/partyremove

[Kistilan]

There is no reason to change what we have it is the best systema nd we dont need no middle ground

It's controversial, just like Reincarnation and Full Character Respec.

The need is in the eye of the beholder. Some people do *want* this ability, but they want it implemented correctly. The old version was obviously flawed and inherently grief-centric. A new system without that flaw would be the best system for a majority that do want this as an option.

Reforming when you're even 25% or 50% of the way through a successful run is one of those things the other 5 players shouldn't have to do because some fellow decides to stay afk and not contribute.

And that's just the piker issue. There are the other disingenuous and disreputable actions that also deserve a good /kick when not following the party leader's request.

I'm sure some people would also love the sweet sweet irony of a zerger running full-speed ahead of the group they joined (that advertised Smell'n The Roses Team-Player Pace!) and eventually dies with 50% of the dungeon cleared by their solo suicide. A well-timed kick would be applauded by the other 5 members and a hearty "Thank-you for making the dungeon easier to explore, but we wanted to kill the monsters as a group."

[MonsterAbuser]

/not signed

[Zenako]

It's controversial, just like Reincarnation and Full Character Respec.

The need is in the eye of the beholder. Some people do *want* this ability, but they want it implemented correctly. The old version was obviously flawed and inherently grief-centric. A new system without that flaw would be the best system for a majority that do want this as an option.

Reforming when you're even 25% or 50% of the way through a successful run is one of those things the other 5 players shouldn't have to do because some fellow decides to stay afk and not contribute.

And that's just the piker issue. There are the other disingenuous and disreputable actions that also deserve a good /kick when not following the party leader's request.

I'm sure some people would also love the sweet sweet irony of a zerger running full-speed ahead of the group they joined (that advertised Smell'n The Roses Team-Player Pace!) and eventually dies with 50% of the dungeon cleared by their solo suicide. A well-timed kick would be applauded by the other 5 members and a hearty "Thank-you for making the dungeon easier to explore, but we wanted to kill the monsters as a group."

While it seems like the above is a cut and dried simple system. There really is little in the way of safeguards to prevent abuse, or the Boot for a Guildy thing is there? Anything with timers can obviously be worked around by just popping the star to another of the team, so they do they deed instead. Or even for people just being spiteful, and booting someone, just because they can.

At the elite end game level, yah a lot of players are concerned about not trashing their reputation, but at the Free to PLay level, many of the could care less from what I have seen.

Putting limits such as Total Favor or length of Subscription only open other issues, that are also not easily solved.

[Gunga]

It's controversial, just like Reincarnation and Full Character Respec.

The need is in the eye of the beholder. Some people do *want* this ability, but they want it implemented correctly. The old version was obviously flawed and inherently grief-centric. A new system without that flaw would be the best system for a majority that do want this as an option.

Reforming when you're even 25% or 50% of the way through a successful run is one of those things the other 5 players shouldn't have to do because some fellow decides to stay afk and not contribute.

And that's just the piker issue. There are the other disingenuous and disreputable actions that also deserve a good /kick when not following the party leader's request.

I'm sure some people would also love the sweet sweet irony of a zerger running full-speed ahead of the group they joined (that advertised Smell'n The Roses Team-Player Pace!) and eventually dies with 50% of the dungeon cleared by their solo suicide. A well-timed kick would be applauded by the other 5 members and a hearty "Thank-you for making the dungeon easier to explore, but we wanted to kill the monsters as a group."

No.

You haven't given even one example of why such a mechanic is needed that doesn't provoke an even worse reaction.

/reform

[Kistilan]

While it seems like the above is a cut and dried simple system. There really is little in the way of safeguards to prevent abuse, or the Boot for a Guildy thing is there? Anything with timers can obviously be worked around by just popping the star to another of the team, so they do they deed instead. Or even for people just being spiteful, and booting someone, just because they can.

At the elite end game level, yah a lot of players are concerned about not trashing their reputation, but at the Free to PLay level, many of the could care less from what I have seen.

Putting limits such as Total Favor or length of Subscription only open other issues, that are also not easily solved.

I have considered the star swop. If it's a group of jerks, they're gonna find a way if it's 5 versus 1. Why would I continue to play with them anyway? Logically-speaking, the boot is a clear indication as to what groups with which one will never run again. Secondly, if it's simply a timer and swop, then let's bring the timer down even further to 5 "Ticks" for disagree about a boot. That allows someone to do something really dumb once, and the second time they're out. Now singular jerks get 1-kick before they lock themselves out theoretically for 5 months. Groups will be able to hot-potatoe up to 5 hits in a month, and someone that keeps coming back for that kind of abuse isn't getting the picture that the guild's a group of aces.

No.

You haven't given even one example of why such a mechanic is needed that doesn't provoke an even worse reaction.

/reform

I have given several examples.

[Gunga]

I have given several examples.

Again, this time with feeling.

You have not given us one example THAT DOESN'T PROVOKE AN EQUAL OR WORSE REACTION.

[Renvar]

/not signed

This just feels to me like:

1) fixing something that isn't broken. You have a mechanic for this. recall and reform.
2) a cure that is worse than the disease. I would rather 100 pikers get free xp than 1 good, quality player get unfairly booted right before opening the end chest or right before XP is awarded. And it would happen. There are too many jerks out there.
3) It would heavily limit Pugging groups with new people.

Now if it could be implemented like the way hirelings are now and you can't summon a hireling if you are too far from the enterance and the logic was that if you had accomplished more than 25% percent of the quest objectives or explored more than x% of the map, then it would be better. I have no problem with a dismissal very early on in a quest. But once someone has invested time and (potentially) consumables to a quest it could be highly unfair.

I think the result would be that there would be a lot less PuG groups running (or a lot more with one or two people in them. Everyone wants to have the star). You might see people only running with leaders they knew very well and could trust.

All so that you can, on the very rare occasion it is necessary, dismiss someone from the party without having to reform.

Sorry. The juice aint worth the squeeze. IMO.

[mystoryflavor]

You used to be able to but there are just to many people out there that have the nerve to kick someone for a stupid reason. You have someone with a short temper with a star and soon enough there's 4 people kicked from the group and if you would ask why then you can consider yourself kicked. it's a stupid idea, if someone is ruining your play time report them or finiish up and then kick him. It really is that simple..

[Greydeath]

Ultimately the vast majority of people complaining that this would be 'abused' somehow, are for the most part the ones that would be removed for good reason.

Indeed it is interesting that hardly anyone in this thread was around when it was available and therefore have utterly ZERO first hand experience with it. Very similar to the raid loot nerf - everyone whined that they never got to raid and that if they did the leader always stole the loot... funny but of all the suggestions that this would happen, the actual instances where it did were few to none.


Recalling is not a subsitution for this ability. Certainly someone WOULD greif with it, but those people rapidly become known and are exactly the type you want to be able to remove yourself. People griefed LESS when this was a leader option since there were consequences when you did so - none go figure it is pretty rampant.

[LightInDark]

/not signed

This is a bad idea , last time you had it you didnt have FTP. I pug a lot and I dont mind things going bad but nothing would bug me more than being booted from a quest just because I was having a bad day, or I disagreed with the leader. Just ask them to leave or reforming is good enough.

[biggin]

Still think it's a bad idea.

And no, I don't think it's a bad idea just because I would get kicked from parties on a regular basis.

I just don't see how anyone can be so entirely disruptive to a party that it could implement a system that could be used to grief. If a party member is being a tard, just let them die. If they are so self sufficient that they can clear a dungeoun by themselves, then I guess you'd be the "pikers". Either way the problem fixes itself. Now, I will say this makes a little more sense now that quests scale, but 1 more in party isn't that big of deal. To me its no different than building an exploit into the game. It may serve 1 purpose, but will undoubtedly be used for another. And it's not the people who are well established and been playing for a while that will be hurt by this. I can just see /partyremove being spammed on the general chat tab already.

[RequiemVampie]

/signed

[taurean430]

Still think it's a bad idea.

And no, I don't think it's a bad idea just because I would get kicked from parties on a regular basis.

I just don't see how anyone can be so entirely disruptive to a party that it could implement a system that could be used to grief. If a party member is being a tard, just let them die. If they are so self sufficient that they can clear a dungeoun by themselves, then I guess you'd be the "pikers". Either way the problem fixes itself. Now, I will say this makes a little more sense now that quests scale, but 1 more in party isn't that big of deal. To me its no different than building an exploit into the game. It may serve 1 purpose, but will undoubtedly be used for another. And it's not the people who are well established and been playing for a while that will be hurt by this. I can just see /partyremove being spammed on the general chat tab already.

I guess all that I am saying in terms of this idea is that we need something to stop people from leeching xp/loot. The person I referred to in an earlier post... I've seen him in 8 different pug groups since that incident. Only one of the party leaders was willing to recall, kick him, and reform.

For folks that may not get where I am coming from; what this guy is doing is:

1. Joins a party
2. insists on getting an additional sorc, to the point of spamming responses in party chat and annoying everyone.
3. Stands at the start point of any quest and will not move or respond to party chat, tells, or mic.
4. If something didn't go his way in terms of what he spammed party chat for, he'll recall out and re-enter the quest.
5. Collects xp and loot from the quest when the active members attain quest completion.

I've witnessed this guy doing this multiple times on TS runs, Caverns of Corremar, etc... He leaves us a person short and I'm sure is laughing his proverbial butt off as we struggle through the quest. And he's getting xp/loot for nothing by taking advantage of players willing to work to completion.

The first time I saw it, I figured it was some glitch/afk/dc... anything but what it looked like. But this guy was level 8 two days ago, and is now level 13. I doubt the possibility that he's worked torward any quest at all. But he's advancing much faster than the rest of us.

It won't be long before some of you on Khyber see him in your level 20 runs. Mark my words...

[bobbryan2]

Ultimately the vast majority of people complaining that this would be 'abused' somehow, are for the most part the ones that would be removed for good reason.

That's a very ignorant statement. A lot of time and effort is put into MMOs to disallow rampant griefing. There has to be some incredible gain for the community to allow such a blatant chink in the armor... and "I wish that piker didn't get to have his xp just isn't gonna cut it."

[Kistilan]

Ultimately the vast majority of people complaining that this would be 'abused' somehow, are for the most part the ones that would be removed for good reason.

Indeed it is interesting that hardly anyone in this thread was around when it was available and therefore have utterly ZERO first hand experience with it. Very similar to the raid loot nerf - everyone whined that they never got to raid and that if they did the leader always stole the loot... funny but of all the suggestions that this would happen, the actual instances where it did were few to none.


Recalling is not a subsitution for this ability. Certainly someone WOULD greif with it, but those people rapidly become known and are exactly the type you want to be able to remove yourself. People griefed LESS when this was a leader option since there were consequences when you did so - none go figure it is pretty rampant.

*nods*

There are some /no folks that were around when this tool was available in its first format, and I understand their knee-jerk reaction based upon that.

You're defo reiterating my self-correcting assertion of the mechanic.

And folks, if you think I'm arguing for this mechanic just for the sake of arguing, I'm not. If you played on Argo in the last 3 years and pug'd frequently, you've probably been in one of my groups. Since EU, I've run into a lot of instances where the /kick feature would be a blessing to the other 4 people I'm leading at any given time. Prior to EU, I had encounters too where again this feature would be useful.

Hell, there's even a Titan raid that I made my own personal science project where I wouldn't have blamed the Cool Guys Club for /kicking me and discussing the details of the shennanigans later. I would not have given them a /disagree vote for that boot either, although I wasn't trying to sabotage the raid (but came **** close by hitting the wrong spell button during my science experiment).

And as a few have noted, a lot of the disagreement is by those that won't take the high road or will incur the penalties of this system suggestion (id modified vote and disagree counter).

I think it'd be extra-keen if Turbine to put a rotten apple floating next to the character's name whenever they get locked out of the /kick feature for booting people unjustly too much. Just say'n... that'd be cute.

[Zenako]

Part of the problem is that the proponents are presenting the worst case scenario, which I have seldom if ever seen. Complete piking, never seen. (being a useless toon in a party...oh yeah). In the case of the complete piker/abuser, having something like this seems like a good idea, BUT, where do you draw the line.

Is someone who is trying and coming along as fast as they can in an unfamiliar quest going to get booted? If they are far enough back, especially in a fast moving group, they might actually end up killing no more than the guy who went permanently AFK at the door? This type of thing is a LOT more prevelant at lower character levels. Witness the tons of posts lamenting "zergers" and how they ruin their early game experiences. Now give those zergers the star so they can just boot the player before they even get anything. That leaves a good impression I am sure with that new, probably soon to be ex, player.

The extreme cases seem to call for some ability like this, but the real problem is where do you draw the line? That is why many of the "no" votes are no.

[Razcar]

Hmmm, I'm not so sure about this. Elitist type party leaders might abuse this system. I guess a vote-kick system would be better comrades.

The party leader (only) can choose "Vote to Remove" for a member in a group. All other party members than the one concerned gets a dialogue box with text akin to "Would you like to remove player X from your party?" All have to answer "Yes" for the person to be kicked out inside a quest.

Less risk of getting leechers/saboteurs, less risk of griefing/PL power tripping.
Would it still be abused? Absolutely. And will ever see this functionality in game? Not a chance.

[Zenako]

Because you also have to consider various party size dynamics.

In a party of 2, could you use it ? If so, the leader could just boot the other player when ever they wanted to.

In a party of 3, the odd man out, gets booted if for example two buddies (one leader, one cronie) decide it works for them.

Would it be hard in a raid of 12 to get 10 other players to agree with the leader on things like this? Pretty likely. There will almost always be someone to have the back of the potential bootee, unless they are beyond the pale.

ON a game mechanics question, where does the booted person end up? Their Bind point? The quest entrance?

When someone complains to the GM's about getting booted, what are the criteria that you want a GM to actually be looking at? Many times it will be more like a he said/she said kinda deal. While somethings are perhaps traceable, other things like attitude over voice chat or style of play are not. Be prepared for the "threads" whining, "I booted this jerk, but got a 3-day ban for it", that will have no happy place to land.

Yes the piker/griefer is doing the group wrong, but unless they are proactively preventing the group from completion (like you could do in WW2 for example), then you can just complete without them. Finish quest and drop. IF they are proactively griefing you, file a harrassment claim. In the long run that should be more effective at weeding out bad apples. You can be sure that in some circles getting booted would be a badge of honor. "Hey dude, I got booted from 6 groups today!!!"

[Razcar]

Yes, I do not think we will see a "quest kick" function ever implemented. You cannot implement a "good" systems for this, only a "less bad" one. The negative splatter effects are just too many. Reforming works, and it works because it's a bother to do it, and because most content where you could get a bad seed in your group in the first place is short and easy to finish anyway. Finsh the quest - in extreme cases reform and restart.

[Krag]

/not signed

However I would support mechanics that lifts booting restrictions from players who are AFK after a certain amount of time.