like to pug though but this kind of thing would make me just log on see if guildies are on and want to run epics if not log out.
Penalties for systems are always give and take on the users. While obviously you'd have people who hate them all together, other people would be comforted using a queue system if there was a penalty in place for people who disrupt their time commitment.
However, it really can't be emphasized enough that penalties should come last.
degraafination: Pretty much everyone has suggested that if you leave in the first 5 minutes or so, you should never be penalized. So that's really not a devil's advocate situation. Saying it's the system's fault that a player chooses not to communicate isn't going to carry any sympathy.
The thing is it should be a forgiving system, perhaps with a cooldown, because not everybody who leaves does so without care for other people.
Disconnects happen. Blips in power do occur. Emergencies will arise.
but if you rage quit and tomorrow you found your rewards impacted it might be a bit more foreboding.
15 mins * number of times you have left dungeons early in the last 30 days. With no cap.
Add to this a - 1% * number of times left in last 30 days on the loot tables... but starting at the count of 3.
Because if real accidents DO keep happening, then its still unfair of you towards other people to keep queuing until you get your internet fixed. And if you're just a rude player, the penalty will ramp up really fast.
Mind you this WILL create a problem where people who want to leave will start wiping the group until kicked out... so there would need to be a second system in place to prevent that from being useful...
- But any such system that punished people who got kicked out would result in griefers that kicked folks out just to get that penalty onto them...
So now you need a third system to discourage that...
...
PST timezone older player. Mostly play tanks and healers. Don't game outside of MMOs.
I'm really not sure I should take that post seriously and I promise that is the first time I have every said that to any post on the forums. Come on, if you oppose the idea give a constructive reason to oppose it.
Those reasons are...well put it this way, I could imagine my five year old brother giving those reasons.
You just openly called a customer a five year old, or at the very best referred to said customer as of lesser intelligence.
Penalties for systems are always give and take on the users. While obviously you'd have people who hate them all together, other people would be comforted using a queue system if there was a penalty in place for people who disrupt their time commitment.
However, it really can't be emphasized enough that penalties should come last.
degraafination: Pretty much everyone has suggested that if you leave in the first 5 minutes or so, you should never be penalized. So that's really not a devil's advocate situation. Saying it's the system's fault that a player chooses not to communicate isn't going to carry any sympathy.
Lets take look at the line I highlighted. A penalty for leavers that disrupt other peoples time commitment. I do believe many leavers leave when they feel their time is being wasted. Do you not see the irony?
Do you not think the "leaver" has had his time wasted as well?
It's one thing you can love about DDO they gave us a pretty darn good grouping system you can put a lfm and put a comment of what kind of group you are looking for.
This is the big fail with our queue system its a blind invite with no regard to what the puggers want. In DDO you can put a up a flower sniffers lfm or a zerg lfm or know it be self sufficient. You can put up a "Crush it" lfm or a drunken run lfm etc etc
In this poor excuse of a system, well its.. like a box of chocolates you never know what your gonna get......
I don't see how any kind of penalty will help with this except to frustrate more people than it will actually help and more than likely peeps will stick to guild/channel runs which mean new people with no guild will be left over with fail pug groups.
That's just additional justification for why we need vote kicks.
Agreed. Along the same lines, the person that got randomly selected by the queuing system to be the "leader" should NOT have the ability to kick others.
<::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Lets take look at the line I highlighted. A penalty for leavers that disrupt other peoples time commitment. I do believe many leavers leave when they feel their time is being wasted. Do you not see the irony?
Do you not think the "leaver" has had his time wasted as well?
It's one thing you can love about DDO they gave us a pretty darn good grouping system you can put a lfm and put a comment of what kind of group you are looking for.
This is the big fail with our queue system its a blind invite with no regard to what the puggers want. In DDO you can put a up a flower sniffers lfm or a zerg lfm or know it be self sufficient. You can put up a "Crush it" lfm or a drunken run lfm etc etc
In this poor excuse of a system, well its.. like a box of chocolates you never know what your gonna get......
I don't see how any kind of penalty will help with this except to frustrate more people than it will actually help and more than likely peeps will stick to guild/channel runs which mean new people with no guild will be left over with fail pug groups.
Before we start going down the "who's wasting who's time" road, it's starting to sound like you are unaware of certain options in game.
We are talking solely about Random Queues (K).
What you are waxing nostalgic about with DDO has a Neverwinter equivalent called Find Party and My Party, which are under the Social menu (O). If it is not similar enough, then please elaborate. (I have never played DDO so I couldn't say.)
The people who are using the random queues shouldn't be caring about the details you're talking about. If they did, they should be using the Find Party/My Party and complaining about any problems with that.
I think it is good if you leave all that you have won will be deleted from your bag
and you will see how they will change there mind of leaving before finish the instance
That's just additional justification for why we need vote kicks.
And what happens when 4 premade tards decide to votekick you for the lolz at the end of the dungeon ? Votekick is a toxic anti-fun game mechanic which is not needed here .
And what happens when 4 premade tards decide to votekick you for the lolz at the end of the dungeon ? Votekick is a toxic anti-fun game mechanic which is not needed here .
That's not an argument against vote kicking. That's an argument against a kick option being available at all, because you'd still be screwed with current standards 4 out of 5 times. Good luck with spearheading that.
Before we start going down the "who's wasting who's time" road, it's starting to sound like you are unaware of certain options in game.
We are talking solely about Random Queues (K).
What you are waxing nostalgic about with DDO has a Neverwinter equivalent called Find Party and My Party, which are under the Social menu (O). If it is not similar enough, then please elaborate. (I have never played DDO so I couldn't say.)
The people who are using the random queues shouldn't be caring about the details you're talking about. If they did, they should be using the Find Party/My Party and complaining about any problems with that.
You are missing the point, queuing just randomly throws people together regardless of their play style etc when it should send them to the find party window.
Now the problem with the penalty thing is you all want to penalize peeps for having a different opinion of what is justified or not when it comes to leaving a group.
Much of the grief is caused by this inane queuing system, so change the system instead of trying to force peeps into a specific mold. This will not mean that there never will be problem with peeps, griefers or just being arsehats but then the same can be said of a penalty system.
When peeps get together in "find a group" lets be real and call it what is and that is a random pug group so why this random queuing baloney? Also the find a party is meh right now there was a thread about it but I can't be asked to go find it right now.
Some simple rules once inside a dungeon, no kicking able to be done by anyone, anyone can leave, you can replace a member that has left at any time. Leader can kick anyone that has disconnected, if leader dc then next person in the list becomes the leader automatically.
Would solve most of the problems with "leavers". No one is penalized.
What "Find a Party" are you talking about? There is no such animal that I am aware of. There is the queue, or advertizing in chat which you can be silenced for.
You are missing the point, queuing just randomly throws people together regardless of their play style etc when it should send them to the find party window.
Now the problem with the penalty thing is you all want to penalize peeps for having a different opinion of what is justified or not when it comes to leaving a group.
Much of the grief is caused by this inane queuing system, so change the system instead of trying to force peeps into a specific mold. This will not mean that there never will be problem with peeps, griefers or just being arsehats but then the same can be said of a penalty system.
When peeps get together in "find a group" lets be real and call it what is and that is a random pug group so why this random queuing baloney? Also the find a party is meh right now there was a thread about it but I can be asked to go find it right now.
Some simple rules once inside a dungeon, no kicking able to be done by anyone, anyone can leave, you can replace a member that has left at any time. Leader can kick anyone that has disconnected, if leader dc then next person in the list becomes the leader automatically.
Would solve most of the problems with "leavers". No one is penalized.
Heh. I think you missed the point too. Throwing random people together (within a series of rules) IS the point of this queue system. It is intentionally a different animal than the My Party/Find Party option. The only difference between this random queue system and other random queue systems when putting a party together is that it doesn't give you the option to select roles. Granted, I have no idea what rules they are using that would get a 3 TR 2 CW group, for example, but I do know that every time I've grouped with a GF on my DC and queued, the queue is significantly shorter compared to on DPS, so there's got to be SOMETHING going on in the background.
In other words, yes, the leavers are a problem that is mostly attached to the random queue system, so if you gut the initial system that assembles the party per your suggestion, yes of course they go away. Everyone who has used a random queue system before knows that, although I'm sure you can get different reasons why from different people. But it's got a lower bar of entry to get people into groups than LFG/LFM because it's very hands off, and people who don't like doing it the old fashioned ways or multitasking don't like giving that ease up. It's to the point where it's practically an MMO standard to have one in a dungeon based MMO now, so at this point, changing that part would hurt the game way more than help the game.
Of course, this is all just the assembly part. I have a hard time believing anyone would defend the state of how broken the party system is once the group is auto-assembled. Any change there is better than no change.
allaerra: Hit O to bring up the Social window. You will see a row of 6 tabs: Friends, Ignored, My Party, Find Party, Find Person, Find Guild. I don't use that system, so the only information I'm aware of about it is that most hand-made parties start off Open automatically, and you can use the Preferences in My Party to set your status.
Comments
CO had a rash of similar discussions when they added Alerts. They functioned like skirmishes but some where timed and as such had a chance of failure. Needless to say, if folks felt the mission was going to be a no-win some would just bail. This obviously caused frustration.
Problem is, while bailing is annoying. There are also legitimate reasons for it. You couldn't kick anyone out of an alert, you were not even grouped. So you would get trolls, leeches, bots, ect. Put simply, there were a lot of ways folks could ruin others fun. And no one should have to be punished for not wanting to accept that.
Its a similar system here. Granted some of the rules are different. Some of the ways folks could annoy others is not the same. But there are other new ways introduced as well. No one should feel the need to be compelled to stick with a bad group or bad personalities simply because of a game mechanic. You cant always kick them, you arn't always in change, the option to remove ones self from a bad situation needs to remain. Or you are simply going to punish people for not wanting to be punished by others. its a loose loose.
Besides, penalties rarely end up as something anyone is happy with. Some accept them as a means to an end. Some resent them. But they are hardly ever the best solution. There should be mechanics to empower and reward players for playing well and socially. Rather then to punish them when they fail to meet some standard not everyone might agree on.
I use to pug a lot in DDO and I i am not very difficult on who joins my lfms but on the occasion I run into an arsehat I want to be able to reform without them without being penalized for it.
Oh and the whole account suspension thing for leaving a group no matter how many times you do it is frigging ludicrous.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
I've reached dungeons which the team simply can not do, which is fine. A system for the team to agree to quit is necessary.
However if the team doesn't want to quit then a leaving penalty is necessary.
Not for times where the boss is hard...
But for the time that you get to the end of a dungeon and the person says "I have to go, bye!" before reaching the boss or after only one attempt.
As I said the system needs to be forgiving to rare occurences...
And punish those who consistently leave parties when the group doesn't agree to leave.
It's a basic necessity in any group game since as a group event players are relying on the members of the team to remain with the group.
If you do not then you are, in fact, hurting other players which is not something I take lightly.
*note as a part of being forgiving I don't care if you leave in the first few minutes. But if you leave past 5-10 minutes into the dungeon I view the chance to leave as already passed.
Sorry but you are way way off base here what this amounts to is becoming a "hostage" to the majority of the group which is insane.
This would be in effect be a in game name and shame mechanism with very little actual control over how it is used. There is no way to really police such a system which is why the name and shame is a big no no in these forum yet you want to essentially add this in game.
The fundamental problem is the queuing system and you guys are trying to invent/add ludicrous rules to make up for its fail.
GO back to basic, KISS and fix the queuing system.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
I did say that I didn't think the thought would fly with people.
However, claiming the queuing system as the fundamental problem is just as ludicrous. It's never just one main problem. Fixing the queuing system isn't going to make more people want to play Guardian Fighter or Devoted Cleric, for example. But if it wasn't obvious enough from my previous comments, it WOULD be nice to have that overhauled before any sort of penalty assessment about queues goes in.
I shouldn't be penalized for leaving a group that is participating in exploiting. There is no way to design the system to be intuitive enough to distinguish between legitimate practices within the group and illegitimate.
The best course of action is to design a replacement system where members can be easily replaced (i.e. entering the queue for a dungeon while being inside the dungeon searches for replacements to fill the party, the party is 'placed on top of the stack' as far as building the group from the queue).
This solves both the problem of people not being a hostage to the happenings of their group, and gives the groups the ability to quickly and painlessly refill their group after a departure.
The main problem IS the queuing system, we have no control over what class we want when we queue, no way to add people once in and someone drops, no control over who we accept into our groups and when in dungeons the leader can kick people which should be a no no etc etc. All this is from a pve point of view btw.
There are other problems with the game sure but plenty of people play guardian fighters. I in fact play a TR and GF and favor my GF. Balance issues are not to be confused with grouping issues which this ludicrous leavers penalty is all about.
Penalties are not the way to go but rather control over your own lfm.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
The exploits need to be resolved, no debate there, but exploits won't be commonplace for long and hopefully would be fixed before any such punishment system was implemented.
Even if every piece of content is fixed for the current content, new content will always be released and it's safe to say it will generally always have a degree of bugs that allow for exploitation. Punishing legitimate players will be a recurring problem if a punishment system is implemented as the 'solution' to losing players in dungeons.
A way to quickly and efficiently replace players will solve both the desire to leave and the desire to continue for the parties involved. Simply making it a punishable offense doesn't get the group to finish any faster.
Implementing a re-queue option to replace leavers is better for both the group and the leaver.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Amen!
How about we stay with a "Innocent until proven guilty" method rather than a "guilty until proven innocent" method which this leavers penalty would be.
You know this would not really solve anything this leaver penalty, I mean whats to keep the person that wants to leave for w/e reason from just alt tabbing and watching his favorite tv show or movie etc or simply logging out.
Hows that going to help with pugs?
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
1. You get in group and people want to either speed run or cheat.
2. You don't and decide to leave.
3. You get penalized for doing what you think is right?
Join Essence of Aggression: PVP-ing Hard Since Beta!
Personally, if there ends up any kind of punishment system. Not that I think one is likely. Id simply stop running pugs. Punishment always has a way of bringing a chilling effect that discourages interaction. Why take the chance?
That's my solution as well. If a system like this is implemented, I will just drop pugs all together go with guild runs only. I think there are a lot of people who already do this anyway though.
Aye some of us like to pug though but this kind of thing would make me just log on see if guildies are on and want to run epics if not log out.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
However, it really can't be emphasized enough that penalties should come last.
degraafination: Pretty much everyone has suggested that if you leave in the first 5 minutes or so, you should never be penalized. So that's really not a devil's advocate situation. Saying it's the system's fault that a player chooses not to communicate isn't going to carry any sympathy.
15 mins * number of times you have left dungeons early in the last 30 days. With no cap.
Add to this a - 1% * number of times left in last 30 days on the loot tables... but starting at the count of 3.
Because if real accidents DO keep happening, then its still unfair of you towards other people to keep queuing until you get your internet fixed. And if you're just a rude player, the penalty will ramp up really fast.
Mind you this WILL create a problem where people who want to leave will start wiping the group until kicked out... so there would need to be a second system in place to prevent that from being useful...
- But any such system that punished people who got kicked out would result in griefers that kicked folks out just to get that penalty onto them...
So now you need a third system to discourage that...
...
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Campaign: The Battle of Neverwinter - NWS-DOQXFA4ZD
Prologue: A not so simple plan - NW-DCJG75B9D
You just openly called a customer a five year old, or at the very best referred to said customer as of lesser intelligence.
Classy.
That's just additional justification for why we need vote kicks.
Lets take look at the line I highlighted. A penalty for leavers that disrupt other peoples time commitment. I do believe many leavers leave when they feel their time is being wasted. Do you not see the irony?
Do you not think the "leaver" has had his time wasted as well?
It's one thing you can love about DDO they gave us a pretty darn good grouping system you can put a lfm and put a comment of what kind of group you are looking for.
This is the big fail with our queue system its a blind invite with no regard to what the puggers want. In DDO you can put a up a flower sniffers lfm or a zerg lfm or know it be self sufficient. You can put up a "Crush it" lfm or a drunken run lfm etc etc
In this poor excuse of a system, well its.. like a box of chocolates you never know what your gonna get......
I don't see how any kind of penalty will help with this except to frustrate more people than it will actually help and more than likely peeps will stick to guild/channel runs which mean new people with no guild will be left over with fail pug groups.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
Agreed. Along the same lines, the person that got randomly selected by the queuing system to be the "leader" should NOT have the ability to kick others.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Before we start going down the "who's wasting who's time" road, it's starting to sound like you are unaware of certain options in game.
We are talking solely about Random Queues (K).
What you are waxing nostalgic about with DDO has a Neverwinter equivalent called Find Party and My Party, which are under the Social menu (O). If it is not similar enough, then please elaborate. (I have never played DDO so I couldn't say.)
The people who are using the random queues shouldn't be caring about the details you're talking about. If they did, they should be using the Find Party/My Party and complaining about any problems with that.
and you will see how they will change there mind of leaving before finish the instance
And what happens when 4 premade tards decide to votekick you for the lolz at the end of the dungeon ? Votekick is a toxic anti-fun game mechanic which is not needed here .
That's not an argument against vote kicking. That's an argument against a kick option being available at all, because you'd still be screwed with current standards 4 out of 5 times. Good luck with spearheading that.
You are missing the point, queuing just randomly throws people together regardless of their play style etc when it should send them to the find party window.
Now the problem with the penalty thing is you all want to penalize peeps for having a different opinion of what is justified or not when it comes to leaving a group.
Much of the grief is caused by this inane queuing system, so change the system instead of trying to force peeps into a specific mold. This will not mean that there never will be problem with peeps, griefers or just being arsehats but then the same can be said of a penalty system.
When peeps get together in "find a group" lets be real and call it what is and that is a random pug group so why this random queuing baloney? Also the find a party is meh right now there was a thread about it but I can't be asked to go find it right now.
Some simple rules once inside a dungeon, no kicking able to be done by anyone, anyone can leave, you can replace a member that has left at any time. Leader can kick anyone that has disconnected, if leader dc then next person in the list becomes the leader automatically.
Would solve most of the problems with "leavers". No one is penalized.
Neverwinter Thieves Guild
Heh. I think you missed the point too. Throwing random people together (within a series of rules) IS the point of this queue system. It is intentionally a different animal than the My Party/Find Party option. The only difference between this random queue system and other random queue systems when putting a party together is that it doesn't give you the option to select roles. Granted, I have no idea what rules they are using that would get a 3 TR 2 CW group, for example, but I do know that every time I've grouped with a GF on my DC and queued, the queue is significantly shorter compared to on DPS, so there's got to be SOMETHING going on in the background.
In other words, yes, the leavers are a problem that is mostly attached to the random queue system, so if you gut the initial system that assembles the party per your suggestion, yes of course they go away. Everyone who has used a random queue system before knows that, although I'm sure you can get different reasons why from different people. But it's got a lower bar of entry to get people into groups than LFG/LFM because it's very hands off, and people who don't like doing it the old fashioned ways or multitasking don't like giving that ease up. It's to the point where it's practically an MMO standard to have one in a dungeon based MMO now, so at this point, changing that part would hurt the game way more than help the game.
Of course, this is all just the assembly part. I have a hard time believing anyone would defend the state of how broken the party system is once the group is auto-assembled. Any change there is better than no change.
allaerra: Hit O to bring up the Social window. You will see a row of 6 tabs: Friends, Ignored, My Party, Find Party, Find Person, Find Guild. I don't use that system, so the only information I'm aware of about it is that most hand-made parties start off Open automatically, and you can use the Preferences in My Party to set your status.