test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Please add a replace option to LFG
sapientcrow
Member Posts: 57
For many years now I have played MMOs and in any of them that have an LFG tool there are some standard options. One of them is a replace option. So if someone rage quits or disconnects you are not screwed. Another standard is the option to invite people into a group after it is started.
this LFG tool is like html code on notepad instead of interactive scripting of the modern day.
please hire someone who can code this properly.
this LFG tool is like html code on notepad instead of interactive scripting of the modern day.
please hire someone who can code this properly.
Post edited by sapientcrow on
0
Comments
But, an option to replace DC'd/leavers would be great indeed, especially if you could invite people freely..
I think they went the wrong way with this. Instead of changing leaders every instance and not allowing 'jump-in/jump-out' gameplay, they should put it that if you were healing or hurting during a boss fight, any drops you get a loot roll for, whether your in the instance or not.
Of course, you shouldn't be able to pick up someone in the middle of a fight. Keeps you from giving your whole guild a chance at a loot roll. And the dropped player, whether by accident or intent, wouldn't get access to the final chest if it's available.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
There was no que for TFs, so you usually did them with your friends, or other players waiting at the mission giver, hoping for a team. also they generally weren't as OP as the DDs are. we often ended up having to finish with 4 players, good teams could sometimes do it with 3, but it took a long time. I met at least half of my longtime global friends in that game on TFs. It was a true group experience.
One of the things I really don't like about this game is that the endgame offers OP loot protected by OP mobs. There is often nothing friendly or casual about DD teams. The stakes and the risks are much higher than with TF, and so many people get bent over nothing, quit, or want to cheat that I seldom even do one any more.
After the merge the other day I got into a PK group during the delve hour. We had two GFs and no CW. The DC Immediately complained about this, but we just started, when we got to the surgeon it got tough, we almost wiped. I had my sentinel GWF and ended up just kiting all the mobs around, and eventually the TR and one of the GF whittled the surgeon down and we let it wipe instead of piling straight in on all those deathpledged. Meanwhile, back at the campfire the DC and the other GF had quit the team with six minutes left on the DD hour. They left all the damage dealers hanging because they KNEW they would get qued up again in time for the bonus. Had they stayed we were very capable of finishing the dungeon.
This kind of content just brings out the worst in lots of players. If you let people fill after the dungeon starts there will be no end of exploits, particularly with BOP. Everyone will be logging to an alt that still needs the loot available in the chest or bringing in that 13k CW for the really tough spots, yada yada. Honestly I think letting a team fill will only make things worse. All of the dungeons need to be reworked, the whole concept is flawed and needs a clean slate makeover.
players who d/c or rage quit. so it wont be all for nothing.
something like in STO, "request reinforcements" feature.
"Great men are almost always bad men."
“If God is all-powerful He cannot be good, if God is good He cannot be all-powerful!”
you kiss your mother with that mouth?
i am against the incorporation of penalizing people for leaving groups because there are a lot of reasons why that might happen. and if it happened to you, you'd then complain about how you were screwed out of doing a dungeon delve because "this" happened. that goes for dungeon runs, pvp, skirmishes... all of it. this isn't <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> germany. this is a game and it's supposed to be enjoyable. if playing these games gets you riled up and angry, maybe you should be doing something else.
Personally, though, this would also need a team-vote option so everyone, (or a majority), of the team would have to agree to kick someone in the first place. Like another poster mentioned, it'd also have to include anyone that participated in a fight a shot at the loot, so that teams don't just kick someone mid- or post-battle, either.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
^This. Make kicking a team vote, and only draw the replacement from someone waiting in queue. Great idea.
A team vote option sounds nice but from personal experience in dungeons i've seen that whenever a pop-up appears (nearly) everyone instantly hits shift+1 and if that doesn't do anything shift+2, regardless of what kind of item it is.
So depending on how the vote kick option would work it could either be very good or it could be abused due to everyone spamming the first option instantly.
Well, it'd have to be limited to non-combat only, and there should be some sort of anti-spam feature as well - like you can only make 1 vote per 30 seconds or so... to prevent people using it as a form of team griefing.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
Oh come on, this sounds like a reality show, not a game. Do you seriously think 'voting people off the island' is a good idea? It's a very negative concept, and negative concepts have an alarming tendency to make the problem worse.
Losers would be forever screaming 'GRIEFING!!" at the GMs. Mini rebellions---'Let's get rid of so-and-so' could hopelessly complicate the teamleader's job.
So possible solutions are penalty for manually leaving groups. This works in other games. Another standard is a party vote kick option. As it is the leader can kick as they see fit with no vote so its not really fair as it is. Another option to pull from the queue. Another option is well yet another option.
As it is the LFG is broken. No replace option and single player authority over kicking as well I cant buy things during a queue because it wont popup while I am selling. This is pretty unacceptable for a modern MMO title. Oh and Foundry missions do not save at campfires so running them while in queue is harsh too because you have to rerun the whole thing. So basically I can run around and harvest nodes or do open world quests but mostly I have to stay glued to my monitor for that very low sounding queue and not be selling any items in case I get a queue while in store interface.
Broken broken broken and poorly coded and designed.
I would totally dig living in an ideal world that party members talk to each other and are patient and help each other out but seriously int he real world they dont talk they are impatient and they are very quick to leave. This just leaves many of my dungeon groups not being able to finish at an end boss and after DD has expired.
As opposed to how the leader can kick someone whenever they want... this would be a huge improvement.
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
You seem to forget (or ignore) the fact that the "teamleader" is often chosen at random. It doesn't make them smart or unbiased. Heck, plenty of times I've been in groups where we had to explain to the leader how to transfer leadership or tell them how to queue for certain dungeons.
Indirectly it does. If they add in a method to replace players without updating the kick mechanics then we'd have more griefing of the type that gek1956 referenced. You have to consider the whole system, not just individual parts.
Getting and keeping a good rep as a team leader is part of the art of playing in an MMO. Que systems have an inherent weakness in this regard, because they have no way of evaluating one player against the other. I don't believe a que generated team either needs or should have a leader. It's just another problem waiting to happen. And as we see here it happens all the time.
Maybe if the game forced players to stop and ELECT a leader it would work better, but this would tend to waste time and lead to problems itself.
This type of system is in place in DCUO and works very well. There are more solid reasons why we should be able to replace players that dc, quit, and i think if you are a bad uncooperative player that is hurting the team, you should be replaceable as well. Again, this requires all the other team members to vote as well.
In DCUO, any team member can initiate the vote, so a bad team leader can be kicked if that's the cause of team grief.
Many good ideas here. I think having it pull from the que if fine, but in DCUO, you can invite individual players. During the 2 years, over 1000 hours I played the game (well probably 2000 hours) I do not think i saw a scenario where this was being abused. We did boot a few folks, but it then caused a conversation that lead to that p[layer learning and improving.