Merging groups based off votes would just create different problems later. What happens when group A is sitting around for 2 minutes waiting for 2 people from an external group to merge into their run? What happens when the 2 people that join are low IL and looking to be carried further and those 3 decide they didn't sign up for that?
The whole concept of IG was just poorly thought out. It's like the random queues. The devs sit there saying "of course people will not mind staying in content they don't want to run". The players show that is not the case at all.
The vote should never have been added to IG. There should only ever have been a reward at the end but instead the geniuses decided they would let people get a reward at bronze too so they could leave faster. It's nothing more than an opportunity for people to troll. If there was no voting and it functioned like other skirmishes most of these issues wouldn't be around. Would it be complaint free? No. But you wouldn't have people saying "I voted to leave so screw you all".
Since there is no reinforcements in IG, it makes no difference whether I leave or AFK. The group will be down one player for the rest of the run. If I leave, no one thinks further of it. No one complains about gold leavers, just gold AFKers. The only "negative" behavior I see is gold runners seething at AFKers.
False.
There's essentially no way to justify AFK'ing for benefit, especially when it involves other people putting in effort while you don't... That's like saying a person at your job sluffing off while still getting paid and periodically getting promotions rather than you/others is ok.
If you leave you rightfully get the leaver penalty, fair enough though if you stay and AFK you are griefing the rest of the team and getting rewarded for it at the end which makes the difference. In other words if you leave the rest of the group is down a spot though they will be rewarded for their efforts, if you stay and AFK you are getting rewarded for their efforts...
Again, if you want to ensure a leave vote if IG pops RQ with at least two like minded players, by not doing so as you have previously stated "I'd rather take my chances" though those chances also include players voting to stay...
It's frustrating 'cause I actually still need those Underdark skirmishes for a bunch of my characters, but the probability of running into deadbeat afks is so high, it's just not worth it to me. I can only tolerate so much aggravation in my free time.
RQs have progressively gotten worse and worse. I see a huge difference in the environment just in the last four or five months. I haven't touched one for over a month now, but the negativity that breeds in pvp and in RQ spills over into the rest of the game too - to the point where I've barely played the game at all for a few weeks 'cause I'm tired of dealing with self-centered fools and wasting time looking for less populated instances just to avoid them.
Anymore it really does feel like Cryptic's gone out of their way to protect the antisocial element to the detriment of everyone else. You know, I don't mind being thrown to bears - or the wolves or the lions, but I really resent being thrown to a bunch of bloodsucking ticks and leeches.
Yeah, I like the game, and I'm invested in it to a certain extent, but I'm not just going to sit here and subject myself to the whims of a pack of puerile jackasses. If Cryptic doesn't offer me some method of ensuring my own enjoyment within the game, I'm just going to walk away. My hands may be tied, but my feet aren't.
Truth
AFK'ers and other that conduct negative behavior are shielded and protected multiple times over and as you stated, to the detriment of others. Long/bugged vote kick timers, 4 hour vote lockouts, etc.
Personally suggested "private" instance hosting where players could purchase timed (duration per hosting, number of days of privilege) "host"/"join" privileges directly from the Xbox live marketplace/PSN store allowing them to host and or join privately hosted zone instances and the publisher to generate revenue directly from something that the game does on it's own which is produce more instances (especially during events like Siege of Neverwinter, Summer/Winter Festival, etc.).
Convenience usually comes with a cost in MMO's so if the developers/CS aren't going to do something about abusive behavior directly (monitor/investigate reports and in-game interactions in zones/RQ's, etc.) allowing players to be able to pay for peace of mind may be a viable option, both sides win.
The whole concept of IG was just poorly thought out. It's like the random queues. The devs sit there saying "of course people will not mind staying in content they don't want to run". The players show that is not the case at all.
It wasn't a bad concept when the dungeon was first release. Gold was pretty hard back then and people had to consider their abilities when they voted. Now with the power creep, gold pretty much guaranteed. The question is if they willing to commit the time. The only thing the gold runner considers now is how compliant others will be to do their bidding,
There's essentially no way to justify AFK'ing for benefit, especially when it involves other people putting in effort while you don't...
I'm just waiting for my RQ reward for my bronze run. It's not free as it cost me time. The difference in reward between bronze and gold is minuscule. If people can't stand the possibility of an AFK getting a +4 drop, they can always wipe. There is nothing to "leech" on a wipe. And nothing makes me happier than when I see a wipe.
Again, if you want to ensure a leave vote if IG pops RQ with at least two like minded players, by not doing so as you have previously stated "I'd rather take my chances" though those chances also include players voting to stay...
Sounds like victim blaming. I see no reason why I should have to go out of my way to rig the vote myself to avoid being forced into gold. Everyone always blames the forced gold victim, never the gold aggressors. I don't like vote riggers, no matter which way they are rigging it.
You know what I would love is if the devs gave us some little pranks we can play on these kinds of people. Pranks that can only be used on someone who's squatting on their throne, or simply hasn't moved for over a certain length of time.
Things like: - being able to set their pants on fire so that their character runs around and around like a fool - being able to eject them from their throne so they fly across the room and do a face plant - being able to ink their face with something like a goofy mustache or thick lipstick, and it doesn't come off for 4 hours - hitting them with a whoopee cushion so that every step they take for the next 4 hours makes an offensive sound - curse them with befuddlement so that all their controls are mixed up for the next 4 hours - banish their character to another plane of existence for a period of time
Alternatively, skirmishes with varying levels of success from bronze to gold might be more engaging if the payout increases with each level of completion. Bronze = 500 rad Silver = additional 1,000 rad Gold = additional 7,500 rad
Too complicated. Though you are in the right direction in that the problem can probably be fixed by restructuring the rewards. The easiest thing to do is make those +4/5 rings BtE. I would do gold every time if I can get something worthwhile to sell. If people farm the hell out of it and prices plunge in the AH, then no one will want to do gold as it would be better to buy what you want.
I'm just waiting for my RQ reward for my bronze run. It's not free as it cost me time. The difference in reward between bronze and gold is minuscule. If people can't stand the possibility of an AFK getting a +4 drop, they can always wipe. There is nothing to "leech" on a wipe. And nothing makes me happier than when I see a wipe.
It is amazing the lengths people will go to justify negative behavior.
AFK'ing after bronze doesn't make it a bronze run nor does the choice of 1-2 people to AFK.
In IG negative players are trying to overturn the majority vote via brute force , again, when you accept the RQ you are essentially agreeing to run the content, not "if I get IG I will AFK after bronze if the vote to stay passes instead of leaving and taking the penalty", if you don't like the idea of a vote to stay passing. are not willing to take the leaver penalty or queue with at least two others don't RQ skirmishes.
Sounds like victim blaming. I see no reason why I should have to go out of my way to rig the vote myself to avoid being forced into gold. Everyone always blames the forced gold victim, never the gold aggressors. I don't like vote riggers, no matter which way they are rigging it.
Essentially the only "victims" are those that after a vote to stay passes are faced with carrying AFK'ers with no benefit (added?) to themselves and no punishment for the abusers. Players don't have to go out of their way to ensure their vote to leave though they also don't have to stay if the vote to leave doesn't pass.
On top of that players can enter a RQ then teleport out and do other things while the rest of the group either runs the content, gets penalized for leaving/voting in that type of situation, or waits to even start it in the first place.
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
kreatyveMember, Neverwinter Moderator, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 10,545Community Moderator
While I realize that there are 2 sides to this debate, please keep it civil and do not insult one another. Thanks!
My opinions are my own. I do not work for PWE or Cryptic. - Forum Rules - Protector's Enclave Discord - I play on Xbox Any of my comments not posted in orange are based on my own personal opinion and not official. Any messages written in orange are official moderation messages. Signature images are now fixed!
In IG negative players are trying to overturn the majority vote via brute force
When most of the time the majority is achieved via vote rigging, I feel i can ignore it.
The two options to discourage vote rigging is leave or AFK. Leaving is the non-confrontational way and I encourage everyone to at least consider it if they voted leave and sensed the vote may have been rigged. Alternatively, one can disconnect to pretend you crashed. The "leavers penalty" will only be as long as it takes the gold runners to finish (hope it doesn't turn out to be a one hour run).
I myself never started AFKing until I learned of the vote rigging. I was in a run where one person had already AFK. The other players were yelling at him for it. Eventually one of them admitted they queued with three people and it was tough HAMSTER for the AFKer. I was like, oh really? I became the next member of the AFK club then.
I was in a run where one person had already AFK. The other players were yelling at him for it. Eventually one of them admitted they queued with three people and it was tough HAMSTER for the AFKer.
Quite convenient for someone to admit that huh?
It leaves the question though, outside of admitting, how does one know there's a team of three in IG?
More so it still doesn't justify AFK'ing
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
Yes, I have seen people done it a few times since. Maybe they were telling that AFK to pound sand? Maybe they were gloating and wanted to show how smart they were? Maybe they were just that dumb. Who knows.
It leaves the question though, outside of admitting, how does one know there's a team of three in IG?
Three players from the same guild is pretty obvious.
Someone begging for bronze only to get ignored. They could be three randos. In any case, people ignoring bronze requests deserve the leave/AFK treatment.
2-2 tie and the last person takes his time to vote and votes stay. Was he consulting his two other cohorts? In any case, he made the calculation that he can probably force two people to participate in gold. They deserve the leave/AFK treatment.
Sometimes I do leave. But I jot down their names first. Then a few minutes later I search for them and sometimes find three, even all four, of them in another IG instance with another victim.
Of course vote riggers prefer leavers and not AFKers. Once their victims have left, they can wipe and requeue if they feel gold will be too long. But an AFK, they can't show the AFK that he won. They will stick it out, even if it takes an hour.
Simple solution don't do randoms, if you want Bronze organise a Bronze only run with a group of like minded individuals, those subject to AFK treatment can always file a report to MS for unsporting conduct, eventually action will be taken. Cheers
Don’t understand why you would just sit there for an hour when you could spend maybe 10 minutes actually playing the game and getting it done. Whatever point you are trying to prove isn’t going they through when you act like that.
I didn't just sit there. No AFKer does that. I made and ate dinner. Then I read emails and surfed the web.
After an painful one hour IG run, I would hope that they learned something and think twice before forcing another gold run.
That's just a tantrum you're throwing. I like going all the way in IG. We even got stuck with some random idiot who kept shouting "BRONZE BRONZE VOTE LEAVE" then he played dead in the arena for the rest of the rounds. Finally as we neared the end of the gold run without him, he started saying "you think we can do it? can we get gold?" Yeah we got gold without him. the trick is to just ignore players like that and go on doing your best. Put him on the ignore list because that's what it is for.
Dealt with an interesting afker in IG yesterday - threw her/his tantrum during silver, and lay there dead until gold - did other things for a few minutes presumably. At some point during gold, the player got up and started pitching in.
And that didn't bother me too much. It's one thing for an afker to rant and rave about being forced to do what everyone else wants to do, but it's hard to take them seriously when they're only too happy to take the gold rewards to the bank. If they discarded them, or gave them away then maybe their, "noble resistance" would seem more genuine. This particular player made her/his point, but also put in some effort which went a little ways toward earning the reward as well as speeding things up.
I voted to leave too, but only because people were dying during bronze, and I didn't like our chances, but surprisingly, the other two rounds went pretty easily.
How long have players been begging Cryptic to remove the b/s/g skirmishes from the random queue? Not only are there plenty of players who would continue queuing for them, but there's also a sizeable group that currently avoid them because of the afk plague but would return once those queues were salted for leeches. But if Cryptic is really bent on leaving them where they are, I hope they consider making some adjustments that make gold more appealing to the unwilling.
Three players from the same guild is pretty obvious.
The initial question was rhetorical.
Outside of the 3 guild mates scenario there's essentially no way to even try to tell though players AFK'ing after bronze STILL happens even if 3 characters are not in the same guild... on top of that queuing with 2 others to secure your vote is not against the rules
AFK'ing still isn't justified even if a group of 3 votes to stay. A player asking for bronze is simply a request, if they don't get it oh well, they are essentially queuing solo and trying to put their personal agenda above the majority vote. If the majority votes to stay then that's what it is and players that AFK should be punished in some way(s) which "should" help discourage that negative behavior.
No one is forced to RQ, by themselves at that. Queue in a group and the IG "issues" will go away/diminish though
To help ensure the quality of experience for players PWE/Cryptic are going to have to take a hands on approach, trying to mitigate things from the shadows hasn't been working especially since the legitimate players often enough sustain the brunt of things while the illegitimate players simply change their course of action and continue on with their negative behavior.
Let's not even get started on the Mod 14 changes which will essentially make RQ's even more of a madhouse than they currently are at the expense of legitimate players...
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
To help ensure the quality of experience for players PWE/Cryptic are going to have to take a hands on approach, trying to mitigate things from the shadows hasn't been working especially since the legitimate players often enough sustain the brunt of things while the illegitimate players simply change their course of action and continue on with their negative behavior.
Oh don't worry. If you are not on PC, you will see that the devs fixed this real good in mod 14. By moving IG to leveling queue, they moved it away from well-geared players who don't care about gold and towards newbies/lowbies who are more likely to care about it. This is the perfect solution and my favorite change to RQ.
The unsavory practical of vote rigging should mostly go away since I doubt these people will be as enthusiastic about abusing newbies/lowbies as they were with well-geared players.
Let's not even get started on the Mod 14 changes which will essentially make RQ's even more of a madhouse than they currently are at the expense of legitimate players...
I thought the consensus was that those changes would make the RQ a better experience for the socially unimpaired. That hasn't been the case on the PC?
Let's not even get started on the Mod 14 changes which will essentially make RQ's even more of a madhouse than they currently are at the expense of legitimate players...
I thought the consensus was that those changes would make the RQ a better experience for the socially unimpaired. That hasn't been the case on the PC?
They can't pleased everyone. But I think the mod 14 RQ changes are generally well-received. Normal players who play only one or two toons certainly like the change. People who can grind a lot but didn't enjoy it (thats me) also like the change. The only people complaining about it are the ones who want to grind all day and be rewarded for it.
But it sure seems sketchy and conspiratorial to me.
When you RQ alone/less than full you are subjected to the group you are matched with and will have little to no influence on their behavior. In IG you are subjected to the majority vote no matter how it comes about so to makes things easier on yourself queue with 2 others, take the leaver penalty or run the content, AFK'ing is against the rules and if you are reported and actioned against it is your own fault.
Oh don't worry. If you are not on PC, you will see that the devs fixed this real good in mod 14. By moving IG to leveling queue, they moved it away from well-geared players who don't care about gold and towards newbies/lowbies who are more likely to care about it. This is the perfect solution and my favorite change to RQ.
Oh... so HLP's won't run LQ's huh? LoL
A number of HLP's will still be running LQ's and still be subjected to negative behavior of those type of players.
The unsavory practical of vote rigging should mostly go away since I doubt these people will be as enthusiastic about abusing newbies/lowbies as they were with well-geared players.
Nah, those who really want no way of going past bronze will still queue in 3's..
Voting to stay can happen with all types of groups. Not all players go inspector gadget checking ilvls, a lot of players simply run the content that pops. Have personally ran IG numerous times where the group was of similar ilvl (around 10-12k or less), voted to stay and got gold.
The only people complaining about it are the ones who want to grind all day and be rewarded for it.
Those are essentially the only players that could complain...
Anyone that only plays a few hours a week really isn't being affected to the same degree. The players that play more for the most part are the players supplying the market with sell-able drops and lowering prices due to under-cutting, less farmers equals higher prices even if AD rates go down...
More so those that play more SHOULD be rewarded more...
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
I thought the consensus was that those changes would make the RQ a better experience for the socially unimpaired. That hasn't been the case on the PC?
It depends on how you look at it. In Mod 14 if you get into a group where there is an abusive player(s) and leave first, the penalty is account-wide so no other character on your account can queue until it expires which essentially means if an abusing player(ws) gets content they don't like they can simply AFK or signpost/teleport out, do other things until they get vote kicked or port back in later for rewards in either case without penalty or contributing to the run...
Also the daily bonus only being available once per reset drops AD significantly on top of the 100k cap which alone would have lowered the AD generated as intended though the one off daily bonus essentially took it further than necessary... Part of the reason RQ's were introduced were to give players an alternative to salvage runs though in Mod 14 a number of players will revert to salvage runs because running two characters will yield the same as running one twice so why do a repeat RQ for much less reward when you can do salvage runs and get more per run...
During events/sales essentially instead of being able to convert AD to Zen and going from there players without sufficient AD will be faced with buying Zen directly...
Going to call it exactly what it looks like, a bait and switch cash grab.
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
AFK'ing is against the rules and if you are reported and actioned against it is your own fault.
It's IG, the shenanigans in there are well known. No individual action would be taken. In a sense, I think I should thank all the petty IG AFK reporting. If not for them, IG would probably been left alone.
Sure some HLP run LQ, but newbies/lowbies, many as low as 3K, vastly outnumber HLPs in LQ, a far cry from the minimum 11K that were in epic queue. Good thing there is the self-serving power of "majority" to make it a bronze run if two lowbies got drawn from the queue.
Where are the changes to combat abusing players? *crickets*
Mod after mod legitimate players are hammered down with various changes while the abusing ones step onto their backs. All this back end shuffling isn't becoming. If you all want people to continue to play (and those that do spend money to continue to do so) the time they spend playing should equate to what they get in-game without such extreme artificial time increases while not having to experience frequent run-ins with abusing players.
In the current system, because the difficulty is so widespread in a given queue, it's understandable that in many cases, you would enter a queue and feel like you received the "short end of the stick." However, with the new organization, the difficulty of the content within each queue should be closer together, so please avoid queuing for a random queue if you do not feel you are prepared for all of the content contained therein.
so please avoid queuing for a random queue if you do not feel you are prepared TO SOLO all of the content contained therein.
Fixed it for you, you forgot that the rest of your team will be afking for rewards.
Going into a RQ with the intentions of participating is EASILY eclipsed by AFK farmers and players forcing others to carry them for rewards... When will that be addressed and or a solution(s) provided?...
In Mod 14 leaving a queue will result in an account-wide 30 minute leaver penalty. If you are in a RQ with abusive players you are essentially stuck because the various timers not only help prevent you from trying to vote-kick/abandon if they fail there's a longer timer before you can initiate them again...
In RQ's AFK farmers are shielded and positive players punished for trying to do something about it.
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
Another quite close related problem i have seen several times, too: Queueing up, entering the dungeon and then manually porting out to other areas, blocking the rest of the team from proceeding.
In fact, i had such a person just today: Queued up for RAQ, Edemo popped (yay), we get in and one person summons a teleport post and goes to bryn shander ... like wtf?!!? There was no disconnect or anything, she just played solo stuff (went on to lonelywood and cold run, too) while still remaining in the queue group to not get the leaver penalty. To messages asking her to come back in or leave the queue, the response was "XD" ... i mean seriously, those people need a RQ-ban for a week or something like that. If I go for RAQ and dont even wanna play edemo, then why the hell queueing up in the first place? There is literally not a single excuse for this, just purposely being an HAMSTER to 9 other people.
And of course we couldnt kick her; she eventually left after like 12 minutes when others were tired of waiting and left themselves.
I reported her (and encouraged others to do so, aswell), but i am not sure whether this really makes a difference or not. If it does, i would really like to get some sort of notification if some action has taken place against someone i reported so i know i dont do it in vain.
Edit: I just saw that this is an XBOX thread (found it by using the search function and thought it is an appropriate discussion to bring it up here). I play on PC but i think the problem is the same on all platforms.
Ok, caught up a little with the IG-discussion here: For me, there is a relatively simple solution to this: Those who voted "leave" get their bronze-reward and get out. Those who voted "stay" get to play the next round; either with less than 5 or they have to wait until another one joins them who also voted "stay" in their respective run.
no such thing as a forced gold run as you put it. majority rules. if you join random que you are agreeing to those terms. it isn't my way or the highway. there is no one persons vote matters more than EVERYONE elses..
The majority can force everyone to stay, but they can't compel everyone to participate. Terms? What terms? I didn't know I signed something to get into the queue. Sure there is a social contract to participate. But there is also a social contract not to force others into something they don't want to do.
Any other instances, I would leave and take penalty if I didn't like what I saw, and that will be the end of it. Since there is no reinforcement in IG, it won't affect the outcome whether I leave or AFK and wait for my RQ reward. If the gold runners don't have qualms forcing me to stay for my reward, then I have no qualms AFKing in their face.
I have to say I completely agree.
In my opinion, if somebody queues up for any RQ, he wants to get the AD-reward (if I wanna do a specific dungeon, I dont RQ).
That said, if I RQ and I get a dungeon I dont wanna run right now or whatever, I leave and take the penalty (thats Ok, its my choice). If I get something I am willing play to get my reward, I will do it. However, what I dont see is why I should be forced to do more/stay longer than I want/need to. I did my part to do what needs to be done to get the reward, what I ACTUALLY signed up for. If people want to go for gold (I guess this whole problem specifically just applies to IG through RQ), be my guest. But dont force the choice "either you stay with us or leave and abandon the reward that YOU ALREADY EARNED up to this point" uopn me.
Which sort of brings me back to my previous post: Either remove IG from random queues or make it happen that people who voted to leave can get out when they want, getting the reward they earned up to this point.
Merging groups based off votes would just create different problems later. What happens when group A is sitting around for 2 minutes waiting for 2 people from an external group to merge into their run? What happens when the 2 people that join are low IL and looking to be carried further and those 3 decide they didn't sign up for that?
The whole concept of IG was just poorly thought out. It's like the random queues. The devs sit there saying "of course people will not mind staying in content they don't want to run". The players show that is not the case at all.
The vote should never have been added to IG. There should only ever have been a reward at the end but instead the geniuses decided they would let people get a reward at bronze too so they could leave faster. It's nothing more than an opportunity for people to troll. If there was no voting and it functioned like other skirmishes most of these issues wouldn't be around. Would it be complaint free? No. But you wouldn't have people saying "I voted to leave so screw you all".
Funny, thats exactly what "goldrunners" force on "bronzerunners" ... something they didnt sign up for. The goal of RQ is the reward, which you get for finishing bronze. Thats what I sign up for. Anything beyond that should be player decision: I wanna get out? -> I get out. I wanna continue? -> I continue (maybe I will have to wait before someone else also wants to do it/gets to that point in another RQ IG, but hey, noone FORCED me to it, it was my choice to proceed). I agree on your 2nd point though, if the voting would never have been implemented, there wouldnt be a discussion at all.
Why don't you bronze runners get a group of three together and "rig the vote". I far as I am concerned the AD should only rewarded for completing GOLD, instead of leaving before the skirmish is completed.
The new 30 minute acct wide ban will only see this situation worsen. If someone lands in content they don't want to run they can no longer leave and switch toons or Disconnect and switch, as the whole acct will get locked. Ergo, those people who don't care about everyone else will just sit and wait to be vote kicked/everyone else to complete the content.
What about giving every player a sort of "Substitution" option? You land in content you don't want to be in, and you go to the instance management screen and call for reinforcements on YOURSELF. As soon as the replacement is found you are kicked and the substitute lands in the dungeon/skirmish. You earn NOTHING from the run. Your substitution then goes on cooldown for whatever period is deemed appropriate (1 hour, 2 hours, refresh at daily tickover... whatever.) so that its not spammed by people who only want one queue from their "Random" list, and you are free to join another queue. And as a bonus the content you left via your substitution is removed from your next queue so you definitely land somewhere else.
That idea would need some work to fine tune and get right, but it took me about five minutes to come up with. Cryptic have a team of game developers on staff who should be able to find ways to make this stuff easier and less frustrating.
Instead of just looking for ways to coral people into a restrictive pattern of play, and then punish, ban and censure those who object, try looking for ways to help people actually enjoy the bloody game.
As to those players who deliberately AFK expecting others to do all the work, surely its not beyond the ken of man to come up with an algorithm that effectively says, "you didn't do enough running around pressing buttons to qualify for a reward... so you get nothing." but 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.
...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.
Why don't you bronze runners get a group of three together and "rig the vote". I far as I am concerned the AD should only rewarded for completing GOLD, instead of leaving before the skirmish is completed.
As I said, if there wouldnt be a vote at all, there wouldnt be a discussion about this topic. And if you'd get the reward after gold, there wouldnt be either.
But there IS the voting system, and you DO get the reward after bronze. So by all means i should be able to get out with the reward I played for at one of the two points possible. So that I'm not being pissed because I am forced to play something i dont want/have to and without upsetting others for going afk after being held hostage (so to speak) to get my reward. There should not be the need to "rig the vote", dont you think?
So either rework IG (maybe like if you enter by queueing directly its the gold version, if you get in by RQ its bronze) OR remove it from RQ OR give everybody the chance to get out at the point they want to. But the way it is right now brings up so many HAMSTER situations ...
Comments
The whole concept of IG was just poorly thought out. It's like the random queues. The devs sit there saying "of course people will not mind staying in content they don't want to run". The players show that is not the case at all.
The vote should never have been added to IG. There should only ever have been a reward at the end but instead the geniuses decided they would let people get a reward at bronze too so they could leave faster. It's nothing more than an opportunity for people to troll. If there was no voting and it functioned like other skirmishes most of these issues wouldn't be around. Would it be complaint free? No. But you wouldn't have people saying "I voted to leave so screw you all".
There's essentially no way to justify AFK'ing for benefit, especially when it involves other people putting in effort while you don't...
That's like saying a person at your job sluffing off while still getting paid and periodically getting promotions rather than you/others is ok.
If you leave you rightfully get the leaver penalty, fair enough though if you stay and AFK you are griefing the rest of the team and getting rewarded for it at the end which makes the difference. In other words if you leave the rest of the group is down a spot though they will be rewarded for their efforts, if you stay and AFK you are getting rewarded for their efforts...
Again, if you want to ensure a leave vote if IG pops RQ with at least two like minded players, by not doing so as you have previously stated "I'd rather take my chances" though those chances also include players voting to stay... Truth
AFK'ers and other that conduct negative behavior are shielded and protected multiple times over and as you stated, to the detriment of others.
Long/bugged vote kick timers, 4 hour vote lockouts, etc.
Personally suggested "private" instance hosting where players could purchase timed (duration per hosting, number of days of privilege) "host"/"join" privileges directly from the Xbox live marketplace/PSN store allowing them to host and or join privately hosted zone instances and the publisher to generate revenue directly from something that the game does on it's own which is produce more instances (especially during events like Siege of Neverwinter, Summer/Winter Festival, etc.).
Convenience usually comes with a cost in MMO's so if the developers/CS aren't going to do something about abusive behavior directly (monitor/investigate reports and in-game interactions in zones/RQ's, etc.) allowing players to be able to pay for peace of mind may be a viable option, both sides win.
Suggestion - Private Zone Instances
“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
Things like:
- being able to set their pants on fire so that their character runs around and around like a fool
- being able to eject them from their throne so they fly across the room and do a face plant
- being able to ink their face with something like a goofy mustache or thick lipstick, and it doesn't come off for 4 hours
- hitting them with a whoopee cushion so that every step they take for the next 4 hours makes an offensive sound
- curse them with befuddlement so that all their controls are mixed up for the next 4 hours
- banish their character to another plane of existence for a period of time
Alternatively, skirmishes with varying levels of success from bronze to gold might be more engaging if the payout increases with each level of completion.
Bronze = 500 rad
Silver = additional 1,000 rad
Gold = additional 7,500 rad
AFK'ing after bronze doesn't make it a bronze run nor does the choice of 1-2 people to AFK.
In IG negative players are trying to overturn the majority vote via brute force , again, when you accept the RQ you are essentially agreeing to run the content, not "if I get IG I will AFK after bronze if the vote to stay passes instead of leaving and taking the penalty", if you don't like the idea of a vote to stay passing. are not willing to take the leaver penalty or queue with at least two others don't RQ skirmishes. Essentially the only "victims" are those that after a vote to stay passes are faced with carrying AFK'ers with no benefit (added?) to themselves and no punishment for the abusers. Players don't have to go out of their way to ensure their vote to leave though they also don't have to stay if the vote to leave doesn't pass.
On top of that players can enter a RQ then teleport out and do other things while the rest of the group either runs the content, gets penalized for leaving/voting in that type of situation, or waits to even start it in the first place.
“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
Any of my comments not posted in orange are based on my own personal opinion and not official.
Any messages written in orange are official moderation messages. Signature images are now fixed!
The two options to discourage vote rigging is leave or AFK. Leaving is the non-confrontational way and I encourage everyone to at least consider it if they voted leave and sensed the vote may have been rigged. Alternatively, one can disconnect to pretend you crashed. The "leavers penalty" will only be as long as it takes the gold runners to finish (hope it doesn't turn out to be a one hour run).
I myself never started AFKing until I learned of the vote rigging. I was in a run where one person had already AFK. The other players were yelling at him for it. Eventually one of them admitted they queued with three people and it was tough HAMSTER for the AFKer. I was like, oh really? I became the next member of the AFK club then.
It leaves the question though, outside of admitting, how does one know there's a team of three in IG?
More so it still doesn't justify AFK'ing
“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
Someone begging for bronze only to get ignored. They could be three randos. In any case, people ignoring bronze requests deserve the leave/AFK treatment.
2-2 tie and the last person takes his time to vote and votes stay. Was he consulting his two other cohorts? In any case, he made the calculation that he can probably force two people to participate in gold. They deserve the leave/AFK treatment.
Of course vote riggers prefer leavers and not AFKers. Once their victims have left, they can wipe and requeue if they feel gold will be too long. But an AFK, they can't show the AFK that he won. They will stick it out, even if it takes an hour.
Cheers
And that didn't bother me too much. It's one thing for an afker to rant and rave about being forced to do what everyone else wants to do, but it's hard to take them seriously when they're only too happy to take the gold rewards to the bank. If they discarded them, or gave them away then maybe their, "noble resistance" would seem more genuine. This particular player made her/his point, but also put in some effort which went a little ways toward earning the reward as well as speeding things up.
I voted to leave too, but only because people were dying during bronze, and I didn't like our chances, but surprisingly, the other two rounds went pretty easily.
How long have players been begging Cryptic to remove the b/s/g skirmishes from the random queue? Not only are there plenty of players who would continue queuing for them, but there's also a sizeable group that currently avoid them because of the afk plague but would return once those queues were salted for leeches. But if Cryptic is really bent on leaving them where they are, I hope they consider making some adjustments that make gold more appealing to the unwilling.
Outside of the 3 guild mates scenario there's essentially no way to even try to tell though players AFK'ing after bronze STILL happens even if 3 characters are not in the same guild... on top of that queuing with 2 others to secure your vote is not against the rules
AFK'ing still isn't justified even if a group of 3 votes to stay. A player asking for bronze is simply a request, if they don't get it oh well, they are essentially queuing solo and trying to put their personal agenda above the majority vote. If the majority votes to stay then that's what it is and players that AFK should be punished in some way(s) which "should" help discourage that negative behavior.
No one is forced to RQ, by themselves at that. Queue in a group and the IG "issues" will go away/diminish though
To help ensure the quality of experience for players PWE/Cryptic are going to have to take a hands on approach, trying to mitigate things from the shadows hasn't been working especially since the legitimate players often enough sustain the brunt of things while the illegitimate players simply change their course of action and continue on with their negative behavior.
Let's not even get started on the Mod 14 changes which will essentially make RQ's even more of a madhouse than they currently are at the expense of legitimate players...
“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
The unsavory practical of vote rigging should mostly go away since I doubt these people will be as enthusiastic about abusing newbies/lowbies as they were with well-geared players.
A number of HLP's will still be running LQ's and still be subjected to negative behavior of those type of players. Nah, those who really want no way of going past bronze will still queue in 3's..
Voting to stay can happen with all types of groups. Not all players go inspector gadget checking ilvls, a lot of players simply run the content that pops. Have personally ran IG numerous times where the group was of similar ilvl (around 10-12k or less), voted to stay and got gold. Those are essentially the only players that could complain...
Anyone that only plays a few hours a week really isn't being affected to the same degree. The players that play more for the most part are the players supplying the market with sell-able drops and lowering prices due to under-cutting, less farmers equals higher prices even if AD rates go down...
More so those that play more SHOULD be rewarded more...
“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
Also the daily bonus only being available once per reset drops AD significantly on top of the 100k cap which alone would have lowered the AD generated as intended though the one off daily bonus essentially took it further than necessary... Part of the reason RQ's were introduced were to give players an alternative to salvage runs though in Mod 14 a number of players will revert to salvage runs because running two characters will yield the same as running one twice so why do a repeat RQ for much less reward when you can do salvage runs and get more per run...
During events/sales essentially instead of being able to convert AD to Zen and going from there players without sufficient AD will be faced with buying Zen directly...
Going to call it exactly what it looks like, a bait and switch cash grab.
“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
“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
In fact, i had such a person just today: Queued up for RAQ, Edemo popped (yay), we get in and one person summons a teleport post and goes to bryn shander ... like wtf?!!?
There was no disconnect or anything, she just played solo stuff (went on to lonelywood and cold run, too) while still remaining in the queue group to not get the leaver penalty.
To messages asking her to come back in or leave the queue, the response was "XD" ... i mean seriously, those people need a RQ-ban for a week or something like that. If I go for RAQ and dont even wanna play edemo, then why the hell queueing up in the first place? There is literally not a single excuse for this, just purposely being an HAMSTER to 9 other people.
And of course we couldnt kick her; she eventually left after like 12 minutes when others were tired of waiting and left themselves.
I reported her (and encouraged others to do so, aswell), but i am not sure whether this really makes a difference or not. If it does, i would really like to get some sort of notification if some action has taken place against someone i reported so i know i dont do it in vain.
Edit: I just saw that this is an XBOX thread (found it by using the search function and thought it is an appropriate discussion to bring it up here). I play on PC but i think the problem is the same on all platforms.
Those who voted "leave" get their bronze-reward and get out.
Those who voted "stay" get to play the next round; either with less than 5 or they have to wait until another one joins them who also voted "stay" in their respective run.
This way, everybody gets what he signed up for.
In my opinion, if somebody queues up for any RQ, he wants to get the AD-reward (if I wanna do a specific dungeon, I dont RQ).
That said, if I RQ and I get a dungeon I dont wanna run right now or whatever, I leave and take the penalty (thats Ok, its my choice).
If I get something I am willing play to get my reward, I will do it. However, what I dont see is why I should be forced to do more/stay longer than I want/need to. I did my part to do what needs to be done to get the reward, what I ACTUALLY signed up for. If people want to go for gold (I guess this whole problem specifically just applies to IG through RQ), be my guest. But dont force the choice "either you stay with us or leave and abandon the reward that YOU ALREADY EARNED up to this point" uopn me.
Which sort of brings me back to my previous post: Either remove IG from random queues or make it happen that people who voted to leave can get out when they want, getting the reward they earned up to this point.
Funny, thats exactly what "goldrunners" force on "bronzerunners" ... something they didnt sign up for. The goal of RQ is the reward, which you get for finishing bronze. Thats what I sign up for. Anything beyond that should be player decision: I wanna get out? -> I get out. I wanna continue? -> I continue (maybe I will have to wait before someone else also wants to do it/gets to that point in another RQ IG, but hey, noone FORCED me to it, it was my choice to proceed).
I agree on your 2nd point though, if the voting would never have been implemented, there wouldnt be a discussion at all.
If someone lands in content they don't want to run they can no longer leave and switch toons or Disconnect and switch, as the whole acct will get locked.
Ergo, those people who don't care about everyone else will just sit and wait to be vote kicked/everyone else to complete the content.
What about giving every player a sort of "Substitution" option?
You land in content you don't want to be in, and you go to the instance management screen and call for reinforcements on YOURSELF.
As soon as the replacement is found you are kicked and the substitute lands in the dungeon/skirmish. You earn NOTHING from the run.
Your substitution then goes on cooldown for whatever period is deemed appropriate (1 hour, 2 hours, refresh at daily tickover... whatever.) so that its not spammed by people who only want one queue from their "Random" list, and you are free to join another queue. And as a bonus the content you left via your substitution is removed from your next queue so you definitely land somewhere else.
That idea would need some work to fine tune and get right, but it took me about five minutes to come up with. Cryptic have a team of game developers on staff who should be able to find ways to make this stuff easier and less frustrating.
Instead of just looking for ways to coral people into a restrictive pattern of play, and then punish, ban and censure those who object, try looking for ways to help people actually enjoy the bloody game.
As to those players who deliberately AFK expecting others to do all the work, surely its not beyond the ken of man to come up with an algorithm that effectively says, "you didn't do enough running around pressing buttons to qualify for a reward... so you get nothing." but 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.
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.
But there IS the voting system, and you DO get the reward after bronze. So by all means i should be able to get out with the reward I played for at one of the two points possible. So that I'm not being pissed because I am forced to play something i dont want/have to and without upsetting others for going afk after being held hostage (so to speak) to get my reward. There should not be the need to "rig the vote", dont you think?
So either rework IG (maybe like if you enter by queueing directly its the gold version, if you get in by RQ its bronze) OR remove it from RQ OR give everybody the chance to get out at the point they want to. But the way it is right now brings up so many HAMSTER situations ...