/bootafk (for those who want a free ride)

Due to the revisions to your suggestion, I am ALL for it!!! Just keep people from abusing it, and you've got yourself (as the asians say) A A-OK SUPER FINE IDEA!!!

I'm not sure this is a good idea. As others have said, it's open to abuse. I'd rather there be some type of idle meter, as previously suggested, that automatically kicks someone who hasn't participated for a certain length of time.

Even though it would take votes, I can see parties kicking someone who's just learning, or who makes one mistake (and we've all made them), or who isn't playing the way someone else wants them to play. There's no way to limit the grounds to what is proposed. I hate afkers and people who repeatedly screw up as much as the next person, but at the end of the day, it's only a game, and a mission/quest can always be attempted again.

agree

Voting is abuseable -- Idle meter is not

This idea can go both ways as it has been said a great many times. I like it for the most part. But the ways this can be abused can go on forever. The "dle Meter" is the only way this could not be abused. So like the one person people don't get kicked out for not playing the way the group leader wants or making a mistake. Now what would be cool is the hench of the same build. But would the hecnh copy the kicked playersskill set or just be the same proffesion. Example I'm a R/Mo say I was idel for to long 10mins being max. I get kicked would the Ranger hench replace me or one with my same build and proffesion?

For now
/unsigned

Idle meter can be tricked. You can have people that aren't AFK but are doing stupid stuff like stepping every once in a while. Then it looks like they're doing something and you get a false count as to how much they're contributing.

In the match that sparked this topic, the monk that was not participating was chatting with us the entire time and saying how he didn't see a point to helping. Basically, he just figured he'd get away with just sitting there and that's it. Most people don't respond, but this guy was explaining how stupid we were for trying to win.

He basically got the free points for everyone else's effort.


Now, consider your idle meter. All someone would have to do is move every so many seconds, and it looks like they're never idle. Then you get false readings. I REALLY think a reputation meter should be in there, but I also think being able to boot people who are not participating or hindering progress should be an option. Y'all keep saying how it'll get abused. Well, what about the people who're currently abusing the system? They're abusing the fact that you can stay in a match and not do anything, while reaping the benefits. If ANet created some way to eject those players from the game, that'd be optimal. Especialy since the players who are being hurt by the actions (or lack there of) by the offender are working against them.

Abusable, sure, but what boot system isn't? In Halo, just stand infront of aplayer on your team you want to boot. When they kill you (prob not intentional on their part), you can hold "X" to eject them.The concept of filling in with a hench is and isn't good. It is good because you then replace teh lost player, but it isn't good because you don't make people carefully consider the ejections. In Halo, you boot someone, there is no bot to take his/her place. As such, your choice to boot or allow a player must be based in the overall scheme of things. If thsi player is really screwing with you and hurting your progress, then booting them is the best choice. If the player is OK and not doing much to really cause problems, then you should probably keep them around.

Yes, the loss of a teammember is hard on the rest, but if they were doing nothign to begin with, the concept of not replacing them with a hench makes players more cautious about their ejections.

"idle meter" will always be either easy to fool or a troublemaker for support classes.

As for people doing something that the team wasnt wanting, like a monk that doesnt heal -but just follows (or another proffesion just following, but rarely doing any killing -skill capper for instance)

I have seen several instances where a Monk/W only have used healing breese (4+) as his only teammate heal.

I strongly suspects its sad Smiting monks -because they wouldnt be invited if they would be frank about their smiting. Often another monk in the group, manages to fill the hole left by the "non-healing" monk

There will always be leechers that adapts, and Rejects that masquerades in order to prevent rejection

Regarding the replacement hench, it is also to prevent the dropratio becoming better after kicking someone. The henches affect drops, as if they were real players.

Sure we could have a system where the drop ratio isnt improving after a teammate is lost, and no henchmen is sent as a substitute

If this voting crap ever gets implemented I'll quit GW for ever, just how I quit all those other games with crap voting systems.

You know what will happen?

Example: RTCW: ET
If you're too good, you get kicked. No matter what, you'll get kicked.

I've been permabanned from several servers (public ones, just like these missions are public)
Why? I singlehandedly held a chokepoint or I played a medic and used my SMG-sniping techniques to kill people from long range with only a small machinegun.

Who kicked me? The enemy team because they were getting frustrated. My own team because they thought I was hacking or they were frustrated because they wanted my kills.

Same thing will happen here.


Other example: some freaky korean thing.
If they don't like your name, they kick.

Everybody votes yes, why?
BECAUSE EVERYONE IS TOO STUPID TO CHECK
or because they're lazy.

Once systems like this get implemented, everyone who gets a votekick is GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT

And you can't prove anything in the 2 seconds the kick stays on because people will want the dam message out of their screen.

A big /nonsigned

Why on earth did so many people sign this idea?

Go check other games.

If I'm allowed to post links to fora for other games in which there is a lot of swearing then I can give you links of polls in which the big majority of players go for the GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT way of thinking.

I refuse to hold back and act stupid just so a bunch of noober wammos don't kick me. I'll play to win and if that means crushing people then they'll be crushed.

This system WILL be abused.


Random quotes off other fora:

DONT GIVE POWER TO MORONS!

quoted for truth:
Most players have no clue of what is going on on battlefield. They are too busy with they characters. Tho I would think it would be exactly opposite of what Don Zardeone described due to click-no-think-later reflex most online inhabitants have.

Huh what do you mean? I don't get it X.x

So... you're saying you'd rather have people leeching your efforts? It's only your teammates that can kick you and the decision to kick should be considered before hand.

Sure, there will be abuse, but when I go into an Alliance Battle or other Faction Vs Faction battle, I want to have everyone working. No slackers.

If you have a better system for punishing slackers, I'd like to hear it. The ability to kick puts teh team at a disadvantage, but also empowers the team to drop useless players. You'd have to be an idiot to drop a good player. And if the person is running in and getting killed a lot, who cares, so long as he/she is helping. Yes, you get noob mistakes, but I'd rather have the ability to kick/boot a player than have to restart the mission.


I don't think ANet will put a system in of reputation any time soon. Plus, you can also descriminate against people with a reputation system. Kinda like Karma systems on some message boards. People see you have bad karma/repuation and either don't want you or ignore you. I know I would be weary about letting people with a negative on their repuation into my group. It usually means that they're abusive. Although, if ANet actually spent the manpower to review why some players are getting negatives to their karma, that would work toward the benefit of the community.

STill, let the community moderate itself. Not sure who said that earlier, but it's true. If the community moderates itself, you will come to a point where sometimes the power is abused, but other times it works to improve the game. And, you can report people who are requesting kicks for little to no reason. If enough ejects are requestsed by a player, it's obvious that they're abusing the system, or just ending up with worthless players.

The problem with a /votekick system is that people can just gang up and boot a player for a completely subjective reason that's irrelevant to gameplay. Democracy has no place on the internet.

An automatic idle-kicker doesn't work because not only is it easily circumvented, honest players who are getting food or going to the bathroom would probably get booted by it undeservedly.

IMO, the party leader should get a /bootafk option that the leader can activate after a certain period of time. This way, the leader has the ability to delineate who's leeching and who is just like "brb 5 minutes" and will actually come back.

im gonna have to say a nah on this for now as well could see it doing some good but it is still very highly abuseable for I.E u could have say a guild go around and just for fun mess with ppl, let u in get so far and just kick u for no reason but there amusment, U could get it to where your grp ragekicks u becuz u r getting all the good drops so they kick u so u don't get anymore/RageKick u cuz the player is a noob/Ragekick u cuz u did somthing like argo 2 grps instead of one pissing off members in the grp etc etc the list can go on. Kicking afk ppl is somthing i don't see coming around as anets current stand is there is nothing in there rules that say there doing anything wrong.

As for #2 i've personal havn't seen anyone just start sacing them selfs in a kill count arena so the other team can win but there r easier ways of handeling with this and a very simple one go with ppl u know id rather see anet do somthing about the ppl who go into the pvp arenas that r simply built for running and just run and run and run til your team had enough and leaves giviing them and easy win.

as for #3 ppl who r being excessivly abusive through words or actions should be left the way it is take a screenshot of it and report them to guild wars support. As this can also get abused I.E player is a noob and makes a mistake player2-6 start pissing off the noob, Noob responds with cures words etc oh look we have an excuse to kick him now cuz hes being abusive and using bad words lets kick him and get a henchie so he doesn't get any credit for helping us up to this point in the mission.

/un-signed

Imagine being 4 hours into Urgoz or The Deep, and suddenly realizing that the incredible guild group that let you in as their *insert profession here* only needs their core 7 of 12 to finish off the important stuff?

"Thanks for your time guys, you did great!" you hear before they vote kick all 5 of the non Guild members, and then complete the final areas alone and collect the proceeds of everyone's hours of hard work.


/NOT SIGNED - anyone that has ever played CSS or other games with majority vote kick should realize that it would be a horrid implementation in a game where some missions/quest areas can take hours to complete. It's one thing to have to restart a 4 minute CSS map, quite another to restart ThunderHead Keep because 5 people thought it would be funny to finish without you.

In some matches (IE: Jade Quarrey & Fort Aspenwood) you can't choose your party leader.

I am all for this! I am finding a rise in the number of afk's or "free-riders" recently.

I see a few problems though. If it is an AFK boot vote, we need to consider the fact that people will be kicked for other reasons.

● Guy accidentally lures a group
● Team engages group
● Few team members die and gain DP
● Team defeats group
● Team flames Guy
● Team-members that die vote to kick Guy
● Rest of team votes to kick Guy (Don't want to seem to be on Guys side)
● Guy has been voted out of the group
● Guy is warped back to Outpost/Town

I don't think this will be implemented, but if it does, and is only able to kick actual afk's, then only one thing to do:

/signed

if someone NEVER MOVES, NEVER SPEAKS, NEVER USES a SPELL/SKILL

thats what I call a ticking Idle meter

if someone is Idle like that for 10 minutes-- they are leeching

so what? If you can make a bot to keep clicking "enter mission" button, you can make same bot take a step forward and cast healing sig every 30 seconds. "Idle timer" will only create problems for legimate players, thats it.

seems it could be misused, if majority are guildies, they could eject non-guildies at end of mission at payoff (Tombs comes to mind). If you ejected non-guildies there with only The Darkness' left, who could stop you, and your guildmates would take all the spoils. An alternative would be for anyone AFG (away from group to recieve a notice to rejoin group within 3 - 5 minutes or be kicked (though this could work against runners as well).

Y'know....

They could always divy points out based on actions performed.

I mean like... give each action a rating and then divy teh ammount at the end.

Say,

Attacking, casting, maintaining enchantments all have points given.

Players who are actually helping will be doing all of this. So, when it tallies up the end of the match, they could divy points out based on who did what. Realistically, in an 8 man team, you should have people performing 12.5% (roughly) of the actions on your team. So, if there are 1000 faction points awarded to the team, whatever your percentage must be above a certain % of the total actions to gain a fair share.

hmm.... thinking.
I mean, a monk who only self heals will only get .. say.... 1 action point. Healing another gives 5. Necros managing minions get a certain count based on how many minions they're managing. Warriors get 1 action poitn per attack (since they'll no doubtedly be attacking at all times and could seriously swing the curve).

Just a thought since y'all are saying the ability to kick players isn't good. I vote to kick players, but if you want it to be a matter of participation, then having an action count would work best. Plus, fi the player fails to make so many actions, they would fail the quest/mission and not get credit for it.

At this point, I can see abuse, but there really is no PERFECT way to prevent AFK's and leechers.

Could also have a point of no return set on certain missions and such. This way you can't boot after # enemies in UW or # levels in tombs.

Then what would stop that person from just going afk after u hit that point of no return sure they would have to help out for a bit but then could just go afk

what about ppl who do the flag/relic running who r not in the battle most of the game etc, Another way u could get around it sit there and spam heals and enchats on your self your still casting so tech u still gain these "preformace points" as u put it which is evern wors then just going afk as u could probably gain more "preformance points" this way then actually fighting making this the new wave of faction farming for those ppl that sit in aspenwood/jade quarry. IMO very horrible idea and if anet ever did somthing along this line it would be off my pc faster then you could blink an eye.

So what would happen if i had a lvl 5 or some other low lvl char and get 3 of my lvl20 guildies to help me out with say Fort Rank since mostly the whole time they will end up killing the enemy b4 i get to them to land an attack i would only have one option left sit there and spam skills on myself again so as to meet this QUOTA of having to preform so many action so as i can still get credit for it just becuz some guildies wanted to help me out.

/not...it is already a problem in FoW, UW and ToPK where a player gets the good drops then gets killed and the rest of the team vultures the drop.

Any kick feature would be abused far more than not.

Regardless if some bot was made to do as you mention, a votekick for idle people would still reduce the freeloaders.

This is absolutely true. I'll often only notice after a battle that someone has said something in chat, and sometimes I have to scroll up a while to catch the beginning of the conversation. And organize a vote during a mission? Most of the PUGs I've been out with can't even agree on which mob to attack first.

I like the idea of the group leader getting a "bootafk" after a player has been inactive for a certain amount of time, but what happens if it's the leader who is afk? That's happened to me a few times.

Again, it's only a game. If someone gets credit for a mission they didn't actually play, it's not the end of the world. If someone screws up and you have to repeat a mission, it's not the end of the world. I'd rather shrug it off than put a system into place that will allow honest, well-meaning players to be kicked out of groups just because the rest of the group felt like it.

I still have no idea why Anet hasn't implemented the vote system. The "bootafk" option given to the group leader is an ok idea but as Felinette said, what if the leader went afked. Like yesterday when I was doing Vizunah Square, 5 minutes into the mission the group leader starts to complain how he's lagging and can't move, etc etc. Everyone knew he was BSing but we couldn't do a thing about it since we didn't want to screw over the other team by leaving so he got to leech and get this mission completed without doing a damn thing.

well, hence, i think it is better if someone type /boot 'a player's name' and needed support from the other in order to make that command works..so that the decision will not lie on solely one player

Every little helps,
Well maybe not everything. i'm a little worried playing as an asassin because there is quite a bit of sin hate going about and I see a situation where a leader willing to give an asassin a chance is then pressured into kicking the person out because they get spiked by an ele or something and someone shouts,

Guy: asassin's are crap, kick him!
Other team members: Yeah, kick him!
Leader threatened with multiple quitters, in best interests of mish kicks sin out

I don't know about other places but in Aspenwood or similar, if the person doesn't move for X amount of time they are automatically kicked, if they were afk for too long (toilet etc...) then it happens and the person just has to do it again, life is sometimes unfair

I would love a /kick command but it has too many opportunities for abuse unfortunately, if it was anything less than perfect it would probably have a negative effect on gameplay imo.

As long as there are less leeches because of it then I would probably go for the idle meter as it has less chance of affecting innocent people who enjoy playing the game.

Probably a bit long for my second ever post

well.. true. There really is no perfect system.




Holdling Flag/Relic/Ashes/whatever is an action



It could be configured to take level or radar into effect..


again there is no perfect system.

But you could have the action points require you to be within radar of 1-2 other party members... it's just a thought.

I think an Idle meter with Vote system would be a good balance

if someone is Idle more than 10 minutes,
the party is given the opportunity to VOTE em out



I dont like the vote system by itself but I would happily support voting for booting people that have been inactive for more than 10minutes

I like the idea as much as the next.
Personally I like the away from group option.
I think the option to kick should only be available when someone is away from the group for more than 5 minutes.


If someone is afk or using the toilet, and they let the group know, the group can wait and that person isn't away from the group (compass/radar based). In this case the option to kick shouldn't be available since they aren't away from the group. Group controlled.

If someone sits somewhere for 5 minutes and does nothing and doesn't let anyone know they are afk before they go, then the group should have the option to kick once they give up waiting and move away from said person.
After 5 minutes of said offender being out of everyone's radar range the kick option becomes available for that person only. Majority rules. This is group controlled and should take care of the majority of PvE issues. Now you'd just have to watch for parties of 5 ragers together... which brings up my next suggestion.

for PvP instances:
If someone is raging and opening gates for the other team, they're moving AND they may be in the group's area. In this case I like the option of being able to double click on their name in the party bar and checking a box of some sort.
If the person gets his box checked say ... 50 times ( or whatever - you'd have to guess at a good ratio x times per hour or x times per day etc.) in a certain period of time, they should have one of those titles (like "im not a team player") automatically inserted under their name for 1 week or something. This should carry across the whole account and should not be removeable by the player and should over-ride ALL other titles across the account for it's duration.

You may not be able to completely stop ragers but you'd slow em down a bunch by identifying them to the community. This way the community would have a little control over the situation instead of unrealisticly expecting anet to be able to keep track of all of the freeloaders.

I would be against having a positive checkbox since they could just have their guildies/friends check them back up into a good standing. I think you'd only be able to vote for someone once per mission... this way if you go into a random area and are unfortunate enough to get stuck with the same guy you could vote again speeding up the process, yet wouldn't be able to spam check one person by yourself for spite.

This option should only be available during missions of course to stop people from party hopping in towns and spam checking all the mebers then moving on. I think a week is a good time that way if they have a change of heart and decide to play right they get another chance. You could either just have them wear the title itself or you could put a number after it that slowly goes down over the week. Let's say you get in a group of eliteists and they call you a noob and say you're stupid or whatever... they all check your box.
you have 7 to 11 checks but not 50 so you wouldn't have the title.
I think if you get NO additional checks in a 24hour period your number should start going down 1 point every three hours.

You could even add the title to your title bar under the hero option so you could check your standing. Again, the title wouldn't be defaulted to your character until you reach the magic number (50 in the examples). This would stop your "funny" guildmate from causing damage when he checks you and laughs.

For example... john is a rager... eventually he gets 50 checks by party members over a period of two days. Now all his characters have a title saying "I'm not a team player" and in his title menu it has the number 50 after it. After 24 hours of no additional checks his number goes down by 1 every 3 hours. Code it in that people with the title couldnt enter random PvP or cooperative missions.

Add it to the terms of service so you don't get sued for not letting people play the game they bought. Have them electronically sign that if theyre turds they will lose certain priviledges for a short period of time. Once they sign that... we're golden.

Either way you would be able to identify people who you wouldn't want in your party, and hopefully wouldn't get stuck with a rager in a random mission. Offenders would still be able to do PvE missions with guildies/henchies or anyone WILLING to take them into their party (the first suggestion for PvE freeloaders would still come into play) but would be stopped from ruining PvP for other players.


There may be an even better way, but this is what came to mind on short notice. Sorry it's a little here and there, I was distracted a little.

/signed

Abbreviated....



Not sure if I read it correctly, but the tile of non-team player shouldn't be one you can choose to or not to display. It should always be visible IMO if they went with a concept such as yours. . Again, I think someone mentioned the message board karma rating earlier on. This'd tell who's helpful and who's hurtful in conversations. Well, it'd be nice to see that as well.

Once again, I'll say that any system can be abused. Although thte chances are slim, if you end up in a group with the same person more than once, they could tell others that you stole from them and they could get the odds stacked against you. Some will say, oh, that's not likely, but it is in Random Arenas. I got the same guy in my group 5 times in a row. It's funny, but the things you think can't happen do at times.

But, but, but - you can't do this. The poor hard working bots will starve if they can't farm faction and gold by going AFK on parties. The idea is horendous.

Fitz

Meh.. do it the old fashion way and have people in a Chinese sweat shop farm for you. Then you can sell the goal for real cash.

=p

You wouldn't be able to kick people from a group of less than 4. You couldn't get 3 votes.

If a player is chosen to be kicked he/she should get the end mission option of taking his/her items.

but kicking would be good for afkers, /boot(playersname), and at least 3 have to do it

2 scammers come into terrorize a party... how are you going to boot them if you need 7 out of 8 votes?

majority
5/8 to pass a vote