yeah, the way that I noticed in these live events that someone was leeching was the 0 damage in the leaderboard summary chart at end.. and it made me initially think that if you do 0 damage you should get no rewards. but after some reflection, I did think it could be unfair to players that have difficulty keeping up. I know myself that I have been in queues where I do not know what I am doing, and it is all I can do to just keep up with the party.
I think if they changed the live events so that there was some timed waygate, it might deter bots or people from going afk. I am a bit skeptical they would make the effort to change the map/event to implement that though.
another way is if a person has zero or almost zero damage no rewards. (damage being healing, damage doing your role basically. if the stats are absent you haven't been helping.. no reward)
New players are likely to hang back, trying to figure things out or avoid getting hit. Especially the new archer type players that can just hang back and pew pew pew. New players may not know to heal, or maybe healing isn't even needed. New players may only be able to land a few hits as well-geared players run ahead and cut through everything like a hot knife through butter. Not good for a new player not to get reward because they were slow.
On the other hand, any damage threshold you pick, players will figure out what that is. Leechers can just go up to the first mob group and do an aoe or two to satisfy it. If they go down, even better as they now have taken damage and can wait at the camp fire for the others to finish the run and collect his reward.
No AFK'er can remain AFK without the entire party noticing using this method and with a programmed count-down kick timer (-vs- a player initiated kick option) a player either plays or they are automatically booted by the game.
So someone who uses the bathroom or goes out for a smoke before starting a long final boss battle can find themselves automatically removed from the instance after a long run to get to the end?
0
Options
greywyndMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 7,093Arc User
Don't mind bio breaks, but if you're in need of a smoke then perhaps you shouldn't be in the dungeon anyway.
I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
Who a person chooses to block is their business. If they don't want to play with a specific person, that's on them. The idea that everybody in an entire network of alliances is going to join hands and block a particular individual is silly. And even if they did, I doubt very much that that player would notice.
While it would take a good long while for leeches to notice a difference, an individual who is no longer coerced by Cryptic to play with the leeches on her/his list would notice a difference right away. Queues would actually be fun again.
Personally I like the idea of "waygates" where the entire party has to assemble before any can proceed... as a matter of fact this technique is so effective, it is used By Neverwinter, in just about every random dungeon right before the final boss battle -
"You Must Gather Your Party Before Proceeding" -
"Your Party Is Waiting For You" -
No AFK'er can remain AFK without the entire party noticing using this method and with a programmed count-down kick timer (-vs- a player initiated kick option) a player either plays or they are automatically booted by the game.
I very much like the idea of a programmed count-down kick timer - so long as it's short. Though I imagine slowlow players will run into trouble if they find themselves trailing a couple high level do littles who ignore all the mobs.
yeah, the way that I noticed in these live events that someone was leeching was the 0 damage in the leaderboard summary chart at end.. and it made me initially think that if you do 0 damage you should get no rewards. but after some reflection, I did think it could be unfair to players that have difficulty keeping up. I know myself that I have been in queues where I do not know what I am doing, and it is all I can do to just keep up with the party.
I guess it depends on the queue, but the vast majority of leeches I run into are extremely well-equipped, and the ones that aren't likely belong to some creep's alt army. It's incredibly rare to run into a newer player who doesn't/can't contribute. Newer players tend to be extraordinarily bold and aggressive.
Most of the time the leeches don't even move from the starting position or they'll move off into some corner out of the way. Sometimes, they'll squat on their throne or hop around the perimeter of the fight just to rub it in. In CTAs you find them perched right on top of the rewards chest like a vulture. The really nasty ones come in pairs and will jeer at everyone in chat.
So, no, there's no way on earth that a newer player who's trying could ever be confused for one of these losers. It takes a conspicuous lack of effort to score a 0.
Pretty much what I said: "party members should not have the power to initiate vote kicks except in extreme circumstances...
And how would the game determine when circumstances are extreme enough to allow players to initiate kicks?
Pretty much as it is now, after an extended cool down period, if a majority of party members feel someone should be removed from the party they can initiate a vote to kick... but that would be for circumstances other than an alleged AFK or disconnect as there would be programmed in-game cause and effect means to remove a character in those instances ("waygates", timers, etc.) and every vote to kick automatically generates a "Report Player Behavior" complaint and lists in a database the accounts of the players who initiated and confirmed the kick vote.
No AFK'er can remain AFK without the entire party noticing using this method and with a programmed count-down kick timer (-vs- a player initiated kick option) a player either plays or they are automatically booted by the game.
So someone who uses the bathroom or goes out for a smoke before starting a long final boss battle can find themselves automatically removed from the instance after a long run to get to the end?
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
I have been in parties where players were willing to wait while another player took care of an urgent matter that couldn't wait, but usually the party was informed of their temporary AFK instead of just waiting for an unresponsive for an extended period of time but be that as it may, regardless of the circumstances I don't think a group should be forced to wait more than two minutes for an unresponsive (AFK) player and coincidentally I think that is also about the same time allotted to disconnected players before they are automatically removed from a queue.
There probably isn't any suggestion that would make everyone happy but I think being able to come up with an acceptable compromise solution that appears to be fair to the greatest number of players would be a giant leap ahead from where we are currently.
For those who believe they may have to take "extended breaks" during any given run - perhaps the best solution for them is to queue private with other players who are made to understand before hand someone may have to absent themselves from the keyboard to "grab a smoke" or whatever...
Don't mind bio breaks, but if you're in need of a smoke then perhaps you shouldn't be in the dungeon anyway.
Agreed...
Bio-breaks take precedence (whether we like it or not) over playing a game anyway... it is entirely probable that a player will receive a dispensation from other party members for an emergency nature call, but even if they don't I think I would be less disturbed and concerned with having to run a dungeon again - than I would be about loading up my gaming chair... (apologies for the icky mental image).
- snip - So, no, there's no way on earth that a newer player who's trying could ever be confused for one of these losers. It takes a conspicuous lack of effort to score a 0.
Again, disagree...
As I already mentioned, I've been in parties where I and other party members were left behind and the player/players who ran off and left us killed everything in sight before we even got there, leaving me/us with a Zero or near-Zero damage score...
So end run damage score would, I believe, be one of the least effective methods of trying to determine who's actually trying and who's leeching during a random run.
For those "well equipped" players who anyone thinks is leeching or scamming other players and game content, there is always the "Report Player Behavior" option... granted probably not the most effective option but I'd rather a dozen actual leeches be allowed to play through than take the risk of kicking out one bonafide player who's struggling, or falsely accused of leeching.
I was just in the event queue a little while ago and someone voted to kick a player for disconnect. When I looked at the player to be kicked, on the side of the screen, I saw they had aggro and, needless to say, was bit confused. I saw no one disconnected.
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
0
Options
greywyndMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 7,093Arc User
No different than the one's that vote to kick for "harassment" when the individual in question is playing, nothing is being said in chat, etc.
I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
There already is such a timer in the game - a player cannot be kicked for 5 minutes after they arrived. What your additional time at the gate does is give the AFK another 5 minutes. If the guy hasn't moved in five minutes from the start, and hasn't said anything, or responded to DM, it is time to kick. Swiftly and with extreme prejudice.
To sum up the postings I read in my absence, many will agree the language and communications is a huge problem. I don't recall the exact date, but in Fall of 2016 they increased the chat restrictions to stupid levels beyond imagination. Now when a new player (English speaking or Not) enters the game they are voiceless. They try to ask something in chat (zone, trade, say, emotes, etc.) ALL are blocked and they get a notice they must run "quest chains" to get it lifted. Other than researching the forums, they cannot even ask where to get these quests. They can't know if they did them already did these quest chains because the current module took out deeds in the journal. It is very probable, with the current restrictions, that the player cannot even communicate with the party at all. After level 15 they can start module 15 and who would blame them? Honestly I am surprised we have anyone new wanting to play the game beyond level 30 or 40 with the heavy handed chat restrictions.
To make chat restricted, but usable, I would have a menu of Q&A "like emotes" for restricted players to use. These would be simple answers like (Yes, No, I don't know?, Maybe) and simple questions (Where is the bank?, Where can I spend AD?, I am a (insert class) I need a party for (insert quest). etc.). These would have a 20 second cool down to prevent spamming. At present, the new player cannot even ask about these forums in the game, and heaven forbid they cannot speak English.
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
There already is such a timer in the game - a player cannot be kicked for 5 minutes after they arrived. What your additional time at the gate does is give the AFK another 5 minutes. If the guy hasn't moved in five minutes from the start, and hasn't said anything, or responded to DM, it is time to kick. Swiftly and with extreme prejudice.
I can't tell if you're being intentionally obtuse, or you're actually having difficulty grasping the concept... for the time being I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
The only timers are for Disconnect and AFK but they are taken from the player/group option and put on a programmed auto timer which will remove the player expediently and without bias if they remain disconnected or fail to move (or arrive at a waygate) in a preset timely manner - as I thought I clearly said in my previous replies.
Sometimes there are valid reasons why a player hasn't moved from the start... I just finished a Cloak Tower RLQ, four of us show up and three take off like they are being chased.
I stay by the healing circle for a full minute to see if the fifth party member shows up - they don't and I guess they either got disconnected or decided to quit but they were removed from the party automatically. I requested reinforcements (not that we needed any) and set out to catch up with the rest of the party, by the time I did they were well into the run.
Someone may have thought I was AFK or Leeching because I didn't move when they did, but they would have been wrong.
If I had been removed from the game by other players, I'd blame those other players for removing me without good cause - If I had been removed from the game by a programmed auto-timer, I'd have no one but myself to blame.
To sum up the postings I read in my absence, many will agree the language and communications is a huge problem. I don't recall the exact date, but in Fall of 2016 they increased the chat restrictions to stupid levels beyond imagination. Now when a new player (English speaking or Not) enters the game they are voiceless. They try to ask something in chat (zone, trade, say, emotes, etc.) ALL are blocked and they get a notice they must run "quest chains" to get it lifted. Other than researching the forums, they cannot even ask where to get these quests. They can't know if they did them already did these quest chains because the current module took out deeds in the journal. It is very probable, with the current restrictions, that the player cannot even communicate with the party at all. After level 15 they can start module 15 and who would blame them? Honestly I am surprised we have anyone new wanting to play the game beyond level 30 or 40 with the heavy handed chat restrictions.
To make chat restricted, but usable, I would have a menu of Q&A "like emotes" for restricted players to use. These would be simple answers like (Yes, No, I don't know?, Maybe) and simple questions (Where is the bank?, Where can I spend AD?, I am a (insert class) I need a party for (insert quest). etc.). These would have a 20 second cool down to prevent spamming. At present, the new player cannot even ask about these forums in the game, and heaven forbid they cannot speak English.
I agree with the chat restrictions didn't seem to be well thought out (I understand it was in an attempt to combat third-party sales spam, but...) and totally believe it could have (and still can be) handled better...
For instance Right Click on Avatar to show pre-programmed messages (Tells), or emotes for pre-chat approved players but can be used by any player at any level can use if they choose to do so...
Pre-programmed messages like:
Slow Down!
Catch UP-We'll Wait -
I need Help!
Do You Need Help/merchant/to heal? (**Used by higher level players for lower level players)
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
Cool. I will kick that "bad behaving" AFK leecher immediately since it is not on a timer. Report complaint to GM? Is that suppose to deter people from kicking? Don't think it will work too well.
Actually the majority of games get a very nice population boost during vacations since a lot of students can now play on their computers most of the day.
Neverwinter is getting heavly hammered by mod 16 and all the issues related by mod 16. No point ignoring the main issue.
I was just in the event queue a little while ago and someone voted to kick a player for disconnect. When I looked at the player to be kicked, on the side of the screen, I saw they had aggro and, needless to say, was bit confused. I saw no one disconnected.
No different than the one's that vote to kick for "harassment" when the individual in question is playing, nothing is being said in chat, etc.
Sometimes people accidentally select the wrong reason because they're in the middle of stuff and rushing. But I've seen players who were disconnected for several minutes come back and start playing. Usually people chalk it up to a legitimate disconnect and let it slide, but occasionally someone in the group isn't so forgiving. I see kick votes for harrassment in Thrones now and then when you've got some goofball running around murdering Thoon Hulks on purpose.
As I already mentioned, I've been in parties where I and other party members were left behind and the player/players who ran off and left us killed everything in sight before we even got there, leaving me/us with a Zero or near-Zero damage score...
Oh, I'm sure it happens, but as I said, "it depends on the queue." Your example's an exception really, and it's mostly a leveling dungeon thing. It's borderline impossible for a player who's making even a slight effort to get 0 damage in a skirmish. In something like a CTA, 0 damage, 0 damage taken, 0 healing, 0 enemies killed tends to be pretty telling.
I think finding leeches in a dungeon is pretty rare in the lower levels. At that level, leeches prefer skirmishes. They have decent rewards. Some of them usually end before the ability to kick becomes available, and the leech doesn't have to move. Even moving takes too much effort for the traditional leech. Leeches with more intelligence will at least muster the energy to shift their mass one or two times - just enough to park themselves where the action is so their companion can do some work. And occasionally you get one who tries to look busy. Last week in Throne - Infiltration I watched a wizard run circles in the middle of the hall casting random bolts of lightning, but not once did he actually target a mob.
On PS4 at least, if you block a player, you block the player's account. It doesn't matter whether it's an alt or not. Of course the way Neverwinter is currently, it doesn't matter if you block the player's account anyway. It's like serving a court order on a reused bar napkin.
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
There already is such a timer in the game - a player cannot be kicked for 5 minutes after they arrived. What your additional time at the gate does is give the AFK another 5 minutes. If the guy hasn't moved in five minutes from the start, and hasn't said anything, or responded to DM, it is time to kick. Swiftly and with extreme prejudice.
What such timers would do is to make the AFKers just move a little bit or do a little damage before AFKing. Given the usual short duration for these runs, the AFKer can't be very far away from his keyboard anyways.
You could of course say 1 minute with no input = kick, but that would interfere with legit AFKing like bathroom visits(remember to wash your hands!!)
I can't really see a good technical solution to this that won't affect legit players.
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
Cool. I will kick that "bad behaving" AFK leecher immediately since it is not on a timer. Report complaint to GM? Is that suppose to deter people from kicking? Don't think it will work too well.
The thing is @namelesshero347 (beginning to think obtuse), if upon a developer reviewing the run (Yes, I believe they can do that) and it is determined there was no instance of AFK or what seemed to them to be leeching then the person who initiates the kick vote can be banned for 48-hours or more.
Right now people are saying they are choosy about voting to kick because they can't use it again for 4-hours, I'm guessing they would be inclined to be even more choosy about starting a vote to kick if they have a chance of being suspended for 48-hours for a bogus kick vote...
There are already instances of people saying in previous posts, there was a vote to kick initiated but the person posting could see no evidence of the infraction that was being used to justify the vote.
People want to start a vote to kick for AFK or Leeching, fine... chances are not every instance will be checked.
However if someone does get caught turning in a bogus vote to kick and they wind up being suspended or even banned, they will have no one but themselves to blame. "Report Player Behavior" goes both ways, If I felt I was unjustly kicked from a random queue - you better believe I'd be turning in a "Report Player Behavior" complaint against the person who initiated the kick vote.
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
There already is such a timer in the game - a player cannot be kicked for 5 minutes after they arrived. What your additional time at the gate does is give the AFK another 5 minutes. If the guy hasn't moved in five minutes from the start, and hasn't said anything, or responded to DM, it is time to kick. Swiftly and with extreme prejudice.
What such timers would do is to make the AFKers just move a little bit or do a little damage before AFKing. Given the usual short duration for these runs, the AFKer can't be very far away from his keyboard anyways.
You could of course say 1 minute with no input = kick, but that would interfere with legit AFKing like bathroom visits(remember to wash your hands!!)
I can't really see a good technical solution to this that won't affect legit players.
"Moving a little bit" wouldn't do anyone any good if as I suggested, there were waygates where the party must assemble before everyone can move on to the next area (kind of like the final boss gate in dungeons). We know it can be done because it is already being done it just takes someone be of the opinion it should be done.
I already mentioned it's just common sense that bio-breaks have priority over playing the game... of course that being said if someone is away from the game (AFK) beyond the allotted time - regardless of reason, it is fair and reasonable to have them removed from the game. Yes their AFK wasn't entirely their fault, but at the same time it isn't reasonable to expect 4-9 or more players to wait on one just because they have to take a potty break or whatever.
I believe in being fair... but that means fair to everyone, not just the person who has to step away for a few minutes.
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
Cool. I will kick that "bad behaving" AFK leecher immediately since it is not on a timer. Report complaint to GM? Is that suppose to deter people from kicking? Don't think it will work too well.
The thing is @namelesshero347 (beginning to think obtuse), if upon a developer reviewing the run (Yes, I believe they can do that) and it is determined there was no instance of AFK or what seemed to them to be leeching then the person who initiates the kick vote can be banned for 48-hours or more.
Right now people are saying they are choosy about voting to kick because they can't use it again for 4-hours, I'm guessing they would be inclined to be even more choosy about starting a vote to kick if they have a chance of being suspended for 48-hours for a bogus kick vote...
There are already instances of people saying in previous posts, there was a vote to kick initiated but the person posting could see no evidence of the infraction that was being used to justify the vote.
People want to start a vote to kick for AFK or Leeching, fine... chances are not every instance will be checked.
However if someone does get caught turning in a bogus vote to kick and they wind up being suspended or even banned, they will have no one but themselves to blame. "Report Player Behavior" goes both ways, If I felt I was unjustly kicked from a random queue - you better believe I'd be turning in a "Report Player Behavior" complaint against the person who initiated the kick vote.
So you want cryptic to pay someone to arbitrate small player disputes in real-time, made judgements on which vote is "bogus", and exact punishment. You have got to be chitting me. You do realize this is just a game?
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
Cool. I will kick that "bad behaving" AFK leecher immediately since it is not on a timer. Report complaint to GM? Is that suppose to deter people from kicking? Don't think it will work too well.
The thing is @namelesshero347 (beginning to think obtuse), if upon a developer reviewing the run (Yes, I believe they can do that) and it is determined there was no instance of AFK or what seemed to them to be leeching then the person who initiates the kick vote can be banned for 48-hours or more.
Right now people are saying they are choosy about voting to kick because they can't use it again for 4-hours, I'm guessing they would be inclined to be even more choosy about starting a vote to kick if they have a chance of being suspended for 48-hours for a bogus kick vote...
There are already instances of people saying in previous posts, there was a vote to kick initiated but the person posting could see no evidence of the infraction that was being used to justify the vote.
People want to start a vote to kick for AFK or Leeching, fine... chances are not every instance will be checked.
However if someone does get caught turning in a bogus vote to kick and they wind up being suspended or even banned, they will have no one but themselves to blame. "Report Player Behavior" goes both ways, If I felt I was unjustly kicked from a random queue - you better believe I'd be turning in a "Report Player Behavior" complaint against the person who initiated the kick vote.
So you want cryptic to pay someone to arbitrate small player disputes in real-time, made judgements on which vote is "bogus", and exact punishment. You have got to be chitting me. You do realize this is just a game?
(*Yep obtuse it seems... ) Show me where I said anything about arbitration - I didn't so you can't.
The game and everything in it belongs to Cryptic they make the rules and can alter the Terms of Service or in game regulations whenever and however they wish.
If Cryptic decides go eliminate vote-to-kick entirely they can, if they want to reduce the timer on the vote they can - if they want to extend the timer they can do that too.
They can and I suspect already have designated people to review specific instances of the game and determine (in their opinion) if there was an attempted exploit such as AFK or Leeching, etc. and if there was or wasn't a valid reason for someone to initiate a vote to kick if they want and how or if they should address any determined infraction(s). They do it all the time.
Yes this is just a game, to us... but it is also a money maker for PWE, Cryptic and everyone associated with them so it is in their best interest to address instances of harmful exploitation of all kinds and to attempt to keep the majority of the player base appeased, while still earning money, as much as possible.
Comments
I think if they changed the live events so that there was some timed waygate, it might deter bots or people from going afk. I am a bit skeptical they would make the effort to change the map/event to implement that though.
On the other hand, any damage threshold you pick, players will figure out what that is. Leechers can just go up to the first mob group and do an aoe or two to satisfy it. If they go down, even better as they now have taken damage and can wait at the camp fire for the others to finish the run and collect his reward.
While it would take a good long while for leeches to notice a difference, an individual who is no longer coerced by Cryptic to play with the leeches on her/his list would notice a difference right away. Queues would actually be fun again. I very much like the idea of a programmed count-down kick timer - so long as it's short. Though I imagine slowlow players will run into trouble if they find themselves trailing a couple high level do littles who ignore all the mobs.
Most of the time the leeches don't even move from the starting position or they'll move off into some corner out of the way. Sometimes, they'll squat on their throne or hop around the perimeter of the fight just to rub it in. In CTAs you find them perched right on top of the rewards chest like a vulture. The really nasty ones come in pairs and will jeer at everyone in chat.
So, no, there's no way on earth that a newer player who's trying could ever be confused for one of these losers. It takes a conspicuous lack of effort to score a 0.
Notice I mentioned programmed "count-down" kick timer... the length of time for the programmed count down timer - the time other players are expected to wait for someone to assemble at a way gate is as yet undetermined...
I have been in parties where players were willing to wait while another player took care of an urgent matter that couldn't wait, but usually the party was informed of their temporary AFK instead of just waiting for an unresponsive for an extended period of time but be that as it may, regardless of the circumstances I don't think a group should be forced to wait more than two minutes for an unresponsive (AFK) player and coincidentally I think that is also about the same time allotted to disconnected players before they are automatically removed from a queue.
There probably isn't any suggestion that would make everyone happy but I think being able to come up with an acceptable compromise solution that appears to be fair to the greatest number of players would be a giant leap ahead from where we are currently.
For those who believe they may have to take "extended breaks" during any given run - perhaps the best solution for them is to queue private with other players who are made to understand before hand someone may have to absent themselves from the keyboard to "grab a smoke" or whatever... Agreed...
Bio-breaks take precedence (whether we like it or not) over playing a game anyway... it is entirely probable that a player will receive a dispensation from other party members for an emergency nature call, but even if they don't I think I would be less disturbed and concerned with having to run a dungeon again - than I would be about loading up my gaming chair... (apologies for the icky mental image). Again, disagree...
As I already mentioned, I've been in parties where I and other party members were left behind and the player/players who ran off and left us killed everything in sight before we even got there, leaving me/us with a Zero or near-Zero damage score...
So end run damage score would, I believe, be one of the least effective methods of trying to determine who's actually trying and who's leeching during a random run.
For those "well equipped" players who anyone thinks is leeching or scamming other players and game content, there is always the "Report Player Behavior" option... granted probably not the most effective option but I'd rather a dozen actual leeches be allowed to play through than take the risk of kicking out one bonafide player who's struggling, or falsely accused of leeching.
But maybe that's just me...
To make chat restricted, but usable, I would have a menu of Q&A "like emotes" for restricted players to use. These would be simple answers like (Yes, No, I don't know?, Maybe) and simple questions (Where is the bank?, Where can I spend AD?, I am a (insert class) I need a party for (insert quest). etc.). These would have a 20 second cool down to prevent spamming. At present, the new player cannot even ask about these forums in the game, and heaven forbid they cannot speak English.
The only reason players can vote for someone to be kicked, is "Player Behavior" - period - which automatically submits a "Report Player Behavior" complaint to the GM and puts the names of the other party members in a database and that is not on a timer.
The only timers are for Disconnect and AFK but they are taken from the player/group option and put on a programmed auto timer which will remove the player expediently and without bias if they remain disconnected or fail to move (or arrive at a waygate) in a preset timely manner - as I thought I clearly said in my previous replies.
Sometimes there are valid reasons why a player hasn't moved from the start... I just finished a Cloak Tower RLQ, four of us show up and three take off like they are being chased.
I stay by the healing circle for a full minute to see if the fifth party member shows up - they don't and I guess they either got disconnected or decided to quit but they were removed from the party automatically. I requested reinforcements (not that we needed any) and set out to catch up with the rest of the party, by the time I did they were well into the run.
Someone may have thought I was AFK or Leeching because I didn't move when they did, but they would have been wrong.
If I had been removed from the game by other players, I'd blame those other players for removing me without good cause - If I had been removed from the game by a programmed auto-timer, I'd have no one but myself to blame. I agree with the chat restrictions didn't seem to be well thought out (I understand it was in an attempt to combat third-party sales spam, but...) and totally believe it could have (and still can be) handled better...
For instance Right Click on Avatar to show pre-programmed messages (Tells), or emotes for pre-chat approved players but can be used by any player at any level can use if they choose to do so...
Pre-programmed messages like:
- Slow Down!
- Catch UP-We'll Wait -
- I need Help!
- Do You Need Help/merchant/to heal? (**Used by higher level players for lower level players)
¢¢Neverwinter is getting heavly hammered by mod 16 and all the issues related by mod 16. No point ignoring the main issue.
I think finding leeches in a dungeon is pretty rare in the lower levels. At that level, leeches prefer skirmishes. They have decent rewards. Some of them usually end before the ability to kick becomes available, and the leech doesn't have to move. Even moving takes too much effort for the traditional leech. Leeches with more intelligence will at least muster the energy to shift their mass one or two times - just enough to park themselves where the action is so their companion can do some work. And occasionally you get one who tries to look busy. Last week in Throne - Infiltration I watched a wizard run circles in the middle of the hall casting random bolts of lightning, but not once did he actually target a mob.
Of course the way Neverwinter is currently, it doesn't matter if you block the player's account anyway.
It's like serving a court order on a reused bar napkin.
lol - whut?
Look at the number of views this kind of thread has.
Players actually do care about being shoved into a cage with these kinds of people.
You could of course say 1 minute with no input = kick, but that would interfere with legit AFKing like bathroom visits(remember to wash your hands!!)
I can't really see a good technical solution to this that won't affect legit players.
Right now people are saying they are choosy about voting to kick because they can't use it again for 4-hours, I'm guessing they would be inclined to be even more choosy about starting a vote to kick if they have a chance of being suspended for 48-hours for a bogus kick vote...
There are already instances of people saying in previous posts, there was a vote to kick initiated but the person posting could see no evidence of the infraction that was being used to justify the vote.
People want to start a vote to kick for AFK or Leeching, fine... chances are not every instance will be checked.
However if someone does get caught turning in a bogus vote to kick and they wind up being suspended or even banned, they will have no one but themselves to blame. "Report Player Behavior" goes both ways, If I felt I was unjustly kicked from a random queue - you better believe I'd be turning in a "Report Player Behavior" complaint against the person who initiated the kick vote.
I already mentioned it's just common sense that bio-breaks have priority over playing the game... of course that being said if someone is away from the game (AFK) beyond the allotted time - regardless of reason, it is fair and reasonable to have them removed from the game. Yes their AFK wasn't entirely their fault, but at the same time it isn't reasonable to expect 4-9 or more players to wait on one just because they have to take a potty break or whatever.
I believe in being fair... but that means fair to everyone, not just the person who has to step away for a few minutes.
My ¢¢
The game and everything in it belongs to Cryptic they make the rules and can alter the Terms of Service or in game regulations whenever and however they wish.
If Cryptic decides go eliminate vote-to-kick entirely they can, if they want to reduce the timer on the vote they can - if they want to extend the timer they can do that too.
They can and I suspect already have designated people to review specific instances of the game and determine (in their opinion) if there was an attempted exploit such as AFK or Leeching, etc. and if there was or wasn't a valid reason for someone to initiate a vote to kick if they want and how or if they should address any determined infraction(s). They do it all the time.
Yes this is just a game, to us... but it is also a money maker for PWE, Cryptic and everyone associated with them so it is in their best interest to address instances of harmful exploitation of all kinds and to attempt to keep the majority of the player base appeased, while still earning money, as much as possible.