if everyone is so mad about how leechers dont get reported, why not a vote kick system?...
like in ab just type /vote kick *name*, than people can press a button if they want to kick them or not. and if you get kicked nothing happens your just out of the group?
discuss?
why not a vote kick system?
your lucky i
KZaske
Interesting idea.
Skyy High
Would get abused so bad.
poasiods
Skyy beat me to it. Too easy to abuse.
xKyo
Can be abused, AND opens up a lot of scam method opportunities.
Besides, usually when one member leaves in any party, the party resigns and gets another... I see no point to it.
Besides, usually when one member leaves in any party, the party resigns and gets another... I see no point to it.
Masmar
Will be wayyy too abused
Shayne Hawke
Not only easy to abuse, but pointless too. There seems, to me, to be very little to gain out of losing a teammate and getting no replacement.
I would rather see ANet fix the current system or people in AB just not pick up leechers.
I would rather see ANet fix the current system or people in AB just not pick up leechers.
Luminarus
I think a better idea is that they change the system from rather being if 1/3 of the team doesnt report a leecher those who did report get some bad points, to if the leecher doesnt move within 30 seconds of being reported he gets the "leech" points. This obviously would have to exclude those who are disconected from the server.
Green Chiken
In my opinion, i think this is a bad idea for the fact that if someone/or team is getting mad because there losing they will find someone to blame and kick them out of the game.
refer
No matter what is implemented it will be abused if players have some control over it.
NuclearSlug
What, not a fan of the Leeroy Jenkins of the world? I do agree that it would be overly abused and create more of a hassle than the leechers themselves.
HollaBigj
Here's a simple solution, flag a leecher and make it harder for leecher get in the ab, jade quarrey, RA, and fort aspenwood. It's same idea as anet flagged a pve player when that player farmed a lot.
elemental hitman
i think it would be a good idea if the leader could initiate votekick or something,
im thinking more about runners tho, when people refuse to pay.
im thinking more about runners tho, when people refuse to pay.
RupDur78
if there was a balance to it then i would say yes. like how the report system works (or dost work if you have reported leachers in jq) also would this kick system make it so other people who are waiting can join in?
DarkGanni
/notsigned for abusive reasons.
Ate of DK
Bad idea, like mentioned before; too easy to abuse.
And...
It's not right when players have to do Anet's dirty work. But hey... they don't have the resources for it.
And...
It's not right when players have to do Anet's dirty work. But hey... they don't have the resources for it.
Lourens
/unsigned
Im not gonna do Anets dirty work lol
Anet should hire some ppl to do JQ and FA all day and they can kick the leechers
Im not gonna do Anets dirty work lol
Anet should hire some ppl to do JQ and FA all day and they can kick the leechers
Eragon Zarroc
it's hard to get a perfect system. the one currently in place is better than nothing.
ebstjohn
eh, I'm not real thrilled with the current system, but I guess that it is suitable. I was once reported when I was having server issues and was given that dishonorable buff. It annoyed me, but from the other perspective people shouldn't have to be impacted by other's technical challenges or limitations. Since that one incident doesn't have any impact upon my long term account standing then I guess it's fine.
TheodenKing
Abuse would result.
A dishonor tag (mentioned above) I think could be a good idea... maybe make it longer than 10 minutes though. Say, for example, a party votes to "tag" a member as a leecher in a pve mission... When that person leaves the group, they are "tagged" for 30 minutes, making it harder for them to find other pugs to leech from. They would still be allowed to do what they want, but pugs could choose not to take someone in their group that obviously ticked off their previous group.
A dishonor tag (mentioned above) I think could be a good idea... maybe make it longer than 10 minutes though. Say, for example, a party votes to "tag" a member as a leecher in a pve mission... When that person leaves the group, they are "tagged" for 30 minutes, making it harder for them to find other pugs to leech from. They would still be allowed to do what they want, but pugs could choose not to take someone in their group that obviously ticked off their previous group.
