City of Heroes: Live Forum Archive

Problem: Kicked from BAF because "I was an add and he was doing a 16 man only"

Adeon Hawkwood

By Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-05-03 19:29 in Suggestions and Ideas

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
Okay guys. Feel free to keep responding. I should have been in bed about 2 hours ago. Going there now. Will pick this up tomorrow if the mods haven't carpet-nuked the thread from orbit.
Sleep well.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by MunkiLord View Post
Better?
Yes, much. Thank you.

And might I add that I didn't think her... assets... could be emphasized even more than it was during the BAF cut scene. Boy was I wrong.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
Making judgments about other players based solely on whether they want to team with random people is pretty harsh of you. I'd also caution you against making assumptions as to how people run trials based on their viewpoint in this thread.

It is a given that some players will want to be selective in who they team with. Sometimes it is elitism (and IMHO there is nothing wrong with a bit of elitism as long as it's in moderation) but that is not the only reason people could want a private league. It could just as easily be that they want to team with their friends and chat about personal topics without an outsider being able to see the chat. Or maybe they want to do some runs under controlled conditions in order to test something in which case having an extra player would change the conditions (for example an all-Defender BAF which has a Tanker added to it).

There will always be people who want to form a specific team and as long as the queue allows them to join as a league and gives the league leader the power to kick people they are already able to. Adding a "lock league" feature simply means that they can do so more conveniently and avoids putting other people in the position that Halon was put in.

If someone is added to a pre-formed but understrength league wouldn't it be better if they were added to a league that wanted them instead of one that didn't?
You can "caution me" all you like, Adeon, but I don't have to make much of an assumption when people openly admit to doing things in-play like pushing strays off into exile teams with the explicit understanding that doing so is going to short-change them when it comes to earning XP... as one poster did up-thread.

To you, that may sound perfectly fair... But to me, it's a harsh and, frankly, seriously dickish thing to do.

@Brightfires - @Talisander
That chick what plays the bird-things...

 

Posted

Here's an opinion from a neutral party in this argument:

I'm on a limited schedule of how much I play, in regards to City of Heroes; and with that said, I'm further limited by when I can play. The fact that the LFG option exists, is evidence of the Devs desire to appeal to the casual player. You would be essentially oblivious, if you didn't recognize the fact that there are spikes in gameplay times, and it just so happens that when I get to play the most, fewer people are online. I play on Virtue, these days; one of the most populated servers, and it as well, is subject to prime times. I used to play on Victory, but due to non-communication, lack of teams forming, etc., I migrated to Virtue.

My point is this: If I wait in the queue for fourty-five minutes to an hour(despite the < One Minute average time to start trial), just to be put on a BAF on which I'm promptly kicked(because I'm a stranger, or I'm the 19th on a team of 18, and the leader doesn't like odd numbers), I'm going to be angry. If it happened enough times, I'd go elsewhere for my super-hero gaming needs. With so many people using private channels, teaming with only people on friends lists, etc., it makes it much harder for someone casual or even new to immerse themselves in the game, and serves to further isolate people. In a massively multiplayer online setting, isolation is detrimental to expansion.

Maybe it'd be different if it didn't take a certain number to even initiate a trial--but thinking that there will always be interest or players enough for multiple groups of said event is naieve. As it stands, there is no contact for an Incarnate trial. With that said, there's no way to know if there's even any interest in attempting a trial, aside from going to a specific zone, channel, or looking at the laughably ridiculous, estimated times on the queue. If that's true on Virtue, I'd hate to imagine trying to gather players for a BAF on Victory.

As far as "fixing" the queue, so you can lock other players out.. I think of it this way: Would it be beneficial, especially when you can already "lock" other players out by simply filling the league? Chances are, people who use the queue already have their patience pushed--but being kicked from the league would be the final straw, for a lot of players. As a leader, what does that accomplish for you? That guy or girl--they aren't looking to ruin your gaming experience. They queued because, like you, they wanted to experience the content, earn their rewards, or both. One person isin't going to make or break league moral; if it does..maybe Hyperstrike isin't the one who needs to chill.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
After all, it started with Snow Globe's argument - as odd as it was - that league locking shouldn't be allowed because you can't lock the RWZ and the mothership raid that takes place there. (paraphrased.)
Actually it started with Arcanaville in post #15, well before I took it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
The same reason you cannot lock the Hive. The trials are specifically designed for the turnstile. "Private leagues" are an invention of the playerbase that bypasses the turnstile by assembling teams outside of the turnstile. A league can't even start the trial "privately" - they *must* enter the turnstile to do so. The fact that a league cannot simply start the trial without joining the turnstile is an unequivocal sign the intent is for the trials to bring together everyone that wants to run the trial at that time.

BAF and Lambda are instanced Hives, not instanced task forces. You can be exclusive if you work at it, but the game's not currently going to help you do it. The person playing the game as intended is the player that joined the turnstile. The team leader who kicked them was frankly playing the game as a dick. I cannot imagine what was so important that the leader felt compelled to kick a single player just trying to enjoy the trials. One more person more or less is not going to change the dynamic of the trial at all if they were not being specifically abusive. I definitely would not stand for it on any trial run I was on.
I may be guilty of expanding/reiterating the argument, but not of starting it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rylas View Post
Quote:
It is human nature. There will always be more excuses (and that is all that they are, excuses) to turn away people than reasons to team with people you don't know.
Quote:
I expect that the developers also expect that the majority of people will accept people from the queue as well.
So which is it? More people will choose to have limited League sizes, or more people would openly welcome LFGers into their team at random?
Those two quotes were not an "either/or". Players, as evidenced by yourself and others here -will- kick players that enter from the queue. The players doing the kicking will have all manner of rationalizations, but all of those reasons boil down to "I don't want to team with outsiders or people I don't know." The developers are smart enough to realize that some people will be jerks and will kick people from the league. However they likely think the actual amount of people kicked for that reason would be small. They are probably hoping that people will see the trials are able to be done with PUGs and will not care if someone enters from the queue. They probably even have a higher opinion than most people in this thread about the courtesy of people leading these trials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rylas View Post
If it's the second, then adding a feature to allow for limiting team size wouldn't be a real issue for LFGers, would it?
Yes, it would be an issue. It means that the system designed to get them on a team as quickly as possible is being subverted by a bunch of jerks that are willing to punish someone that they don't know for something beyond their control. You can't start a Lambda or BAF by going to a contact. You have to use the LFG queue. By doing so you agree with the terms that the queue imposes.

Among those terms is that if you don't have a full league, the queue will add people up to the max amount for that trial. As a person entering the trial you are presented with a choice to accept or decline the invite to the trial. The moment everyone clicks "Accept" instead of "Decline" they are bound to the agreement of the rules for the system. Try to wriggle around it as much as you want, everyone is given the same choice.



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

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bright View Post
You can "caution me" all you like, Adeon, but I don't have to make much of an assumption when people openly admit to doing things in-play like pushing strays off into exile teams with the explicit understanding that doing so is going to short-change them when it comes to earning XP... as one poster did up-thread.

To you, that may sound perfectly fair... But to me, it's a harsh and, frankly, seriously dickish thing to do.
I assume you're referring to my very first post in this thread so I shall respond.

What should I do instead? When I originally set up the league and recruited the players who actually *bothered* to make it to Pocket D (as if that's somehow a chore), there was no way of knowing how many people would join from the LFG queue is there? Should I tell the whole league to just twiddle their thumbs after we've already entered the trial while I re-arrange the teams? So in actuality, letting the queuers stay is simply not good enough. No, I actually need to re-adjust the whole original league of 16 in order to accommodate the extras. Do you even realize asking for league leaders to do that will actually have the exact opposite effect of encouraging them to just boot the queuers and be done with the extra hassle?

Tell you what, when you have the league star, you can run it how you like. I'm already taking the time and responsibility of setting up the leagues (often back-to-back) because many others won't, now you wish to place more burdens on top? This might come as a surprise but like the queuers, I am also here to play a game and to actually enjoy the process. If I have to lead them so be it since I don't mind it. However, I am *not* here to play micromanage-a-league as that is not fun for me. I swear, you give a yard and next they want the whole effing mile.

Edit: I see some people arguing for equal rights to trial as well as fair treatment for the LFG queuers but there is something else that is quite absent. What about the rights of those who went to Pocket D to pre-form the trials? When I lead 16 player BAFs, I advertise it exactly as such in broadcast. Everyone who joins the league has the expectation of potentially better end reward, better iexp distribution, a bit more challenge and perhaps in the process, more fun. And now because of 1 or 2 LFG queuers, the whole formula has to be tossed out of the window in order to appease their needs. Did I somehow inherit the role of a babysitter that has to coddle everyone in the league just because I have the star? So let's say if I do spread out the teams and as a result, the original 15 are dissatisfied since their expectations of better iexp distribution is no longer being met. Just who is the dick for wanting to put the league leader in such a no-win situation? That's not asking for fairness or equal rights, that's asking for preferential treatment.

Frankly, if LFG queuers want equal treatment, come to Pocket D like everyone else and I guarantee that they will get it, at least from me. I don't turn down invite requests unless the league is critically short on something. That is the reality of how "fairness" operates in CoX when it comes to grouping and there, I finally said the very thing that undoubtedly has already crossed the minds of some people in this thread.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
It also doesn't make it any more difficult either. If a group goes in with less than the maximum, they should not expect the trial to be more difficult (scaled to the max with a minimal team), as the trials are specifically designed to scale with team size. Suggesting otherwise is just a falsehood.
Number of enemies and enemy rank is only a portion of the difficulty on the trials. No matter how many people you bring, you've still got 10 portals to close, requiring 10 Molecular Acids (or alternatively, be able to survive the stream of ambushes from any portals you don't close). Marauder is still going to Nova Fist you in the face if you're too close, no matter how many teammates are also close, and if you're not at full health, you'll probably die. Guard towers in the BAF don't go away or become weaker, unlike enemy spawns no do Nightstar and Siege, or the sequestering rings they give you. (In fact, with fewer people you're more and more likely to be targeted for sequestering.)

There's another thread about a 2-man Lambda. Sure, the normal spawns were smaller, but that's certainly some increased difficulty there. You can't argue against that. (Rather, if you did argue against that people would point fingers and laugh at you.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MunkiLord View Post
I saved the address! Now I need your last name and year of birth. I want to go shopping!
Keep up the funny

http://www.fimfiction.net/story/36641/My-Little-Exalt

 

Posted

Quote:
I'm on a limited schedule of how much I play, in regards to City of Heroes; and with that said, I'm further limited by when I can play. The fact that the LFG option exists, is evidence of the Devs desire to appeal to the casual player. You would be essentially oblivious, if you didn't recognize the fact that there are spikes in gameplay times, and it just so happens that when I get to play the most, fewer people are online. I play on Virtue, these days; one of the most populated servers, and it as well, is subject to prime times. I used to play on Victory, but due to non-communication, lack of teams forming, etc., I migrated to Virtue.

Not sure how casual players comes into the LFG option. It really doesnt take that much time to zone into rwz or pocket d and see if any leagues are forming. Takes less time to get in on a trial that way too.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by baron_inferno View Post
I assume you're referring to my very first post in this thread so I shall respond.

What should I do instead? When I originally set up the league and recruited the players who actually *bothered* to make it to Pocket D (as if that's somehow a chore), there was no way of knowing how many people would join from the LFG queue is there? Should I tell the whole league to just twiddle their thumbs after we've already entered the trial while I re-arrange the teams? So in actuality, letting the queuers stay is simply not good enough. No, I actually need to re-adjust the whole original league of 16 in order to accommodate the extras. Do you even realize asking for league leaders to do that will actually have the exact opposite effect of encouraging them to just boot the queuers and be done with the extra hassle?

Tell you what, when you have the league star, you can run it how you like. I'm already taking the time and responsibility of setting up the leagues (often back-to-back) because many others won't, now you wish to place more burdens on top? This might come as a surprise but like the queuers, I am also here to play a game and to actually enjoy the process. If I have to lead them so be it since I don't mind it. However, I am *not* here to play micromanage-a-league as that is not fun for me. I swear, you give a yard and next they want the whole effing mile.

Edit: I see some people arguing for equal rights to trial as well as fair treatment for the LFG queuers but there is something else that is quite absent. What about the rights of those who went to Pocket D to pre-form the trials? When I lead 16 player BAFs, I advertise it exactly as such in broadcast. Everyone who joins the league has the expectation of potentially better end reward, better iexp distribution, a bit more challenge and perhaps in the process, more fun. And now because of 1 or 2 LFG queuers, the whole formula has to be tossed out of the window in order to appease their needs. Did I somehow inherit the role of a babysitter that has to coddle everyone in the league just because I have the star? So let's say if I do spread out the teams and as a result, the original 15 are dissatisfied since their expectations of better iexp distribution is no longer being met. Just who is the dick for wanting to put the league leader in such a no-win situation? That's not asking for fairness or equal rights, that's asking for preferential treatment.

Frankly, if LFG queuers want equal treatment, come to Pocket D like everyone else and I guarantee that they will get it, at least from me. I don't turn down invite requests unless the league is critically short on something. That is the reality of how "fairness" operates in CoX when it comes to grouping and there, I finally said the very thing that undoubtedly has already crossed the minds of some people in this thread.
he, he,
And what does exactly Pocket D have to forming a BAF/Lamda? I admit its easier to form a League from there, but that's it. Here's the fact, if you have enough singleton toons in the Q, with each toon in a seperate zone, a trial will begin. Pocket D just happens to be an easy place for people to meet to form a Trial, a gathering point could just as easily be the Rikti War Zone or somewhere else, although I admit I personally like seeing traffic in Pocket D.

Even forming s league before hand is just to make things easier, you can start a trial if there is enough singleton's in the Q. Forming a league beforehand is just to make it easier to start one.

If anything, the devs should've used different terms, using terms like LFG or Trial, does tend to confuse things

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
There may not be deliberate malice but there is certainly non-premeditated malice: the league leader has to know kicking the player isn't a positive experience and is explicitly deciding that negative experience is not important relative to their own playing experience. Its not an act that has an unintended consequence that is out of sight or difficult to predict by the league leader, whereupon they could argue they did not foresee the consequences of their actions.

And that is the choice players have to make. You have two options: sacrifice your own control over who you team with and allow another player to join, or preserve your control over who you team with and prevent a player from running the trial with your league, forcing them to return to the queue. The game forces you to choose, but it does not force a specific choice upon you. To change my mind, someone would have to prove the game presented this choice in a manner that the player did not have the free will to voluntarily choose either choice.

The only people saying this is no choice are people who are essentially implying that it is a given the player must always get what they want. In that event, the only choice available is to kick the player. I simply don't subscribe to that axiom, and because I don't I see choices where other people don't see choices. I can choose to compromise to sometimes get what I want, and sometimes not get what I want but allow someone else to get what they want. That philosophy also lies at the core of everything you could claim is a contribution to the game of mine, so that's probably a good thing in general.
Okay, let's suppose for a moment 8 friends form a Lambda Trial. They push the "begin Trial" button with the expectation of running the Trial with only the 8 people who were on the team. When they zone into the Trial, they found the queue system has added an additional player. The League Leader does not want to kick them, but instead, all eight people leave the Trial and reform as a team. They enter the queue again, and they continue to do so until the system puts them in a Lambda Trial on their own.

In other words, they make the exact same choice between giving up control over the team to play with the adds, or playing exactly as they like. But they make the choice to optimize their play experience in a way that inconveniences *both* parties instead of only one. Is there malice in that?



Character index

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
Actually it started with Arcanaville in post #15, well before I took it up.
And Wicked Wendy's response in that other thread gave a great explanation why a zone can't be compared to a raid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wicked_Wendy View Post
Okay Bill tore this apart already but allow me to add my perspective. The Hive is a ZONE. even if there isn't a raid taking place I can enter and collect badges or just fly around exploring. The RWZ is a ZONE. Mothership RAIDS take place in it but it also has numerous contacts offering door missions and one giving out a task force. NO you can't kick a player out of those because they don't need to join a TEAM to get in.

Now Snow tell me exactly how many times you have gotten inside the BAF or Lambda Trial without joining a team attached to a league? Did you fly around and check out the place. Maybe head over and visit Siege in his office?

No because the ONLY way anyone can get into that MISSION that TRIAL is by joining a team. Which by the way is the same with the Terra Volta Trials, Eden Trials, Treespecs, the COP, etc. no one just waltzes inside and looks around. Heck to see the inside of a COP you not only need to join a team the SG sponsoring it needs the raid teleporter and the mission computer. Yeah go tell those guys after they spent the time and prestige to set up their base they don't have a say in who they invite.

You can't compare an unwanted player showing up in Eden for a Hami raid to players being assigned to an established league without the league leader having a say. As mentioned here repeatedly, and ignored completely by you, all any leader needs to do to avoid this is FILL a team to maximum before entering Q or kicking unwanted and uninvited players from the team once inside. So why not just avoid the hurt feelings and allow a lock that bars outsiders from joining once the league is set? It allows those leaders trying to avoid lag by staying at a set size to accomplish that with less grief and it protects those in the Q from being kicked because they weren't invited. I fail to see a down side here.

 

Posted

You guys are so funny.

The devs created a system knowing that most people would feel bad about kicking stragglers. However, they know that for whatever reason, you sometimes need to be able to kick folks from your team. So they left that in.

The OP's story is lamentable, but fully within the rules and fully intended. The only thing that the OP can do is make a note about that league leader.

The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Coming_Storm View Post
Report the league leader for griefing.
And watch nothing happen.

The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.

 

Posted

Actually, I thought it was rather nice of the leader to explain him or her self in the first place.

"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."

 

Posted

The LFG tool doesn't work for what its designed to do, and probably never will. The sooner we all come to accept this the sooner I think a valid solution can be found.

Players do not pre-arrange teams because they are elitist. They do it because these events require coordination and leadership. The entire team has to be on board with the strategy or the trial is a potential wash. If random players are a potential liability to the team of course some teams will be reluctant to involve them. The badges for doing or not doing certain tasks in particular are practically guaranteed to lead to pre-forming and a resistance to random adds.

The feature we needed, but didn't get, was the ability to post "advertisements" for teams that are forming. Functionally this is almost exactly identical to spamming global and private channels except without the spamming. Another way to look at it is the reverse of the "Looking for Team" flag.

 

Posted

Funny enough:

The other day, I was discussing the LFG tool's failings with my friends. From my perspective as a person who A) sees randomly assembled teams kicking tuchus all the time and B) does not like to wait for teams to assemble, the LFG queue's failing was that it allowed people to form premade leagues at all. 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.

Because honest to heaven you guys, any random assembly of 8+ level 50 characters in this game is going to be incredibly powerful, and besides the LFG tool could be enhanced to try to build balanced teams that include multi-run veterans if only it were allowed to pick and choose from whoever happened to be enqueued at the time.

The fact that this would send some of the posters in this thread into an apoplectic rage is a wholly unexpected benefit. Because just as you privilege your desires over mine, I in turn privilege my desires over yours.

@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by MengoMengo View Post
Why not just go to wherever the server start trials from (pd, mc, cim, rwz.) and ask there instead of waiting on the dumb queue system.
Well, part of the wonder of the new system is that you don't have to do this -- this works hand-in-hand with the fact it can take awhile to build up enough people to start a (random, PUG-like) league.

Thus you can run around doing other things -- a solo mission, crafting, AHing, etc. and not just stand there bored while waiting.


The devs can't stop kicking, or else you'd end up with lazy people standing at the entrance waiting for free xp. So they have to be able to kick.

I was already an old hand at gaming when UO and EQ came out. People should be able to create teams, including full leagues, with exactly and only the people they want. Therefore there should be the option to prevent random adds through the LFG mechanism to prevent people like me from getting kicked in the first place.

If I have to wait longer, so be it. I don't want the devs "fixing" my irritation at a long wait by having the game shoehorn me into any league, wanted or not, that's next up for entry.


Let's put it bluntly, ignoring the lazy player issue, I don't think it wise to prevent kicks just so the singletons can "get into a league" on a more timely basis -- and I'm regularly just that kind of player.

"Hey! You knocked generic cola all over your precious D20 books!"

ED: Now I know how Nancy Kerrigan felt: "Why...?!? Why...?!?"

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilGeko View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Coming_Storm
Report the league leader for griefing.
And watch nothing happen.

Actually, I was so mad I was planning on doing a report, but fortunately I settled down enough to ask the guy why he kicked me, giving him the benefit of the doubt. That's why I came here to beak off about it instead. He didn't really do anything wrong.

Whether he was doing a "16 man" for lag reasons, or he had a private group of friends, or wanted to feel studly doing it with fewer people, I don't know. Nor do I care -- since he can kick people, there should be better ways to keep unwanted people out in the first place.

If I'm kicked, I have to re-queue. Now *that* is irritating, devs.

"Hey! You knocked generic cola all over your precious D20 books!"

ED: Now I know how Nancy Kerrigan felt: "Why...?!? Why...?!?"

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Halon View Post
If I'm kicked, I have to re-queue. Now *that* is irritating, devs.
This quote sums up alot of passion. It's about, "time wasted is frustrating".

The tool works a certain way and using it as intended is not wrong. Leaders kicking because they don't like the way the tool works wastes time and hurts feelings.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
So if your boss tells you that you're going to mandatory overtime for a couple days, do you kick your dog or beat your wife?
Well said. I half-love you now!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post

Those two quotes were not an "either/or". Players, as evidenced by yourself and others here -will- kick players that enter from the queue. The players doing the kicking will have all manner of rationalizations, but all of those reasons boil down to "I don't want to team with outsiders or people I don't know."
You assume much. And are incorrect in the assumption.

I could, for instance, want to run an all-Controller BAF. We get 14 people. We go in and a scrapper joins. I, obviously kick him.

Yeah, that's OBVIOUSLY "because I don't want to team with outsiders or people I don't know."

Or, as I've seen quite a few of, maybe they're trying for a MOTrial and only want level-shifted characters. A non-level-shifted character comes in via queue. *kick*

OBVIOUSLY because they don't want outsiders or people they don't know - even though they may not know everyone else who is level shifted.

You try to assume, but all you do is make yourself look like you lost your "ume."


Quote:
The developers are smart enough to realize that some people will be jerks and will kick people from the league.
Perhaps you have trouble getting onto teams with the *sterling* personality you evidence here, but people do not kick people "because they are jerks." Are some people jerks? Sure. Is that what causes everyone who's ever kicked someone to do so? No.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan View Post
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.

Because honest to heaven you guys, any random assembly of 8+ level 50 characters in this game is going to be incredibly powerful, and besides the LFG tool could be enhanced to try to build balanced teams that include multi-run veterans if only it were allowed to pick and choose from whoever happened to be enqueued at the time.
No, I want to team with specific people because I play this game to play with my girlfriend and with my friends. Yes, I could just hop on the queue, but if the LFG queue broke teams apart and reformed them randomly, and I ended up on a separate league from my gf (when we're planning on doing stuff together), I'd probably drop immediately, because I wanted to do it with someone specific. Taking team control away from the players is always a horrid idea on its face.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler
Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?
Apostrophe guidelines.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilGeko View Post
You guys are so funny.

The devs created a system knowing that most people would feel bad about kicking stragglers. However, they know that for whatever reason, you sometimes need to be able to kick folks from your team. So they left that in.

The OP's story is lamentable, but fully within the rules and fully intended. The only thing that the OP can do is make a note about that league leader.
Completely agree with Evil and Memphis Bill on the these points. Kicking anyone out of any content is not griefing.

I also like the points made related to being a league leader.

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!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcticFahx View Post
No, I want to team with specific people because I play this game to play with my girlfriend and with my friends. Yes, I could just hop on the queue, but if the LFG queue broke teams apart and reformed them randomly, and I ended up on a separate league from my gf (when we're planning on doing stuff together), I'd probably drop immediately, because I wanted to do it with someone specific. Taking team control away from the players is always a horrid idea on its face.
Agreed.

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!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Coming_Storm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
So if your boss tells you that you're going to mandatory overtime for a couple days, do you kick your dog or beat your wife?
Well said. I half-love you now!
So you and Hyperstrike are saying that team leaders should be paid real world money as compensation for allowing random players onto their preformed leagues. Time and a half to be exact. That seems like a fair compromise that we can get behind.

And what hourly wage is the team leaders time worth for managing a group of people? Personally I wouldn't do it for less than $20 dollars an hour so with time and a half figured in $30 bucks an hour to run a BAF or LAM.

And will this compensation come as a check paid to the team leader or as credit to his account that he can use to pay for his sub fee or in the online store?