Guild Wars 2

Since this game doesn’t employ live GMs that you can contact in game, I propose a democratic system on every server to elect WvW “Moderators”.

People in WvW can vote for a certain number of moderators. Those who get the most votes (and over a minimum of some number in the hundreds) are elevated to a “Moderator” for a set period of time before a revote is required.

Those people would have certain regulatory abilities in WvW. The ability to temporarily kick people from WvW. Perhaps the ability to dismantle siege in WvW. Some other abilities to be decided.

Since they require a large number of votes, they would be on their main characters, and so if they abuse that power they cannot hide behind a dummy account. They would be publicly shamed on the server (say if they kick people to make room for their guildmates).

ALso, since there are a small number, it would be fairly easy for Anet to police them. If someone is kicked they can directly appeal to Anet against the Moderator. The Moderator will have to provide evidence of why they were kicked (For instance, a series of screenshots showing them placing rams all over a Tower in random useless places, including evidence in chat where the person was asked to stop multiple times etc…). If a moderator is found to have abused the power, they are relieved of the power and can never “run for office” again (or at least for a period of time).

Umm… No.
There are servers with large WvW guilds. Unless you require votes in thousands, those guilds would just elect their lead for moderators. On dummy accounts if need be. If you do require votes in thousands, I’m not sure if every server has enough WvW population to choose enough moderators.
And you can not assume that people who gained power easily would not abuse it easily. In fact, you should always assume the player abuses everything he can. Therefore, no, you should not give him tools to abuse others with.

Yeah bad idea sorry. :<

The ability to kick a person could exist in WvW and be based on a fixed percentage of the population on the map. Just like it is in parties but, on a larger scale. The same could be said of dismantling siege. After this past week, it’s obvious something needs to be done. They either needs GM’s or give us the power the police ourselves more.

DeWolfe.2174:

The ability to kick a person could exist in WvW and be based on a fixed percentage of the population on the map. Just like it is in parties but, on a larger scale. The same could be said of dismantling siege. After this past week, it’s obvious something needs to be done. They either needs GM’s or give us the power the police ourselves more.

Because /votekick works so well with larger guilds. Instead of guilds asking for people to join, it could be more like “Join or don’t play”

What I said about always assuming players abusing every feature they can, works for this one too.

Do you really believe a Guild would kick players just so the could fill the queue with their own? When all they have to do is fill the queue already. Then believe such behavior wouldn’t come with harsh consequences either? Like full Guild ban’s or something of such nature if they were found being abusive.

I’m pretty certain the OP and I must be on the same server. Because we’ve been handicapped by a person siege capping us most of the week. To have your hands tied by one person and be completely powerless to do anything simply sucks. Arenanet themselves have been less than useless on this. Because the only action I can see they’ve taken is removing a screen cap a fellow player posted of the person doing it.

Fred Fargone.3127:

Umm… No.
There are servers with large WvW guilds. Unless you require votes in thousands, those guilds would just elect their lead for moderators. On dummy accounts if need be. If you do require votes in thousands, I’m not sure if every server has enough WvW population to choose enough moderators.
And you can not assume that people who gained power easily would not abuse it easily. In fact, you should always assume the player abuses everything he can. Therefore, no, you should not give him tools to abuse others with.

Couple of things:

They could limit the voting per guild. Plus the percentage could be based on the server so it could require votes in the thousands for very big populated servers, but less for smaller.

Also I’m not assuming people wouldn’t abuse it…but it is FAR easier for Anet to moderate 4 or 5 “GM’s” per server than it is to moderate everyone on the server. If they are abusing it, you report them and they are stripped of their power and can’t be voted again.

The problem is right now we “report” people and nothing really happens. Anet does not police WvW. Games in the past had live GMs but that just isn’t practical anymore. Giving some responsibility to the player-base as a whole could alleviate some of the stress of Anet policing the worlds.

Obviously everyone can abuse anything, however as I said I’m merely thinking of perhaps a way to limit the necessary work Anet has to do. They can easily check up on 5 “flagged” players per server if abuse is reported….and leave the problems with the mass population to those 5 players (or whatever number is deemed appropriate per server).

If you look back there is also some precendent for this type of them. Older MMO’s and online games had player-derived “GM’s” that did it as volunteers. I can’t remember the games I played with them, but I do remember them way back when (before WoW…UO-type days). Recent MMOs have done away with “Live Gamemasters”, which I think should change.

DeWolfe.2174:

Do you really believe a Guild would kick players just so the could fill the queue with their own? When all they have to do is fill the queue already. Then believe such behavior wouldn’t come with harsh consequences either? Like full Guild ban’s or something of such nature if they were found being abusive.

I’m pretty certain the OP and I must be on the same server. Because we’ve been handicapped by a person siege capping us most of the week. To have your hands tied by one person and be completely powerless to do anything simply sucks. Arenanet themselves have been less than useless on this. Because the only action I can see they’ve taken is removing a screen cap a fellow player posted of the person doing it.

Ya exactly. All Arenanet does is delete all evidence of the player doing it (screenshots, posts with the player’s name etc…). They state we can’t “personally attack” someone, and ask us to report them. We report them though and nothing ever happens.

If Arenanet doesn’t believe they can successfully police their own game, my suggestion is merely to perhaps allow us to help them police it. Policing the police officers is easier, because there would be less police officers than players. The mechanics of how that would work of course can be discussed and worked out, but I do think something should be done.

drwookie.6391:

Couple of things:

They could limit the voting per guild. Plus the percentage could be based on the server so it could require votes in the thousands for very big populated servers, but less for smaller.

Which would work if it wasn’t for the multi-guild guilds. Or if we had alliances and limited the voting per those.

drwookie.6391:

Also I’m not assuming people wouldn’t abuse it…but it is FAR easier for Anet to moderate 4 or 5 “GM’s” per server than it is to moderate everyone on the server. If they are abusing it, you report them and they are stripped of their power and can’t be voted again. The problem is right now we “report” people and nothing really happens.

So, by the new system, the problem would be that people abuse their power, you “report” them and nothing really happens.
ANet doesn’t police WvW separately now. They probably wouldn’t change that even after they gave players more abusive powers. Which is why I do not think they will.

drwookie.6391:

Obviously everyone can abuse anything, however as I said I’m merely thinking of perhaps a way to limit the necessary work Anet has to do. They can easily check up on 5 “flagged” players per server if abuse is reported….and leave the problems with the mass population to those 5 players (or whatever number is deemed appropriate per server).

Yet, it wouldn’t remove all the other flagged people. Unless you plan on removing the reporting from WvW? Or direct it only at the player-moderators?
And don’t you think player-moderators would get frequently flagged by unsatisfied “customers”?
Also, to be able to efficiently police WvW, they would need to be able to move around at ease. Less their effective radius is only the people around them. Or the tower they are at. Then again, if they had means to move around the map easily, they could not actually play the game due to having unfair advantage over the enemies.
Not to mention that the good player-moderators wouldn’t really get re-elected. Why? Because the election is about popularity, moderating is not.

And yeah, depending on their abilities, 5 is enough. Too much. Or too little. Likely too little, definately too much.

This is a bad idea, imagine some immature but popular guild promoting their leader and then kicking random players out so that they have more room for guild members. Do not implement.