Problem: Kicked from BAF because "I was an add and he was doing a 16 man only"
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-05-03 19:29 in Suggestions and Ideas
Quote:
Yeah and all those people who want to join a league definitely have an opportunity to join those leagues via the LFG Queue . . . oh wait. |
Originally Posted by Wooden_Replica
actually there exists a way to lock a league today, simply form a league at the max count, and guess what, its locked.
|
Honestly I think it's time for a red name to come in and speak up about how the players are ACTUALLY forming up for the trials.
But I have a feeling that may not happen.
The LFG tool is a failure for multiple reasons. Period.
EDIT: And before anyone posts any more silly, inane, useless Second Measure posts from beta or pre-beta . . . don't. It makes you look foolish, as I think by now we can all agree how the devs wanted people to form up for the trials IS ******* NOT HOW THEY ARE DOING SO.
Funny that, the playerbase using content in a way the devs didn't intend or anticipate. I don't know what I'm getting this funny deja vu . . . Like something like this has happened before.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
No. My point has been made. It's simply not a point you wish to accept, so you are doing your best to ignore and trivialize it.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Really. You're reaching to try to make some sort of point. And missing.
|
That's okay though. Watching someone put their hands over their ears and shout "Not listening!" is always amusing.
Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.
Quote:
You're making a horrible point by assuming that people always run the same way. Do you always go out and do things with random people? Because you're assuming that the people who want to be able to do something with just friends only ever do so. Which isn't true, just like the vast majority of absolutes (not using the ironic version normally used).|
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
No. My point has been made. It's simply not a point you wish to accept, so you are doing your best to ignore and trivialize it.
That's okay though. Watching someone put their hands over their ears and shout "Not listening!" is always amusing. |
Depending on someone's mood they may want to run a Lambda with their SG (go catch a flick with a group of friends), run it with random people (go out to the club and meet people), or even just solo stuff (sit at home and watch Doctor Who). You're making this a false all-or-nothing dichotomy, Hyperstrike.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler
Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?
|
Quote:
Systematically going through your "points" and explaining in detail how they are flawed, is not "putting hands over our ears." And making strawman arguments isn't making a point.|
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
No. My point has been made. It's simply not a point you wish to accept, so you are doing your best to ignore and trivialize it.
That's okay though. Watching someone put their hands over their ears and shout "Not listening!" is always amusing. |
The funny part is that our side of the argument would like to find a solution beneficial to all sides, while the other side just screams loudly, "YOU'RE SELFISH," and then accuses us of not listening.
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
Quote:
Yes, it quite is. |
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
No. My point has been made. It's simply not a point you wish to accept, so you are doing your best to ignore and trivialize it.
That's okay though. Watching someone put their hands over their ears and shout "Not listening!" is always amusing. |
Honestly, I don't think anyone is going to convince anyone in this thread.
Some folks have fundamentally different views of what an mmo should and shouldn't be. (Hell and gaming and life in general it seems).
The question Paragon Studios (and NCSoft) should be asking is which on is better for their bottom line:
Continuing the trend of the last 7 years of giving folks the ability to control who they team with.
or
Now telling folks that you must team with random folks if you wish to advance your 50s?
With the solo and small teams Incarnate content they have promised is coming (which completely bypasses the trials and the idiotic LFG tool, I'm betting I know what direction they may go. But I could be wrong.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
Your point that you don't want to accept that others would like other things, so you put your hands over your ears and shout "Not listening?" |
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
No. My point has been made. It's simply not a point you wish to accept, so you are doing your best to ignore and trivialize it.
That's okay though. Watching someone put their hands over their ears and shout "Not listening!" is always amusing. |
Yes, you've made that very well. If you want to make yourself look like someone who should not be listened to - excellent work!
99.9% of the game works the way we expect. Two (2) missions out of the whole game are different and to deny players acess to these two missions, because the leader can, is unreasonable.
Quote:
Players would not be denied access to the missions. Only to a specific team forming at a specific time. Much like they don't get to tag along on my SG-only TF, or my solo mission, or my "project team" missions - but are more than welcome (barring being jerks) on my PUGs.
|
Originally Posted by Gunstar
99.9% of the game works the way we expect. Two (2) missions out of the whole game are different and to deny players acess to these two missions, because the leader can, is unreasonable.
|
Quote:
This is the crux of the argument. Those advocating for locked leagues see these as "my missions", where those wanting not to kick PUGs see it as everyone passes through the LFG, thus no one has exclusive access to these two (2) missions.
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Players would not be denied access to the missions. Only to a specific team forming at a specific time. Much like they don't get to tag along on my SG-only TF, or my solo mission, or my "project team" missions - but are more than welcome (barring being jerks) on my PUGs.
|
Quote:
If the missions were only available - say - for one hour a week, or even one hour a day, and closed off at all other times, I'd call "exclusive access" an argument as I'd want to see as many people able to go through them during the limited time as possible. |
Originally Posted by Gunstar
This is the crux of the argument. Those advocating for locked leagues see these as "my missions", where those wanting not to kick PUGs see it as everyone passes through the LFG, thus no one has exclusive access to these two (2) missions.
|
However, the missions are always available, and leagues are continually forming - even on lower population servers. Having someone not able to join one specific team on one specific run through does not preclude them from joining another team that's wide open (and I believe that open "PUG" leagues would remain the majority of those formed.)
Quote:
I don't think you're really describing the argument we're making then. And if that's what you're interpreting from our suggestions, then maybe some clarification would help you understand we're not asking for selfish gains.|
Originally Posted by Gunstar
This is the crux of the argument. Those advocating for locked leagues see these as "my missions", where those wanting not to kick PUGs see it as everyone passes through the LFG, thus no one has exclusive access to these two (2) missions.
|
Advocating locked leagues does not imply a "my mission" mentality anymore than Task Force teams do. Occasionally, people will just want to team with their friends, SG, etc, for a myriad of reasons. An SG event is not someone being able to claim it's "their mission." It's just an event in which friends could enjoy their company without intrusion of others. Yes, some people might treat it as their mission, but you're just turning it into a blanket statement for everyone. That's a fallacy.
On the other part of your comment, you're talking about exclusivity that doesn't exist. No one has exclusive access to the ITF. Everyone can use this content at anytime they want to form/join a team and do it. The ITF is not restricted to anyone except by level. Allowing people to form locked leagues will not make trials exclusive either. Anyone willing to enter the queue will still be able to access them. Are there times of the day when the queue will take longer? Yes, but there's times of the day it will take you longer to form an ITF. That's nothing to do with making things exclusive.
If you think everyone will just start forming locked leagues, then you have to concede that everyone wishes they could just play with their friends/sg mates. And if that's the case, then you have to admit the queue system is going against the entire population of players preference. But guess what!? Not all teams will lock their league, and the queue could still be a functional tool. Probably more so than it is now.
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
Quote:
The PUG side want you to play with your friends and SG, if I met you in game I would like to team up. It's just you may not be able to just play with your friends on these two missions. For the enjoyment of all, the game requests the leagues accept guests and to kick them so they have to wait again is not nice or fair.
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
Advocating locked leagues does not imply a "my mission" mentality anymore than Task Force teams do. Occasionally, people will just want to team with their friends, SG, etc, for a myriad of reasons. An SG event is not someone being able to claim it's "their mission." It's just an event in which friends could enjoy their company without intrusion of others. Yes, some people might treat it as their mission, but you're just turning it into a blanket statement for everyone. That's a fallacy.
|
Quote:
Given that I'm seeing even PUG groups trying to lock leagues with the team lock tool, I think I can safely say that most people will lock leagues.|
Originally Posted by Rylas
1. Let's assume that you actually understand the player base as a whole, and everyone prefered locking leagues. If so, that means that right now, the majority of the player base is not happy with the Queue system as it is, which means it seriously needs to be looked at and changed to accomodate this majority you've asserted.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
2. You've already stated you think the amount of instances people have been kicked in the way the OP experienced are scattered and rare instances. If so, this implies the majority of the population is open to LFG players, and any changes to the gueue to allow controlled team size would hardly make all leagues locked.
|
This is because most people that want a private league would feel bad kicking players who the system teams with them. That is why kicking isn't more rampant. You've said it yourself -- that you'd feel bad kicking someone, but would want a way to prevent them joining in the first place. The system doesn't allow for you prevent people from joining so the person being added has a chance to actually do the trial.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
I gotta wonder why there's so much arguing in this thread... It's really very simple.
If we don't like how the LFG tool works (and consequently, the raids connected to it), we make suggestions to hopefully get it changed. Until then, if we choose to use it, we're stuck using it the way it is.
If I'm trying to use it differently (create private leagues by kicking people) before these features (bugs?) are changed, I'm using it in an unintended manner, inconvienencing (or worse) people that are using it correctly.
That puts me in the wrong.
Why is this concept so hard to grasp?
Edit to add: If I don't like a suggestion being made- tough. It's the suggestions forum. This is what it's here for, and ultimately, it's for the devs to decide. I can make a counter suggestion, and give a quick reason why. There shouldn't be more than that going back and forth.
Quote:
Because it assigns a positive moral value to 'doing what you think the devs appear to be telling you to.'|
Originally Posted by Warlocc
I gotta wonder why there's so much arguing in this thread... It's really very simple.
If we don't like how the LFG tool works (and consequently, the raids connected to it), we make suggestions to hopefully get it changed. Until then, if we choose to use it, we're stuck using it the way it is. If I'm trying to use it differently (create private leagues by kicking people) before these features (bugs?) are changed, I'm using it in an unintended manner, inconvienencing (or worse) people that are using it correctly. That puts me in the wrong. Why is this concept so hard to grasp? |
The developers aren't a moral agent, and their intentions are not a measure either of right or wrong.
Furthermore it relies on an interpretation - really, an extrapolation - of the developer's intent out from the design of their system. The fact that there's no 'league lock' button doesn't necessarily mean they don't want any private leagues. The fact that there's a kick button may mean that their intent actually is for you to kick people to maintain privacy instead!
But either way what the developers intend really doesn't matter. It's their job to provide us with an entertainment service, not to be arbiters of morality for us.
"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."
Quote:
But then RO couldn't break the game |
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
And my preferred solution would be that LFG dissolves any group that enqueues, and assembles new leagues from the individuals in the queue. In other words, that premaking leagues would be completely impossible, and hopefully people would just stop trying and start enqueueing individually and rolling with whatever team results.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vega
The timer starts, trial begins, everyone loads, and you have a team of:
ALL Tanks.  or all Stalkers or all Defenders with no level shifts I smell fail. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gunstar
Snow Globe's quote of the red name was an interesting insight into the devs thoughts.
I have a level 50 character, I have Going Rogue, and I have an hour and a half of play time. I want to get into the end game content and profit by it. I click the LFG button and wait my turn in the queue. The mission starts and I'm promptly kicked from said content by another player who gets to enjoy the mission, while I have to start the process over again. However, I am now out of playtime and must log off. Perhaps the Incarnate trials aren't all inclusive? |
http://www.fimfiction.net/story/36641/My-Little-Exalt
Quote:
It's not hard to grasp. Maybe people just don't care what the intended manner is.
|
Originally Posted by Warlocc
I gotta wonder why there's so much arguing in this thread... It's really very simple.
If we don't like how the LFG tool works (and consequently, the raids connected to it), we make suggestions to hopefully get it changed. Until then, if we choose to use it, we're stuck using it the way it is. If I'm trying to use it differently (create private leagues by kicking people) before these features (bugs?) are changed, I'm using it in an unintended manner, inconvienencing (or worse) people that are using it correctly. That puts me in the wrong. Why is this concept so hard to grasp? |
Quote:
I know shocking that players are using a feature in an unintended way.|
Originally Posted by MunkiLord
It's not hard to grasp. Maybe people just don't care what the intended manner is.
|
That's NEVER, EVER happened in the history of this game . . . never ever . . . at all . . . nope never in this game's history.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MunkiLord
It's not hard to grasp. Maybe people just don't care what the intended manner is.
|
You see that's a double lol. Especially since this thread has devolved into why can't we exclude people we don't like.
Just guessing here but the devs may have, just may have noticed that the community has become increasingly balkanized and one of the reasons they lose new players that stumble upon this game is that they can't make the hookup with a community in the game.
So don't expect the devs to help you out in using the tool that runs counter to their wishes. The other side of this coin is that the devs have done quite a bit to make certain that the fragmentation exists and not much to fix it. (The help me badges aren't a fix but are hilarious)
Quote:
They can form their own teams and build their own communities. The trials I think are the WORST places to try to reverse the trend you speak. New players don't start the game at level 50.|
Originally Posted by Another_Fan
You see that's a double lol. Especially since this thread has devolved into why can't we exclude people we don't like.
Just guessing here but the devs may have, just may have noticed that the community has become increasingly balkanized and one of the reasons they lose new players that stumble upon this game is that they can't make the hookup with a community in the game. So don't expect the devs to help you out in using the tool that runs counter to their wishes. The other side of this coin is that the devs have done quite a bit to make certain that the fragmentation exists and not much to fix it. (The help me badges aren't a fix but are hilarious) |
If these new players have gotten to 50 I'd assume they've built the personal tools to be able to break into these communities. Unless they solo'd to 50, which I doubt. And also getting into them is as simple as adding chat channels to you chat box.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MunkiLord
It's not hard to grasp. Maybe people just don't care what the intended manner is.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
I know shocking that players are using a feature in an unintended way.
|
Frankly, I don't even acknowledge the existance of the league forming function of the LFG tool. In reality, when was the last time a viable and successful league was formed via the use of the said tool? As I have already mentioned before, the only thing the LFG tool is doing right now is dumping extras into pre-formed trials. Is that the intended purpose/use of the tool? I think not therefore it is broken and not functioning as intended. With that mind, should I choose to ignore it entirely, no one has the high ground to tell me otherwise.
Quote:
What if it is and a developer came right out and said it? Would you say the developer didn't have the high ground to tell you that is what they intended?|
Originally Posted by baron_inferno
As I have already mentioned before, the only thing the LFG tool is doing right now is dumping extras into pre-formed trials. Is that the intended purpose/use of the tool? I think not therefore it is broken and not functioning as intended. With that mind, should I choose to ignore it entirely, no one has the high ground to tell me otherwise.
|
At this point, I think those that have made their up their mind to think that the developers are wrong or that the LFG system isn't functioning as it is supposed to be will not be appeased even if a developer speaks to the issue.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
Yes. Because it's NOT how players are currently using that useless tool.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
What if it is and a developer came right out and said it? Would you say the developer didn't have the high ground to tell you that is what they intended?
At this point, I think those that have made their up their mind to think that the developers are wrong or that the LFG system isn't functioning as it is supposed to be will not be appeased even if a developer speaks to the issue. |
The tool has so many bugs and problems associated with it I couldn't honestly care less if Positron or War Witch came and stated what it's intent is. The players have decided as a whole that they don't care to use the tool as it doesn't work correctly.
And even if it did work correctly, I'd still bet many folks would form their Leagues FIRST before they queued. Why? Because players like being able to control AT/powerset composition/SG vs VG composition, etc. Also known as they like to control WHO they team with.
This is NOT a foreign concept in this game or mmos in general. I do not understand why you're not getting this. Folks like to decide for themselves when they PUG and when they team with friends/sgs/coalitions exclusively. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has played this game for seven years. And it certainly shouldn't be to the devs.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
I should point out there are actually family-style restaurants that work very similar to how you suggest, where there are no small tables that small parties can request, where you are expected to share the table with other groups, and while you could theoretically attempt to move to another table or specifically request to not be seated with a specific set of other people except for corner cases that would be considered exceptionally rude. I've seen them and dined in them first hand.
|
Originally Posted by Flux_Vector
I actually came up with a great analogy here.
Think of the trials as a restaurant. It's a public business that puts people at various tables inside it, and serves food to them. Everyone who goes into the restaurant has the right to get the same quality food, from the same kitchen, at the same price, with the same service. Ie, everyone has the right to do the same trial, with the same NPCs, and the same rewards and advancement. It's a series of semi-private spaces (tables) inside a larger public space (the restaurant). A hostess seats people or groups or people at various tables in the restaurant; that would be the LFG tool. But this restaurant has some strange rules - its tables only come in certain sizes and need to have a minimum number of people at them before you can get your meal, but if you come with that many people you will get served immediately. If you don't, the hostess groups people together to meet the minimum number for service. But one of the other rules is that the person who reserved the table can remove anyone from it, at any time, for any reasons. The problem with all of this is that the hostess never knows ahead of time who minds having someone being sat with them, and who doesn't. And since it's disruptive and adds to someone's wait time to get a table if they're removed, it's not really good for any of the customers - either the table's original occupants, or the one who was innocently seated there by the ignorant hostess. I don't think people have the right to sit at other peoples' tables if they're unwanted. If they are, the person whose table that is, is in my opinion perfectly within their rights to remove them from that table, forcing the hostess to ask to seat them elsewhere, including waiting for another table to open. They aren't always going to choose to exercise their rights, but that doesn't mean they don't have those rights. The problem of people being seated where they aren't wanted would easily, smoothly, and invisibly be solved, if only the hostess could be told ahead of time who was or wasn't open to strangers being sat at their tables. And everyone would always have an enjoyable meal with the minimum amount of waiting as a result. And as noted, on different visits to the restaurant, the same people might be open to guests sometimes, and not others. Just like they already sometimes have guests reseated, and sometimes don't. It wouldn't create an exclusive or hostile environment anymore than the current situation where someone is disruptively removed does, it would probably be a lot cleaner and smoother. And that'd be better for the restaurant's business cause really, who wants to eat alot at a restaurant with their friends, when strangers at seated with you without your consent and then you have to ask the hostess to remove them (and get called a jerk by perfect strangers who seem to reject your human rights of privacy and freedom of association), rather than just telling them you want a private table? Edit: Oh, and yes, privacy and freedom to choose with whom one associates? Basic, fundamental human rights that everyone ought to enjoy. |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Welcome to the real world. Shared by more than just you and your immediate clique of friends. Try to play nice.
It's not an "Either or." People CAN decide "I just want to do this myself this time," or "I just want to deal with my friends this time," and then say "Hey, let's just grab anyone and do this" the next day. People want *the flexibility to choose.*
It's not "Psychotic" for me to decide that, this Saturday, I just want to have a few friends over to hang out and maybe watch a DVD or two, eat pizza and have a good time with them as opposed to heading into the middle of the city and doing stuff there. Nor is it "non-psychotic" for me to decide I want to stand around with a few hundred to a few thousand people I don't know at a concert or big movie premiere. It's a choice on how I want to spend my time and who I want to spend it with at that particular instance.
Really. You're reaching to try to make some sort of point. And missing.