Now i know lots of people who hate this, and want a way for it to be stopped.
Now there are 2 ways to end this:
1. Create Requirements for the rewards. Example: in order for a player to gain a reward he/she must have hit 100 points of damage/captured 2 defence points (etc).
This would stop must AFK's as they just sit there, doing nothing, meaning they would recive no reward for it.
2. Is before the players are allowed into the game they must complete a puzzel, or some random task (a quick and fairly easy one) that a bot would not be able to do, due to the fact the task would be random.
These are the only ways i can see to fix the problem, but feel free the discuss your ideas/opinions.
How to stop AFK Faction Leeching.
Raiin Maker
Sevlis Bavles
Very nice ideas... I'm getting so extremely pissed with AFK leechers... Most of the time there are two or three afk people, and then everyone leaves. It just takes the fun out of the game.
I would suggest something like : about 5 minutes in the game the match will be paused and players asked to press some button and if players do not press they will automatically be reported to AN. To stop auto-click bots players must type a random code that appears in the screen. It may be far-fetched, but its a very easy way of detecting the leechers and automatically punishing them, without setting any tasks, that would for instance force monks to be very offensive on the Kurzick side while its no part of their strategy at all.
I would suggest something like : about 5 minutes in the game the match will be paused and players asked to press some button and if players do not press they will automatically be reported to AN. To stop auto-click bots players must type a random code that appears in the screen. It may be far-fetched, but its a very easy way of detecting the leechers and automatically punishing them, without setting any tasks, that would for instance force monks to be very offensive on the Kurzick side while its no part of their strategy at all.
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sevlis Bavles
Very nice ideas... I'm getting so extremely pissed with AFK leechers... Most of the time there are two or three afk people, and then everyone leaves. It just takes the fun out of the game.
I would suggest something like : about 5 minutes in the game the match will be paused and players asked to press some button and if players do not press they will automatically be reported to AN. To stop auto-click bots players must type a random code that appears in the screen. It may be far-fetched, but its a very easy way of detecting the leechers and automatically punishing them, without setting any tasks, that would for instance force monks to be very offensive on the Kurzick side while its no part of their strategy at all. |
Kaguya
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Raiin Maker
1. Create Requirements for the rewards. Example: in order for a player to gain a reward he/she must have hit 100 points of damage/captured 2 defence points (etc).
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Raiin Maker
2. Is before the players are allowed into the game they must complete a puzzel, or some random task (a quick and fairly easy one) that a bot would not be able to do, due to the fact the task would be random.
|
Not all afkers are bots, that makes the simple anti-bot mechanics ineffective.
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaguya
Doesn't work. Some monks might not deal any damage at all during a match, and they might not be capping either. Plus, there is Aspenwood which doesn't have anything to cap. Plus, it's easy to make a bot deal 100 dmg one way or another (of course that would actually break EULA).
That is presuming they are all bots, which they aren't. Getting some random people to fill up your guild team, they might talk, say "ready" and gogo in the start, but AFK through the match [AvA] Not all afkers are bots, that makes the simple anti-bot mechanics ineffective. |
the second problem could be that if the puzzel/code isnt solved by the end of the match they get no reward, if they were AFK from the time the puzzel appeared then it is their falt for going AFK, and shouldnt gain a reward as they didnt partisipate in the whole match.
Kaguya
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Raiin Maker
the second problem could be that if the puzzel/code isnt solved by the end of the match they get no reward, if they were AFK from the time the puzzel appeared then it is their falt for going AFK, and shouldnt gain a reward as they didnt partisipate in the whole match.
|
Impossible to effectively counter, but I'd go with #2, since it's the most botproof.
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaguya
That is if they don't solve the puzzle, and then go AFK.
Impossible to effectively counter, but I'd go with #2, since it's the most botproof. |
Vahn Roi
Choice 1)
Again, such methods would filter out the more passive classes such as Monks and Ritual Lords even if they are fully active throughout the whole battle. People really need to take into account the fact that some classes do not need to attack at all to do their job, I have yet to see a suggestion that takes this into consideration.
Choice 2)
That would be great for stopping bots, but it does nothing to stop the assclowns who press "enter" then go AFK.
Again, such methods would filter out the more passive classes such as Monks and Ritual Lords even if they are fully active throughout the whole battle. People really need to take into account the fact that some classes do not need to attack at all to do their job, I have yet to see a suggestion that takes this into consideration.
Choice 2)
That would be great for stopping bots, but it does nothing to stop the assclowns who press "enter" then go AFK.
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vahn Roi
Choice 1)
Again, such methods would filter out the more passive classes such as Monks and Ritual Lords even if they are fully active throughout the whole battle. People really need to take into account the fact that some classes do not need to attack at all to do their job, I have yet to see a suggestion that takes this into consideration. Choice 2) That would be great for stopping bots, but it does nothing to stop the assclowns who press "enter" then go AFK. |
also what you could do is make the random 'puzzel' appear at a random point in the match, meaning you would have to be at your pc all the way through to enter the code/puzzel.
broodijzer
the monk (bot maybe) can just wear a vampiric weapon and spam orison or w/e
Spoony
In my opinion, the best way would do, to , whenever you dont move/use a skill/ wtfever, or some other condition, a little window would appear, with which you need to enter a code of 4 numbers (undetectable, unreadable by bots) or so, and make people type it if they want to continue. However, if they wont , the players would be kicked from the server after , lets say 5 minutes.
Or, i got it.
Whenever you enter such an area, get a 4 number code to write, 2 minutes to fill. And, at the end of the match, you need to write some other code , again.
This could be actually, in my opinion the best way to solve this. Would need to come each 20-30 minutes at the computer, in my opinion would annoy each botter.
Note that it is just for areas with which are not safe, so this would not function in towns or outposts.
Puzzles at random moments would be a nuisance, something really annoying.
Or, i got it.
Whenever you enter such an area, get a 4 number code to write, 2 minutes to fill. And, at the end of the match, you need to write some other code , again.
This could be actually, in my opinion the best way to solve this. Would need to come each 20-30 minutes at the computer, in my opinion would annoy each botter.
Note that it is just for areas with which are not safe, so this would not function in towns or outposts.
Puzzles at random moments would be a nuisance, something really annoying.
Felessan
what I usualy do is the following:
From the moment we enter the mission, I ask "TO PREVENT AFK'ers, please respond with I'm ready"
then I wait a sec (of course there will be some players who can't wait to respond and begin rushing around).
If I don't get a response from a player, i'll ask the question again with the player names mentioning that I will quit if there is no response
This is usually the Flaming bit from the players.
If there is an afk'er and your team knows it they have the option of restarting or trying to finish the mission.
It's absolutely not a permanent fix or anything and this does not exclude bots, but a tool you can use to minimise the quitting later after the team discovers that someone is afk or a bot.
From the moment we enter the mission, I ask "TO PREVENT AFK'ers, please respond with I'm ready"
then I wait a sec (of course there will be some players who can't wait to respond and begin rushing around).
If I don't get a response from a player, i'll ask the question again with the player names mentioning that I will quit if there is no response
This is usually the Flaming bit from the players.
If there is an afk'er and your team knows it they have the option of restarting or trying to finish the mission.
It's absolutely not a permanent fix or anything and this does not exclude bots, but a tool you can use to minimise the quitting later after the team discovers that someone is afk or a bot.
lishi
imo a admin who just check for 20 minute and ban for 1 week should be a good way.
WasAGuest
There is only two ways to stp the afking that I can see actually working.
One sollution is to remove the rewards from these types of game styles so that there is no reason other than to play them; so no one wanting to farm faction (a general flaw in design) can or want to go there as they gain none.
The second is to allow pre-grouping so you know who you are going with and can leave the afkers sitting in town with a finger in their nose.
I personally would prefer the second option so there is more a reason to play the missions.
One sollution is to remove the rewards from these types of game styles so that there is no reason other than to play them; so no one wanting to farm faction (a general flaw in design) can or want to go there as they gain none.
The second is to allow pre-grouping so you know who you are going with and can leave the afkers sitting in town with a finger in their nose.
I personally would prefer the second option so there is more a reason to play the missions.
SpeedyKQ
I think a requirement for the reward makes the most sense. The game already has a pretty good system where it gives you XP if you help kill an enemy, or if you heal somebody who helped kill an enemy. Maybe you just need to earn a certain fairly small amount of XP to qualify for the faction reward.
Chief
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spoony
In my opinion, the best way would do, to , whenever you dont move/use a skill/ wtfever, or some other condition, a little window would appear, with which you need to enter a code of 4 numbers (undetectable, unreadable by bots) or so, and make people type it if they want to continue. However, if they wont , the players would be kicked from the server after , lets say 5 minutes.
Or, i got it. Whenever you enter such an area, get a 4 number code to write, 2 minutes to fill. And, at the end of the match, you need to write some other code , again. This could be actually, in my opinion the best way to solve this. Would need to come each 20-30 minutes at the computer, in my opinion would annoy each botter. Note that it is just for areas with which are not safe, so this would not function in towns or outposts. Puzzles at random moments would be a nuisance, something really annoying. |
How this works is if a player is AFK and with no actual significant game movement within 5 or 10 minutes, the player’s account is automatically logged from the game. NCSoft developers have created game code which has the ability to see if an actual keystroke is being used while online.
This helps eliminate leechers from going AFK while others do the actual work. (id est, a PvE party member join your group for a mission, but they are AFK during the entire mission and still get credit for completion.) Additionally, this could clear towns and outposts of people who are AFK for a significant period of time.
Celab
/votekick *playername*
Only usuable by your side, Ie kurzicks/luxons, red/blue.
Only usuable by your side, Ie kurzicks/luxons, red/blue.
The Hand Of Death
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaguya
Doesn't work. Some monks might not deal any damage at all during a match, and they might not be capping either. Plus, there is Aspenwood which doesn't have anything to cap. Plus, it's easy to make a bot deal 100 dmg one way or another (of course that would actually break EULA).
|
aceofblitziii
^^ Tape a letter key or mouse button down, lol.
I Mean I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Celab
/votekick *playername*
Only usuable by your side, Ie kurzicks/luxons, red/blue. |
EDITED: forgot to: /signed for the votekick idea :P
aceofblitziii
A vote kick would be perfect
Chief
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceofblitziii
^^ Tape a letter key or mouse button down, lol.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Celab
/votekick *playername*
Only usuable by your side, Ie kurzicks/luxons, red/blue. |
Votekick system can be abused in a PvE environment. Usually, this is a majority vote by the team. What if you are on a team, who all appear to be a PUG, but the majority are friends or you could be in a guild group as a PUG?
There probably many examples how this can be abused, but these are a few off the top of my head:
- You get a nice drop in the middle of combat, they want it, give you the boot, and take the reward for themselves.
- The party will to get to a certain area/zone, boot the PUGs that are not needed, just so they have better odds on farming rewards.
Li Tian
i agree with the earlier comment, i always ask a question of each player before we enter mission, judge response and time to determine if they stay in group. You control the group and if you dont get the right 'vibe' kick...
afk'rs seem to be increasing in number, is this people who are doing survivor and dont want to lose a title but also want faction etc?
it is very irritating and if there is software that sees that there has been no movement, then that seems like a good approach too. however when we are doing long runs, fow/uw we often take a 15 minute break, so that might not be the best idea when there are areas that to clear can take 4-6 hours.
another simple approach is that if you dont leave the bunker, you dont get the rewards.
on missions if it happens we just lure a mob to the leecher, always fun...infact immense satisfaction.
afk'rs seem to be increasing in number, is this people who are doing survivor and dont want to lose a title but also want faction etc?
it is very irritating and if there is software that sees that there has been no movement, then that seems like a good approach too. however when we are doing long runs, fow/uw we often take a 15 minute break, so that might not be the best idea when there are areas that to clear can take 4-6 hours.
another simple approach is that if you dont leave the bunker, you dont get the rewards.
on missions if it happens we just lure a mob to the leecher, always fun...infact immense satisfaction.
Caleb
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chief
People tried that, it does not work and you still get the boot. A single key being held down for a period of time does not count as game movement. Developers are smarter than that.
The votekick option could be a nice feature just for the competitive missions (Fort Aspenwood), Alliance Battle areas, and maybe RAs/TAs as long as it does not bleed over to the PvE side of the game. Votekick system can be abused in a PvE environment. Usually, this is a majority vote by the team. What if you are on a team, who all appear to be a PUG, but the majority are friends or you could be in a guild group as a PUG? |
Shadow of Light
I have a suggestion for faction leechers in the Aspenwood/Jade Mines missions (don't know how foolproof it is, but I'll throw it out there anyway).
The first thing: Unless there's a way to limit the reward on the losing side to only those who participated, get rid of it entirely. :/ As nice as it is, it's a massive lure to leechers. Even if their side doesn't win they gain. This will not prevent faction gains from killing players on the other side, etc.
As for the winning side: Rather than faction simply being issued at the end of the match (when the other team all dies/vanishes, before the cinematic), make it so that the winning team members must speak to an NPC. This NPC can award the players who speak to it the appropriate faction/experience, and extra 'Return me to Fort Aspenwood/The Jade Mines' and 'Play the cinematic' option can allow individuals to leave the mission or even explore if they're so inclined (however, I'd put a short time limit on claiming the reward so leechers have less of a chance to run and claim it once a match is over).
I'd spawn this rewards NPC *away* from the winning team's starter area and res areas, so leechers/bots can't use some program to home in on the NPCs name and autorun there when (s)he appears. EG. The Luxon rewards guy might appear where the Kurzick Architect was killed. The Kurzick rewards guy could be at the refined amber mine.
1. This method will not stop leechers, but it might seriously reduce the benefits of trying to be one... so in theory, it might reduce their numbers.
2. I'd love for rewards for the losing side to be kept, but am at a loss as to how to award the faction in a way similar to what I've outlined for the winning side.
The first thing: Unless there's a way to limit the reward on the losing side to only those who participated, get rid of it entirely. :/ As nice as it is, it's a massive lure to leechers. Even if their side doesn't win they gain. This will not prevent faction gains from killing players on the other side, etc.
As for the winning side: Rather than faction simply being issued at the end of the match (when the other team all dies/vanishes, before the cinematic), make it so that the winning team members must speak to an NPC. This NPC can award the players who speak to it the appropriate faction/experience, and extra 'Return me to Fort Aspenwood/The Jade Mines' and 'Play the cinematic' option can allow individuals to leave the mission or even explore if they're so inclined (however, I'd put a short time limit on claiming the reward so leechers have less of a chance to run and claim it once a match is over).
I'd spawn this rewards NPC *away* from the winning team's starter area and res areas, so leechers/bots can't use some program to home in on the NPCs name and autorun there when (s)he appears. EG. The Luxon rewards guy might appear where the Kurzick Architect was killed. The Kurzick rewards guy could be at the refined amber mine.
1. This method will not stop leechers, but it might seriously reduce the benefits of trying to be one... so in theory, it might reduce their numbers.
2. I'd love for rewards for the losing side to be kept, but am at a loss as to how to award the faction in a way similar to what I've outlined for the winning side.
Raiin Maker
There is another way to stop leechers: change them to the same as AB's, you have to choose a party before you enter, that way if there is a leecher they can be kicked when the game ends. 
I dislike the /kick idea, because it could be used to kick anyone, so if a player held a grudge against another player, they could just do /kick, and its possible they would be.
I dislike the /kick idea, because it could be used to kick anyone, so if a player held a grudge against another player, they could just do /kick, and its possible they would be.
Zubey
I hate leeching with a passion.
The only solution I think would work is /votekick.
It'd need to have features like:
* PVP-mission only
* only kick the player on getting a simple majority (i.e. more than half) /votekicking
* Only players from your team can /votekick you
* Give the player a "time-out" where they can't re-enter any pvp mission for 1 hour after two consecutive kickings
The only solution I think would work is /votekick.
It'd need to have features like:
* PVP-mission only
* only kick the player on getting a simple majority (i.e. more than half) /votekicking
* Only players from your team can /votekick you
* Give the player a "time-out" where they can't re-enter any pvp mission for 1 hour after two consecutive kickings
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zubey
I hate leeching with a passion.
The only solution I think would work is /votekick. It'd need to have features like: * PVP-mission only * only kick the player on getting a simple majority (i.e. more than half) /votekicking * Only players from your team can /votekick you * Give the player a "time-out" where they can't re-enter any pvp mission for 1 hour after two consecutive kickings |
I do not belive that /kick can work: if you are slight offensive to a teammate, saying after they run of and kill themselves and then say its your fault, etc, he can just got /kick and you could get kicked. You have to remember that 95%+ of the population of Guild Wars aren't nice, helpful and friendly.
max gladius
i have always felt, best screening around is making team.... if person doesnt reply, then boot them...
random arenas for small 4 man pvp's, not for aspenwood and such...
and i have always, always, always wanted the /votekick idea....
nothen like half way through a mission and someone goes afk <- but do see major flaws in this idea for pve...
random arenas for small 4 man pvp's, not for aspenwood and such...
and i have always, always, always wanted the /votekick idea....
nothen like half way through a mission and someone goes afk <- but do see major flaws in this idea for pve...
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by max gladius
i have always felt, best screening around is making team.... if person doesnt reply, then boot them...
random arenas for small 4 man pvp's, not for aspenwood and such... and i have always, always, always wanted the /votekick idea.... nothen like half way through a mission and someone goes afk..... |
I personally belive /kick is open to too much abuse to be considered a viable option.
Taurucis
If there was /votekick, I'd probably get kicked out of 3/4 the alliance battles I join 
I can be one hell of a drill sargeant... but it sometimes wins the game.
I agree with Raiin about the problems of a votekick.
Not all faction leechers are AFK'ers, sometimes they set up a character with only run buffs and evasion stances and run around the map doing nothing. Or they could merely keep throwing themselves at the enemy base defender.
I think Shadow of Light's idea about going up to collect your reward is good. Maybe for the losing side, you'd have to target a random party member and control-space him/her. It would be like "Playername Here, please target Playername Here and press control-space." The losing party would be gathered up in the base or something, and you'd have to target with your mouse. The players would be spaced out evenly, and the person you must target won't be anyone next to you (Prevents "target nearest ally") You would have 10-20 seconds to find them before you lose your chance at the reward.
I can be one hell of a drill sargeant... but it sometimes wins the game.I agree with Raiin about the problems of a votekick.
Not all faction leechers are AFK'ers, sometimes they set up a character with only run buffs and evasion stances and run around the map doing nothing. Or they could merely keep throwing themselves at the enemy base defender.
I think Shadow of Light's idea about going up to collect your reward is good. Maybe for the losing side, you'd have to target a random party member and control-space him/her. It would be like "Playername Here, please target Playername Here and press control-space." The losing party would be gathered up in the base or something, and you'd have to target with your mouse. The players would be spaced out evenly, and the person you must target won't be anyone next to you (Prevents "target nearest ally") You would have 10-20 seconds to find them before you lose your chance at the reward.
Raiin Maker
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Taurucis
If there was /votekick, I'd probably get kicked out of 3/4 the alliance battles I join
I can be one hell of a drill sargeant... but it sometimes wins the game. |
Chief
I went to Fort Aspenwood to witness any "leeching of faction" and spent an hour or two, at various times, during the double faction event weekend and I did witness a player consistently "leech" during the mission. A great number of players complained during the mission and in the town. Evidently, based on what people were saying, is this individual was here all weekend "leeching".
I decided to document the incident and report it via the Guild Wars Support System. If you feel there is a player conducting a scam, leeching, etc. within the game, take the time to document the location (town - district), times, and name(s) then report using the link above. The Support Team does listen and help.
I decided to document the incident and report it via the Guild Wars Support System. If you feel there is a player conducting a scam, leeching, etc. within the game, take the time to document the location (town - district), times, and name(s) then report using the link above. The Support Team does listen and help.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Response (GM Dynamite) 07/24/2006 11:04 AM
Hello,
Thank you again for reporting this incident to the Guild Wars Support Team. We have reviewed the game logs of this incident and taken the appropriate action based on the information from the logs. As previously indicated, due to our Privacy Policy (http://www.guildwars.com/support/leg...acy-policy.php) we will not be able to provide any additional information regarding this report. That is to say, we cannot reveal what action, if any, was taken, nor if the actual violation was confirmed. However, please be assured that the Guild Wars team takes User Agreement and Rules of Conduct violations very seriously. We are dedicated to maintaining an enjoyable playing environment. Because the incident that you report has been handled by the Guild Wars team, we are now setting this incident to a "Closed" status. Thanks again for submitting your report. Regards, The Guild Wars Support Team |
Pet Peeve
Hello
I'm fairly new to Guild Wars PvP but I love it, especially Fort Aspenwood. I was thinking that another good way to remove inactive players, or leechers, would be to make the initial spawn pad auto kick players that haven't moved off of it in 60 seconds, then bring in replacement players as needed, or if that's not possible, at least spawn NPC replacements of the same profession of the player that was removed. You would have to separate the respawn pad for active players of course.
To further discourage particularly abusive players, a tally of number of the number of times they were removed this way could be recorded and they would be prohibited from that mission for a specific amount of time.
Thanks for reading this and see you in the Fort.
I'm fairly new to Guild Wars PvP but I love it, especially Fort Aspenwood. I was thinking that another good way to remove inactive players, or leechers, would be to make the initial spawn pad auto kick players that haven't moved off of it in 60 seconds, then bring in replacement players as needed, or if that's not possible, at least spawn NPC replacements of the same profession of the player that was removed. You would have to separate the respawn pad for active players of course.
To further discourage particularly abusive players, a tally of number of the number of times they were removed this way could be recorded and they would be prohibited from that mission for a specific amount of time.
Thanks for reading this and see you in the Fort.
bamm bamm bamm
Any technical proposal to solve a social problem by advocating a hard limit of some kind WILL NOT WORK. The person/bot will always adjust, and a lot quicker than the dev team will. You'll end up in an arms race. The only technical way to stop this and other problems such as spam is an evolving system where the masses define what is or isn't leeching/spam/whatever by flagging it when they see it, and letting the system statistically compare as many measurable points as possible and then automatically punishing people when it sees it. And that probably won't stop the problem either. Maybe doing just enough to hit the ever-moving goalposts might become too difficult and they'll leave. But maybe the ever-moving goalposts get too close to what is considered fair-play and legitimate players start getting punished too.
I highly doubt a kick option would ever be implemented, but who knows.
I highly doubt a kick option would ever be implemented, but who knows.
MithranArkanere
Well... kick by votation is something that an be done in random enter places, but not something you could do in places where you can form the party before entering.
In the case of the two Competitive challenges in Cantha, there they could add that.
In the case of the two Competitive challenges in Cantha, there they could add that.
Hell Raiser
Maybe a puzzle that pops up at a random time in a mission, and boots you if you don't complete it within a certain time frame (of course it should be solvable within ~10seconds, but it should stop AFKers and Bots)?
/notsigned on vote kick, very abusable.
/notsigned on vote kick, very abusable.
MithranArkanere
Don't you think.
The only possible abuse that could be is people of the other side getting into yours to try ti kick your own people...
But not many people would support the kick, if they see the character moving around.
The only possible abuse that could be is people of the other side getting into yours to try ti kick your own people...
But not many people would support the kick, if they see the character moving around.
cynnn
Do it like the way you have to type the character name everytime you wanna delete one.
But in this case, type something else perhaps.
But in this case, type something else perhaps.
cynnn
EDIT: sorry for double posting