I'd like to see a feature, that every member on a team get's his/her own color to paint on the map with.
Not because it's beautiful (though it might be), but to identify people who paint crap.
The other day some jerk was in my team, painting 3rd-Reich symbols on the map.
We weren't able to identify him/her because all the paintings are done in white.
I don't suggest that everybody can use RGB to do unique colouring. Just take 8 different colors and assign them.
Or maybe A-Net could put some permission-checkbox on the party-window were the team-leader decides who paints and who doesn't.
If there'd been the feature "ban member from pary" and I'd been able to identify the 3rd-Reich guy, he would've been baned AND reported.
A lot of players are probably 18 and less in age, so one might argue, that they don't understand the meaning of such things. But why should such ignorance ruin my team and the mission it's on?
Sometimes 1 member can ruin the hole thing. The pary would be better of with just 5 members than have 1 jerk, screwing it all up.
everyone's an artist / painting on the map
Ashley Twig
Yorrix
Yeah, this a good idea. I agree with both suggestions.
As for the 'they don't understand' thing, well they have to understand sometime. I doubt most players understand how a gun works, but I doubt any would be exemt from the law if they shot someone with it.
Likewise people who offend through the use of racism on GW should also be subject to certain processes, and similarly have their case heard. The only problem is how do you report such issues and not be accused of lying? You could submit a screen-shot, but even then who is not to argue the it could have been faked? (It could potentially happen.)
It's a good idea, and I support it, but to work to the fullest of it's potential we may have to see an in game abuse reporting tool to submit abuse acqusations.
Certainly with both of your suggestions working together, however, people could stop this kind of behaviour where it begins and so at least deal with that as best they can. Though I bring up the latter issue, this works by aiding ANet as abitrator.
I am fully behind this idea. /signs
As for the 'they don't understand' thing, well they have to understand sometime. I doubt most players understand how a gun works, but I doubt any would be exemt from the law if they shot someone with it.
Likewise people who offend through the use of racism on GW should also be subject to certain processes, and similarly have their case heard. The only problem is how do you report such issues and not be accused of lying? You could submit a screen-shot, but even then who is not to argue the it could have been faked? (It could potentially happen.)
It's a good idea, and I support it, but to work to the fullest of it's potential we may have to see an in game abuse reporting tool to submit abuse acqusations.
Certainly with both of your suggestions working together, however, people could stop this kind of behaviour where it begins and so at least deal with that as best they can. Though I bring up the latter issue, this works by aiding ANet as abitrator.
I am fully behind this idea. /signs
Ashley Twig
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Yorrix
The only problem is how do you report such issues and not be accused of lying?
|
So being able to identify the painter to make sure he's not getting invited next time, and maybe even to ban him from your party during missions/quests or at least revoke his painting rights should be ok.
Otherwise A-Net would've to include a jurisdictional system with judges, jurys and stuff like that.
It could add some nice realism to the game though
Epinephrine
I suggested a while back that you could simply have a check mark beside the names for "view drawings" so you can toggle off any at will - this allows finding the culprit, as you can just toggle until it disappears, and allows you to set it so you only view drawings by the leader for example - that way you aren't distracted by what others write. Might be simpler to to than trying to identify colours, and allows you to ignore him until the end of the mission, rather than putting up with pink (for example) swastikas. I left a group over hte swastikas thing a while back, I figure that's what you have to do, just leave after 1 warning. Don't put up with it.
Yorrix
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashley Twig
The purely theoretical and technical sollution would be to trace and protocol these things, but, of course, the amount of data would become overwhelming pretty soon.
So being able to identify the painter to make sure he's not getting invited next time, and maybe even to ban him from your party during missions/quests or at least revoke his painting rights should be ok. Otherwise A-Net would've to include a jurisdictional system with judges, jurys and stuff like that. It could add some nice realism to the game though |
I love your idea of a judicial system!
It would be cool, though technically there is the issue that different kingdoms would have their own judicial systems... *Cough.* We'll ignore that! ^_^ It's a cool idea and I like it; leave the realistic side out. 
There could be like an island court for it or a new outpost of something. There is the courthouse at Greenith of course. It would be cool to turn up and see a court session. Maybe even see someone get the 'death penalty'. :P
I like it anyway. Cool idea.
Numa Pompilius
I support the "different colors for each team member" suggestion. I do not support the "checkboxes for the leader determining who gets to draw" suggestion.
Flame
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Yorrix
There could be like an island court for it or a new outpost of something. There is the courthouse at Greenith of course. It would be cool to turn up and see a court session. Maybe even see someone get the 'death penalty'. :P
|
Perhaps, even worse than a "public court", any offenders would be reported to their guild leader. The leader can then choose their punishment, regardless of whether or not they leave immediately. The punishments would have to be chosen from a list of pre-approved ones, or something similar, to prevent abuse, but a three-day ban would do wonders for some attitudes.
The main problem with that is that friends of guild leaders will get off scot-free, so perhaps have an additional, general punishment for a certain number of offenses.
drowningfish999
A guild leader punishment wouldn't work very well, because if the leader gives too harsh a punishment the player will most likely leave the guild, and if they give too easy a punishment, theres not point. In response to the color thing, why not just at the start, each player gets a color which appears next to their name in the party window. The colors should be easily identified to avoid confusion(no having Purple and Violet and Indigo and dark Purple). Also, maybe if you click on the lines a player makes, it will select that player.
Snipe Kan
k. im not fully understanding are you guys talking about painting PICTURES on the mini map? or people giving combat directions and somebody is drawing all over the mini Map. it your talking about painting pictures then go on paint the little program on windows :O stop using GW to paint little pretty pictures on the compass. and if ur talking about the 2nd issue then... yah maybe everybody in the party should be assigned a colour like you said but show the colour in the screen name tag in the party window so you can tell?
Sniper22
Ya, I like this idea. Last night I was playing in UW and someone kept scribbling all over the map, really annoying when you are trying to find out where to go but, I wanna choose my color . In addition to this, we should add a button to erase your drawing/directions. I have to speed draw the directions because they dissapear to fast. If they can stay there and then we erase, that would be much better.
. In addition to this, we should add a button to erase your drawing/directions. I have to speed draw the directions because they dissapear to fast. If they can stay there and then we erase, that would be much better.
Yorrix
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snipe Kan
and if ur talking about the 2nd issue then... yah maybe everybody in the party should be assigned a colour like you said but show the colour in the screen name tag in the party window so you can tell?
|
As for the issue of judgement being down to a guild leader, you have missed to vital points. Though a lesser issue perhaps than being chummy with the guild leader, what if the the person in question is the guild leader, or for that matter isn't in a guild.
No, I think it needs to be independant of this. Guilds can take their own action as they see fit, but an independant body would need to pass judgement and some form of punishment.
Nokomis
I would like different colors assigned to group members for a different reason. If a group agrees on a leader, we could actually follow HER directions instead of whomever decided to start pinging and drawing arrows. More than once two or three group members have started directing traffic and I have NO idea who is doing what. Even if I trust the leaders judgement, I can't follow her directions because some other dimwit is telling us to go some other direction and I can't tel lthe difference between their arrows and diagrams. Sometimes you have seconds to react, and it would be really nice if I could actually KNOW which arrows were being drawn by the person I trust.
--Nokomis
--Nokomis
drowningfish999
Maybe a way to ignore peoples drawings, like with the ignore list or something.
Imp
Awww, no more tic tac toe while the leader is afk. jk jk, I love this idea.
/signs
/signs
Talesin Darkbriar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashley Twig
I'd like to see a feature, that every member on a team get's his/her own color to paint on the map with.
Not because it's beautiful (though it might be), but to identify people who paint crap. The other day some jerk was in my team, painting 3rd-Reich symbols on the map. We weren't able to identify him/her because all the paintings are done in white. I don't suggest that everybody can use RGB to do unique colouring. Just take 8 different colors and assign them. Or maybe A-Net could put some permission-checkbox on the party-window were the team-leader decides who paints and who doesn't. If there'd been the feature "ban member from pary" and I'd been able to identify the 3rd-Reich guy, he would've been baned AND reported. A lot of players are probably 18 and less in age, so one might argue, that they don't understand the meaning of such things. But why should such ignorance ruin my team and the mission it's on? Sometimes 1 member can ruin the hole thing. The pary would be better of with just 5 members than have 1 jerk, screwing it all up. |
Simple.
Problem solved.
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talesin Darkbriar
Why not lock the map drawing feature for everyone except the party leader?
Simple. Problem solved. |
Snipe Kan
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talesin Darkbriar
Why not lock the map drawing feature for everyone except the party leader?
Simple. Problem solved. |
or even designate a Target/Direction called at the begging before you leave town then its locked for everybody cept that 1 guy.
Aidan Gawain
I agree with the colors and with the ability for each player to turn off other players' drawings on his computer. I don't agree with letting the leader choose who to let draw.
UsagiNoSenshi
all for the colors!
drowningfish999
The only problem with limiting it to 1 guy, is what if that guy doesn't know a certain part of a mission, how is he supposed to ask for directions?
Porkchop Sandwhiches
Meh, probably colors wouldn't be the best idea. If you got a group where you're supost to follow one person directions on the map, but a few other people in group are spamming on it as well, and you are color blind it could be a problem.
I personally like the idea of being able to filter whos drawings you see.
I personally like the idea of being able to filter whos drawings you see.
Revived Soulreaver
I agree with the team leader filtering idea,
Not enough power is given to a team leader.
I think colors would be nice quick solution, but also an annoyance.
Not enough power is given to a team leader.
I think colors would be nice quick solution, but also an annoyance.
Aidan Gawain
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Porkchop Sandwhiches
Meh, probably colors wouldn't be the best idea. If you got a group where you're supost to follow one person directions on the map, but a few other people in group are spamming on it as well, and you are color blind it could be a problem.
|
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Revived Soulreaver
I agree with the team leader filtering idea,
Not enough power is given to a team leader. I think colors would be nice quick solution, but also an annoyance. |
The colors thing is why you add in the ability to tun off people. When I try to point out a path or a direction sthe annoying dude in the group always has to draw an arrow going the oppisite way, or you have to arrows going oppisite ways it gets really hard to know which to follow.
Yorrix
Just to point out, the leader may not know the directions, or even want to be map reader. It's not unreasonable to suggest that the party leader leads their men into combat, and someone else is given the duty of giving directions. Moreover, some guilds, etc. may encourage it to split roles.
Furthermore, there are two ways of implementing the tick-box idea, as well as modifcations of those two themes.
Furthermore, there are two ways of implementing the tick-box idea, as well as modifcations of those two themes.
- Firstly, it could be done the way that has been commonly suggested. This way the leader has control of draw privaledges, turning people's draw privaledges on and off as needed.
- The second method is to allow players instead to hold this ability, switching on and off people they find to be offensive, distracting, etc.
- Alternatively there could be a comprimise between these two extremes. Most notable perhaps is taking the second method, but the leader's drawings cannot be switched off. What if they offend you? That would be the good old 'leave the party' option; after all, do you really want to be in a party if its leader is drawing swastikas?
- Another option is an even further half way house. The players are given the ability to switch people on an off, but the party leader has the ability to select players who should not be muted, for example if a player other than the leader has been chosen as the 'map reader'.
- You could also add to that enforced muting by the leader, but I would be against that.
spikydude
I say assign a color to different party members when it comes to drawing on that mini map, do not limit the map drawing to leader only (for reasons that people have explained above).
There's been threads about this in the past, and I totally support this idea.
There's been threads about this in the past, and I totally support this idea.
Ashley Twig
To be able to actually ban a team member during missions and quests, after identifying him/her by the color, A-Net might include a 9th skill that is exclusive to the team-leader.
Press '9' followed by a "Are you sure Y/N" question, and off s/he goes.
Some kind of a rating system ala eBay could make sense too. All team members vote on each other after the (un)sucessful mission. Anonymously, of course. Nothing too fancy. Maybe just something like "valuable"-member and "spoiled the mission"-member.
Before inviting somebody to a mission you'd check their rating. To many "spoiled the mission" entrys and s/he's out (not in).
Anyone can accidentally spoil a mission. Tell me about it. I'm a ranger who likes to take her pet into any mission.
But it's the ratio that counts.
Press '9' followed by a "Are you sure Y/N" question, and off s/he goes.
Some kind of a rating system ala eBay could make sense too. All team members vote on each other after the (un)sucessful mission. Anonymously, of course. Nothing too fancy. Maybe just something like "valuable"-member and "spoiled the mission"-member.
Before inviting somebody to a mission you'd check their rating. To many "spoiled the mission" entrys and s/he's out (not in).
Anyone can accidentally spoil a mission. Tell me about it. I'm a ranger who likes to take her pet into any mission.
But it's the ratio that counts.
EmperorTippy
Leaader having ban powers is horrible. A rating system can be easily abused.
Ashley Twig
But there should be some way to kick people during the mission.
Especially in the long ones, where you've passed a point-of no return where it's better to continue with one less member than to restart the mission again.
Especially in the long ones, where you've passed a point-of no return where it's better to continue with one less member than to restart the mission again.
EmperorTippy
Yes a kick function would be nice but no one has come up with a non abusable one. The best so far is the splitting instances one.
Howling Wind
So far all the "artists" i've teamed up with, they have a thing for drawing penises... but I guess what turns ppl on...
Ashley Twig
The wish to kick somebody, initiated by the leader could be followed by some kind of a vote. Like when you skip cinematics. (x out of y members like to have <name> kicked)
The team finally deceides if somebody is kicked or not.
Bummer of course if it's a 50/50 vote. In that case in favor of the accused.
The team finally deceides if somebody is kicked or not.
Bummer of course if it's a 50/50 vote. In that case in favor of the accused.
Ashley Twig
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Howling Wind
So far all the "artists" i've teamed up with, they have a thing for drawing penises... but I guess what turns ppl on...
|
Reminds me of the time when I was 14 and younger. Good old times
Esprit
Colors are a good idea, it would be a nice to see who is drawing.
Though, sometimes the drawing doesn't help, people like to ignore drawings, thinking they know best. Many a time I've drawn a line to stop the party before going to aggro a group. So they either hit a point further out and then type "What?" while aggroing everything or else they ignore it and think "Oooo, purdy squigglies".
Though, sometimes the drawing doesn't help, people like to ignore drawings, thinking they know best. Many a time I've drawn a line to stop the party before going to aggro a group. So they either hit a point further out and then type "What?" while aggroing everything or else they ignore it and think "Oooo, purdy squigglies".
Yorrix
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EmperorTippy
Leaader having ban powers is horrible. A rating system can be easily abused.
|
As for the rating system, on eBay there is incentive both sides to not abuse this system, partly because results are not anonymous. If I ever see negative ratings for a seller on eBay, I try to find what the issue is and who made the complaint. Sometimes I find it was just a one off bad experience; other times I find the complainee has done this several times seemingly to make trouble. If such a system were introduced I think it would have to be public to try and stop abuse, but this would only help stop abuse of the system. Furthermore, most people on eBay try to behave. With so many complaints of immature players on Guild Wars, how can you tell what is legitimate complaints, mass abuse, or a bad player with lots of friends giving positive reviews?
Furthermore you have to ask what the point is. eBay is a trading system and people want the peace of mind to trust the other person involved in the transaction. Guild Wars, on the other hand, is a game. People who abuse it don't take anything away from you per se, they just spoil your gaming experience. Implementing this system would add overheads to the game, both in data storage/transfer and trawling through lists of comments. In the end I think most people would ignore it and it would just be an unnesscary use of resource, imho.
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ashley Twig
The wish to kick somebody, initiated by the leader could be followed by some kind of a vote. Like when you skip cinematics. (x out of y members like to have <name> kicked)
The team finally deceides if somebody is kicked or not. Bummer of course if it's a 50/50 vote. In that case in favor of the accused. |
As for the penis thing I perfer smilies when were not doing anything (someone went to the bathroom) tic-tac-toe is also fun.
Ashley Twig
How would "instance splitting" work?
EmperorTippy
It gets long to explain. use the search button in the suggestion thread for instance splitting there were like 2 threads on it yesterday.
heres the link to the thread:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...ce+splittin g
heres the link to the thread:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...ce+splittin g
Terminal
I had some joker in my group draw swastikas while i was leading a group a few days ago.
I just said: "Bro thats rad."
One of them responded: "Yeahh I know lol."
I proceeded to head back, ported the group back into town 5 mins later through the "where u going ?" remarks, kicked the guy and took the party back into the mission.
I apologised to them for wasting 10 mins of their time but explained that that Neo-Nazi had to be identified and kicked.
Anybody monkeys around with rascist stuff while i'm in a group, I'm either finding out who did it, going back and kicking them or leaving the group myself. BS like that I dont tolerate for 1 sec.
I just said: "Bro thats rad."
One of them responded: "Yeahh I know lol."
I proceeded to head back, ported the group back into town 5 mins later through the "where u going ?" remarks, kicked the guy and took the party back into the mission.
I apologised to them for wasting 10 mins of their time but explained that that Neo-Nazi had to be identified and kicked.
Anybody monkeys around with rascist stuff while i'm in a group, I'm either finding out who did it, going back and kicking them or leaving the group myself. BS like that I dont tolerate for 1 sec.
Shadow_Avenger
Just flag players name next to map, simple, or even position with in group, easy.
The majority don't abuse the system, and the odd prat here and there that does will get there come upance they always do.
The majority don't abuse the system, and the odd prat here and there that does will get there come upance they always do.