Guild Wars 2

Khisanth.2948:

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

Honestly, in order to overcome the base issue here (people) the only way to curb abuse would be to start imposing stricter limitations on what players can and cant do. To better control what is considered acceptable behavior. At which point we start straying into other issues…

If the problem is people the perfect solution would be to remove them …(GW1 heroes/mercenaries).

That is correct; however, we know that isn’t likely to happen. Though many of us have been asking for heroes for instanced content for a very long time, and have cited these types of issues / reasons as to why we desire them.

tramwajarz.2369:

New players are already being kicked with rangers and necros alike. And answer for them would be the same as it is now – create your own “everybody welcome” group.

You act like there are 5 new players or that veterans are obligated to cater to them Knowledge bomb – they don’t have to, it’s not my job to carry a new player. I learned the game by myself and I don’t want to waste my time teaching others. There are people willing to teach and share knowledge, more power to them. It’s their choice to do so as my choice is to avoid and kick new/bad players on sight.

Of course it is your job to cater to new players. Thats the whole point of a team.. you help them out. A team isnt made up of tools you can use just to get what you personally desire. If you decide to PUG you know fully well its a gamble sometimes you get good people, sometimes you get inexperienced people, once they’re in your team, they’re in your team and you have to care for them for better or for worst. Thats the fair and the right thing to do.

Or are you going to claim that if 3 players who are more experianced then you join your team you’re okey with them kicking you out if they feel they dont want to teach / carry you? Would you feel what you want to do to others is okey if it happens to you?

Ultimately you have to remember that you’re playing in an MMO… MMOs are about people not individuals. If you want to have a specific version of party, you’re free to do that but it is something you have to do and not something the game has to support because excluding people based on whatever goes against the very nature of team play. If anyone has to go out of their way to get what they want it should be people who want to restrict and not like you suggest the new players who all they want is to play with others and have fun which is the very target MMOs try to accomplish.

tramwajarz.2369:

It is a gamble only because there is no party system. There should be. People who open parties should be protected and have control over their parties.

why should starting a team put you above the rules? cant someone who started a party be as abuse as someone joining the party?

if we had no abuse problem we wouldnt need a kick in the first place after all.

Galen Grey.4709:

tramwajarz.2369:

New players are already being kicked with rangers and necros alike. And answer for them would be the same as it is now – create your own “everybody welcome” group.

You act like there are 5 new players or that veterans are obligated to cater to them Knowledge bomb – they don’t have to, it’s not my job to carry a new player. I learned the game by myself and I don’t want to waste my time teaching others. There are people willing to teach and share knowledge, more power to them. It’s their choice to do so as my choice is to avoid and kick new/bad players on sight.

Of course it is your job to cater to new players. Thats the whole point of a team.. you help them out. A team isnt made up of tools you can use just to get what you personally desire. If you decide to PUG you know fully well its a gamble sometimes you get good people, sometimes you get inexperienced people, once they’re in your team, they’re in your team and you have to care for them for better or for worst. Thats the fair and the right thing to do.

Or are you going to claim that if 3 players who are more experianced then you join your team you’re okey with them kicking you out if they feel they dont want to teach / carry you? Would you feel what you want to do to others is okey if it happens to you?

Ultimately you have to remember that you’re playing in an MMO… MMOs are about people not individuals. If you want to have a specific version of party, you’re free to do that but it is something you have to do and not something the game has to support because excluding people based on whatever goes against the very nature of team play. If anyone has to go out of their way to get what they want it should be people who want to restrict and not like you suggest the new players who all they want is to play with others and have fun which is the very target MMOs try to accomplish.

Once I get paid for carrying new/bad players we can resume this illogical discussion.

Either way it’s unfair.

There’s only one way to make it fair:

• Sending kicked players to a copy of the instance with the same progress done, without losing their own progress. So even if they kick you, you don’t lose all your progress.

And because people would exploit that to purposely split instances to sell them, that can only be done along another change:

• Scaling rewards based on personal progress. So someone who arrives just to kill a boss will get rewards for just killing a boss, not for the whole path.

I can’t think of any other way to keep kicking and joining mid-way while not having instance owners: Instance splitting + reward scaling.

Galen Grey.4709:

tramwajarz.2369:

It is a gamble only because there is no party system. There should be. People who open parties should be protected and have control over their parties.

why should starting a team put you above the rules? cant someone who started a party be as abuse as someone joining the party?

if we had no abuse problem we wouldnt need a kick in the first place after all.

Because opening a party is like opening a room for other people, if they join and don’t match the rules of the party, they should be kicked. If they feel like they want to be bosses they can make their own room and lead other.

There are people who like to lead, there are those who like to follow. People are not equal, time to leave rainbow pony dimension some people think they live in.

tramwajarz.2369:

Galen Grey.4709:

tramwajarz.2369:

It is a gamble only because there is no party system. There should be. People who open parties should be protected and have control over their parties.

why should starting a team put you above the rules? cant someone who started a party be as abuse as someone joining the party?

if we had no abuse problem we wouldnt need a kick in the first place after all.

Because opening a party is like opening a room for other people, if they join and don’t match the rules of the party, they should be kicked. If they feel like they want to be bosses they can make their own room and lead other.

There are people who like to lead, there are those who like to follow. People are not equal, time to leave rainbow pony dimension some people think they live in.

so should we dump elections and hand over the presidency to the first person who opens the door first? You want to lead, lead if your party is okey with that. But just like in this instance if you abuse your leadership the people will boot you out of office the first chance they get. And btw last I checked governments don’t exile people / organizations for not performing to their desired level they find a way to help them to get to the level they wish. It would be preposterous for any government to fix economic deficit by killing off those business who perform bad. On the contrary they try to find a way to help them out.

So sure, people are not equal but this has nothing to do with rainbow pony dimensions. The human race has not gotten to where it has gotten by restricting knowledge to the elite few. We got to were we got by actually trying to improve the base level knowledge across the board. We were all newbies once even the champion of champions. You may carry them today but tomorrow they might carry you.

Galen Grey.4709:

PistolWhip.2697:

@Galen Grey
You missed the whole point of him asking them to bring heavies. They were evidently new and would extend his 2 am dungeon trip even longer so he suggested they bring heavies as it would make the path doable. Why does he have to help 3 newer players in the middle of the night? Also he doesn’t have to start the dungeon earlier, he can play when he wants.

Evidently his duo didn’t go as planned, and he wanted 3 others to help them finish it so they could resume whatever practice another day. Instead, thanks to the party system, 3 players came in, stole his instance then squandered it by leaving anyway which is even more infuriating.

Just because LFG is there, it doesn’t mean you have to accept playing with anyone. When did this become a thing? If a matchmaking service set you up with random people you’d have to date every single one? No, you can pick and choose, LFG is like said above a platform to ALLOW co-operation, not an obligation to co-operate.

Yes Elitists who are wholly too extreme exist, but the opposite does also,which are ‘dowhatIlike’ players who not only refuse to fulfill set requirements but also choose to be carried by those Elitists. They are both as rotten as each other, the rest of us shouldn’t have to suffer for their BS.

Since when not using heavies automatically means you’re new and inexperianced? He asked for heavies in the LFG request itself. Yes the 3 who joined turned out to be newbies which I’d bet is also a result of requesting heavies, I mean what would you expect at 2am ? He was clearly targeting speed runners but at 2am those are still active will likely be with their own group finding 3 actually looking for a group to join at that hour is kinda hard. Others who are not speed runners will likely stay away from groups with such requests.. I wouldnt join even if playing a heavy at the moment for a lot of reasons, cant speak for all player base obviously but I’d be surprised if I am the only one. Then you have the newbies who likely didnt even know the reason behind the request.

Yes that is exactly what it means. If you decide to play with others you decide to play with others. There is a certain etiquette to follow so to speak and respecting others is part of it. Imagine if this is PvP instead of PvE would you imagine someone starting a match and complaining with players who dont get heavies or who even leaving mid match cause they dont get heavies? It would be unacceptable so why is it okey in PvE?
Everyone has a right to play and the LFG is a system to get people together and form groups when they dont have their own group to play with. Its not a system to help people discriminate on their own believes of what other should or shouldnt be doing. Someone who plays a necro can finish a dungeon just as well as someone who plays a berserker warrior. Sure they’ll not finish as quickly but hey if he was in such a hurry why did he duo the thing in the first place?

You are completely misunderstanding everything going on here and evidently are in too much of a flurry to reply to even read.

She asked them to get heavies BECAUSE when given the chance they proved UNABLE to play with the squishier lighter classes. This also coincided with the fact she found out they were new, and she suggest they get their heavy classes AFTER this fact. So you’re so wrong here it isn’t even relevant.

Once again, the example you gave in PvP makes no sense because the important part isn’t heavies. In PvP a better example would be that your team is losing due to someone’s ineffective build and you ask them, (not shout or even demand as OP and his friend suggested) to bring something more meta and viable, like D/D Ele, Shoutbow, Cele Engi etc. This does happen and to newer players sometimes it ends up teaching them a new meta spec so as long as it is a polite transaction there is no issue.

And no I can pick and choose who I play with, as can OP as can you. That is why the block function exists. No one is obligated to play with everyone. If you think I’m going to carry some lazy new players that don’t take my advice you’re sorely mistaken, they go on my block list so I can filter them out faster than anyone else. In fact, people who are rude, or trolls don’t bother me as much as these guys who want to just be carried by Vets.

As long as I am not going out of my way to harass anyone, I am certainly allowed to ignore and refuse to play with them provided I keep it cordial, and respectful in the interaction. I.E “Sorry you aren’t quite what our party needs, good luck finding another though!”

Galen Grey.4709:

Of course it is your job to cater to new players. Thats the whole point of a team.. you help them out. A team isnt made up of tools you can use just to get what you personally desire. If you decide to PUG you know fully well its a gamble sometimes you get good people, sometimes you get inexperienced people, once they’re in your team, they’re in your team and you have to care for them for better or for worst. Thats the fair and the right thing to do.

Or are you going to claim that if 3 players who are more experianced then you join your team you’re okey with them kicking you out if they feel they dont want to teach / carry you? Would you feel what you want to do to others is okey if it happens to you?

To answer your questions:

Yes I have been kicked before for being new, yes I have been kicked before for not having the right build, and guess what? That is perfectly fine. They had every right to do so as it was their party. I just learned the ropes and moved on. So yes it is okay and well within reason. If he has to teach newer players then it is only fair he is compensated? Right? Right? Isn’t that the very nature of a transaction? To earn profit for your efforts?

No the nature of team play is not to carry and teach. The nature of team play is cohesiveness, familiarity and being ABLE to rely on one another’s ability because a trust is formed. None of which is present within interactions with new players. The act of teaching newer players is rewarding in another sense, but not within the cornerstones of team play. That is why none of the ‘top’ PvP teams have new players cycling in every week because they are practicing with their old familiar friends and players to better their TEAM PLAY.

@Tramwajarz

Though I agree with your assessment and views of in-game party mechanics, as a staunch supporter of socialist alignments I disagree with your political persuasions on this in game topic.

PistolWhip.2697:

And no I can pick and choose who I play with, as can OP as can you.

Of course you can. Just not through the LFG tool. And this is really the problem. You people want guild-quality interaction with other players but you want to do it with randoms. This is not reality. Let’s say you put “experienced” in your little LFG message. Since everyone has a different definition, you have no way of coordinating your expectations ahead of time. That’s what friends are for. If you’re not prepared to play with randoms, DON’T PUG. People complaining about this need to make some friends or live with the consequences of their anti-social behavior.

Most other LFG tools will randomly form the groups and penalize you for leaving the group before the dungeon is over. Would you prefer that system instead?

Though I get where you’re coming from, I disagree. Of course PUGing means you will have people who don’t meet your requirements join, but that is what kicking is for.

Plus, experience is subjective yes, but in OP’s case they evidently had never done it before. And that is why people set barriers (however stupid) like AP. As someone with 12k AP I never have issues joining parties, but I also don’t dungeon often enough to be better than mediocre at them. There is just no way to tell if you will have to take longer due to inexperience when you need a dungeon done fast due to time constraints. Though I acknowledge the risk with PUGing is this, you aren’t contracted to stay in a party with, or keep said person who has joined, it is their responsibility to meet the stated requirements, and if they try to get away with not doing so, then they took the gamble also, and face the consequences. A kick.

PistolWhip.2697:

You are completely misunderstanding everything going on here and evidently are in too much of a flurry to reply to even read.

She asked them to get heavies BECAUSE when given the chance they proved UNABLE to play with the squishier lighter classes. This also coincided with the fact she found out they were new, and she suggest they get their heavy classes AFTER this fact. So you’re so wrong here it isn’t even relevant.

Once again, the example you gave in PvP makes no sense because the important part isn’t heavies. In PvP a better example would be that your team is losing due to someone’s ineffective build and you ask them, (not shout or even demand as OP and his friend suggested) to bring something more meta and viable, like D/D Ele, Shoutbow, Cele Engi etc. This does happen and to newer players sometimes it ends up teaching them a new meta spec so as long as it is a polite transaction there is no issue.

And no I can pick and choose who I play with, as can OP as can you. That is why the block function exists. No one is obligated to play with everyone. If you think I’m going to carry some lazy new players that don’t take my advice you’re sorely mistaken, they go on my block list so I can filter them out faster than anyone else. In fact, people who are rude, or trolls don’t bother me as much as these guys who want to just be carried by Vets.

As long as I am not going out of my way to harass anyone, I am certainly allowed to ignore and refuse to play with them provided I keep it cordial, and respectful in the interaction. I.E “Sorry you aren’t quite what our party needs, good luck finding another though!”

With all due respect its you who are wrong on the sequence of events.

They joined, she asked them to get heavies, they kicked her off the party, tried the instance without her, failed, gave up. She didnt ask them to get heavies after they proved they couldnt handle the instance in light, she asked them to change the moment they joined. I would have been fine with all of this if she only suggested heavies once they were having issues but she did not, she asked before they were given a chance to prove themselves in anyway.

Again, * your team is losing due to someone’s ineffective build and you ask them* thats perfectly fine but what happened here isnt like that at all. someone joined the team before the match even started you ask them to change, even if done politely with no shouting thats still not okey.

Somehow I doubt the block function was designed to protect vets from new players rather then from abusive trolling players

I had an annoying experience with the lfg yesterday…i joined a arah p1 run where they didn’t want to one shot lupi and i thought that it would be fun and so on. there were two friends and 3 pugs where i was one of them, we got to lupi and did a few tries, and one of the friends said he had to brb he wanted to eat and so on we said ok, one of the pugs left, then 20min later the guy who ate got back and the two friends decided to kick me and the other pug, after spending 20min on waiting for him… i was furious….

PistolWhip.2697:

To answer your questions:

Yes I have been kicked before for being new, yes I have been kicked before for not having the right build, and guess what? That is perfectly fine. They had every right to do so as it was their party. I just learned the ropes and moved on. So yes it is okay and well within reason. If he has to teach newer players then it is only fair he is compensated? Right? Right? Isn’t that the very nature of a transaction? To earn profit for your efforts?

No the nature of team play is not to carry and teach. The nature of team play is cohesiveness, familiarity and being ABLE to rely on one another’s ability because a trust is formed. None of which is present within interactions with new players. The act of teaching newer players is rewarding in another sense, but not within the cornerstones of team play. That is why none of the ‘top’ PvP teams have new players cycling in every week because they are practicing with their old familiar friends and players to better their TEAM PLAY.

now imagine if every one acts like that. you join a group, get kicked, join another, get kicked again, another get kicked again. Until you get “lucky” and find a group of completely new players. How would that run go? plenty of wipes and no one teaching you what you’re doing wrong.. so there is no growth and next time you’re going through all this cycle… until eventually you get fed up and quit.

On the other side there are the vets who stick together only vets dont play a game forever. some quit, some take a break, some move on to another game. The pool gets smaller and smaller and no new players are replacing the vets that stop playing because we have segregated them. Until one day it starts getting bad. its hard to find a party without a long wait so one fine day they decide perhaps its worthed to let new players in the party and teach them only by now so many have quit out of frustration and the game is a shell of its former self.

Was it worthed?

Her aim was to finish off the instance. That they’re helping her doing it is already compensation. By helping them understand how to perform better they’ll finish her off quicker… isnt that also compensation? Next time she goes for it she might get them in her party again and now they’re even better from what they learned and practiced in the meantime.. isnt this also compensation ?

Above everything else she would most likely have actually finished the instance instead of having to start from scratch… more compensation.

not really. You dont always get to team up with people you’re familiar with. as for cohesiveness and trust, yes most certainly but you dont foster those values by essentially telling people they dont know what they’re doing and should listen just to what you say instead. As a matter of fact if you look up how to set up effective teams a few common suggestions are to share knowledge, give everyone a chance and top above all is no ego.

How about something like this?

• When you join a party, you get an incrementing party kick `boon`, that starts at 1. Because it’s a boon, you can establish the increments of the other members when you join their party.
• Every time the party completes a dynamic event, everyone who gets credit for the DE has their party boon incremented by +1. People who are AFK obviously wont get credit for the event, and therefore won’t receive any increment.
• You cannot initiate a boot against a party member with a higher kick increment than yourself. However, you can initiate a kick against members with equal or lower kick increments.
• Your increment also indicates the number of votes you will have in a kick.
• Majority votes still rule.

The simplest solution is to disallow kicking except when the user is either offline or not inside the instance. Otherwise, kicking is a solution in search of a problem.

Realistically, the number of leechers who decide to join a dungeon and then AFK is smaller than the number of trolls who abuse kicking, and even in those cases there are factors working against them:

1) The game automatically kicks them for being idle. Anet may want to consider lowering dungeon instance timeouts to be similar to that of PvP. This by itself will pretty much shut down most attempts at abusing the group system.
2) If they are not actually AFK, then not helping will actually make the run take longer for no real reason. They’d usually be wasting their own time. This is as opposed to AFKing in the open world, where unrewarding events are usually AFK’d because they are on fixed timers.
3) If their lack of participation causes the party to fail, they don’t get the reward either.
4) Leeching a dungeon group is easy for Anet to determine in an objective manner. Doing this can and should be a reportable offense to be handled by Anet with account-level disciplinary action. This was how it was done in GW1.

In total, kicking basically serves no real function other than to enable griefing, including actions that could otherwise be dismissed as elitism.

In the specific case of the OP, I think he displayed several red flags and in any case we only have his side of the story, so I’m not going to make any judgment as to whether it was justified or not. Rather, I think the problems could be avoided if Anet simply approached the hypothetical problem with a clean slate:

How do you stop leeching in dungeons?

Kicking has virtually nothing to do with it and is more of a thoughtless reimplementation of misfeatures found in other games.

Tigaseye.2047:

You seem to have had a lot of requirements…

“We wanted this, we didn’t feel like doing that, can you bring this instead?” etc..

When you want (random) people to do everything on your terms and for your own convenience, rather than theirs, don’t be too surprised if some people (who can do so) decide to take things into their own hands.

Is it something I would do?

Probably not – I would just avoid the whole situation, personally.

But, once again, I’m not surprised that other people do.

I think people need to to accept that they may not get exactly what they want from a random grouping situation.

Speaking from experience, from other games, you just work with what you get in random groups and if you’re too tired, you should have either started earlier and/or accepted that (if you failed to duo) you might not be able to finish, at all.

Nice, lets ignore reading entirely in the game

Leablo.2651:

The simplest solution is to disallow kicking except when the user is either offline or not inside the instance. Otherwise, kicking is a solution in search of a problem.

Realistically, the number of leechers who decide to join a dungeon and then AFK is smaller than the number of trolls who abuse kicking, and even in those cases there are factors working against them:

1) The game automatically kicks them for being idle. Anet may want to consider lowering dungeon instance timeouts to be similar to that of PvP. This by itself will pretty much shut down most attempts at abusing the group system.
2) If they are not actually AFK, then not helping will actually make the run take longer for no real reason. They’d usually be wasting their own time. This is as opposed to AFKing in the open world, where unrewarding events are usually AFK’d because they are on fixed timers.
3) If their lack of participation causes the party to fail, they don’t get the reward either.
4) Leeching a dungeon group is easy for Anet to determine in an objective manner. Doing this can and should be a reportable offense to be handled by Anet with account-level disciplinary action. This was how it was done in GW1.

In total, kicking basically serves no real function other than to enable griefing, including actions that could otherwise be dismissed as elitism.

In the specific case of the OP, I think he displayed several red flags and in any case we only have his side of the story, so I’m not going to make any judgment as to whether it was justified or not. Rather, I think the problems could be avoided if Anet simply approached the hypothetical problem with a clean slate:

How do you stop leeching in dungeons?

Kicking has virtually nothing to do with it and is more of a thoughtless reimplementation of misfeatures found in other games.

So a true jerk joins a party. The run goes smoothly for most of the run so the jerk isn’t that bad and is tolerable. Then the run starts running into issues. The jerks then starts going off in chat about how bad everyone but he is and how he hates carrying and on and on and on. Ruining the experience of the other players.

Your solution means that the other four players have to decide to sit there and deal with the jerk and hope he rage quits without any guarantee that he will, or quit the instance themselves and lose progress in the dungeon.

I think that’s a much worse situation to be in than what we have now.

I’ve somewhat read through this thread and can see both sides. The problem is that the LFG tool does allow us to recruit for dungeon paths. We can put in whatever we want including and I think actually for the purpose of this discussion, most importantly, language.
The fact we can specify the language opens up the entire concept that we have the authority to set requirements for our parties.
If I am in a party of 3 and we want to make a LFG saying:

AC p1p2p3 80s only 2 ele’s please.

Then I am expecting 2 eles to join the party. That is what the group I am a part of (not saying it’s my group, but the group wants) 2 eles.
If a Thief and a Mesmer join is it wrong of the 3 original members to kick those 2?
Not at all. They requested 2 eles, that is what the team requires.

If I am in a party of 2 and we want to make a LFG saying:

AC p1p2p3 80s only

Then I am expecting level 80s to join. That is what the party wants and that is what people should join on.
If 3 low level friends join, and refuse to leave, or kick the 2 level 80s then there is a problem. It will either force the level 80s to leave, or make them have a bad experience since they did not want to “carry” low levels.

The #1 rule in the ToS states.

While playing Guild Wars 2, you must respect the rights of others and their rights to play and enjoy the Game. To this end, you may not defraud, harass, threaten, embarrass or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players.

The people forming the party must be respected as much as people joining. People joining have the responsibility to take in upon themselves to meet the requirements on a party before joining. That is respecting the party formers. That should be the priority and the fact people in this thread have used said ToS#1 rule as an argument against OP is pretty awful.

The real issue with the LFG tool is that there is such a broad range of players and a very diverse way of completing dungeons.
-We have the top players speed running, rushing through them at breakneck speeds.
-We have the more casual dungeon runners, they will stack, use zerker gear and expect everyone to do the same. Maybe an Icebow4 here or there and maybe just maybe no one will knock defiance on for an Icebow 5.
-We have the very casual/newbie dungeon runners. They don’t care about gear/specific builds, they want to clear everything and play however they like.

All 3 of these groups are perfectly entitled to play how they would like. However, taking that a step further, if they make a team that team should be respected in a fashion that respects the original group creators wishes. It should have not give new people joining, some sort of entitlement to stay if they don’t meet the requirement of the group.

In gw1, we had specific team set ups.

kitten (WHY IS T"ONE" T"TWO" KITTEN) MT UA VoS EoE MoP for Fissure of Woe Speedclear (pug friendly). Each one of these had a distinctive role and when looking for a group it was quite simple.
GLF (group looking for) kitten to go. You couldn’t take 2 extra VoS or UA because they couldn’t do the job needed. They didn’t have the skills or the abillities require of them to do the roles the team needed.
how is this any different to wanting a Guardian in Zerker gear in LFG now
how is this any different to wanting a team to all be heavy? or all be light???
Did we not have the right to kick people then? Okay we had a party leader in gw1 but the concept stands.
If a team is looking for specific members for their party then they shouldn’t be punished or expected to change their own game style because someone joins a team (they don’t meet the requirement for) and feel entitled to stay.

maybe one thing they could do is make it harder to kick someone who been playing longer in the instance than newer people. This may help against new people kicking old people.

Could have 4/5 votes to kick, and then an automatic kick feature after 5mins of no in game movement, like the auto logout feature already there.

Having the LFG tool only allow certain players to join a party would be unfair, like if it had an AP score.

Galen Grey.4709:

now imagine if every one acts like that. you join a group, get kicked, join another, get kicked again, another get kicked again. Until you get “lucky” and find a group of completely new players. How would that run go? plenty of wipes and no one teaching you what you’re doing wrong.. so there is no growth and next time you’re going through all this cycle… until eventually you get fed up and quit.

No. These players can read one of the thousands of guides or watch one of the hundreds of video tutorials that vet players have made specifically for them, in their free time. They have done their part in helping the new players and devoted time to it. If new players dont wish to use the help given its their own fault and therefore should have to stick to runs with wipes.

Noone should expect vet players to spend every minute of their gaming time teaching others. Their time is as valuable as anyone elses and they should be allowed to spend it doing what they want, even if its a speed run to get quick gold.

Also many vet players create anyone welcome groups and teach new players when they are in the mood to do so. Theres even an entire sticky for guild and teaching runs in the dungeon forum.

On topic, I do not want a part leader system. Its too easy to troll when you are immune to kicks and, even without the troll issue, immunity brings out the worst in people. You get people who order the rest of the group about, are rude and insulting and threaten others because they know there is nothing you can do about it.

I wish there was a simple way to fix this but there isnt, as its a problem with players not the system. If everyone respected the lfg there would be no problem, unfortunately this isnt the case and the only thing Anet can do is provide a system that helps the majority. That means ofc that the minority, people who solo or duo dungeons are at a disadvantage but there isnt much they can do.

The only improvement I can see that doesn’t cause more problems is making pugs unable to kick until they have been in the group 1-2 mins, and also make them not count for majority kick vote ofc. But that’s more work for anet and with their limited resources, and how long it took just to get majority kick, i don’t see it happening.

the problem is not how vote kick works. The problem is ppl can join without your permission. If there is an option that joining a party require confirmation from existing party member, then we can Let ppl in 1 by 1 and do whatever checking you want.

I think that “milestone stacks” mechanics is really good idea.

For example, each path have 4 milestones. Everyone, who participate in the event get one stack. You will need total “party size”/2*X+1 stacks at all player, who vote to kick player with X stacks(but minimum of 2 player, if pary size is bigger then 2). So if u solo something, but need help with last event – you have 4 stacks and all joined players have 4 too(lets say everyone starts with 1 stack), so thay cant kick you.

This system have no difference at kicking compare to current system for groups that progress together from the beggining, but it would protect old players from new(in terms of current dungeon run).

Of corse, 4 is random number and 25% of CoF p1 and 25% of Arah p4 are slightly different, but I really like the idea.

Strange how these arguing for having “instance owners” all seem to have a similarly bad grasp on English…

If you PUG, you will need to deal with the fact that it’s a PUG, not a premade. Want a premade? Advertize it in chat or guild and discuss your requirements. Entirely possible.

The option is there. And even then, you shouldn’t have the ability to randomly kick people if the majority of the party is against it. We already know why, because we saw how things were with the old system.

People like OP used PUGs to run paths, then kicked them to sell the spots. It didn’t work, and was changed. Overall, other than path sellers, people are more happy with the way things are now.

And to be honest, in the last 2 months I pugged high fractals daily and ran many dungeons (including lots of Arah), and had to kick people only twice.
If you have constantly “need” to kick people, the issue probably is with you.

Seera.5916:

So a true jerk joins a party. The run goes smoothly for most of the run so the jerk isn’t that bad and is tolerable. Then the run starts running into issues. The jerks then starts going off in chat about how bad everyone but he is and how he hates carrying and on and on and on. Ruining the experience of the other players.

Your solution means that the other four players have to decide to sit there and deal with the jerk and hope he rage quits without any guarantee that he will, or quit the instance themselves and lose progress in the dungeon.

I think that’s a much worse situation to be in than what we have now.

I think that’s an imaginary situation, as I described in my original post.

Leablo.2651:

Seera.5916:

So a true jerk joins a party. The run goes smoothly for most of the run so the jerk isn’t that bad and is tolerable. Then the run starts running into issues. The jerks then starts going off in chat about how bad everyone but he is and how he hates carrying and on and on and on. Ruining the experience of the other players.

Your solution means that the other four players have to decide to sit there and deal with the jerk and hope he rage quits without any guarantee that he will, or quit the instance themselves and lose progress in the dungeon.

I think that’s a much worse situation to be in than what we have now.

I think that’s an imaginary situation, as I described in my original post.

It’s not an imaginary one. It’s likely not a common occurrence, but jerks exist in all games unfortunately.

And I’d rather try find a solution that lets those jerks get what’s coming to them (a kick and some reporting) than the innocent suffer than settle with the easy solution.

Actually it sounds like it’s a bit of poetic justice from where I’m sitting especially since this kind of heavy only, 3k + only etc pretty much destroyed this game early on for many a player. Nothing to see here carry on.

tigirius.9014:

Actually it sounds like it’s a bit of poetic justice from where I’m sitting especially since this kind of heavy only, 3k + only etc pretty much destroyed this game early on for many a player. Nothing to see here carry on.

No, people having requirements in LFG didnt ruin the game for anyone apart from intolerant people who cant stand to see others playing in a way they dont like. Heavies only and AP requirement comes from a place of ignorance and I agree its a daft thing to ask for but the intention behind it, to find exp people who dont need carrying, is fine to request if needed.

As much as the OP’s scenario sucks:

3 of the 5 people felt that the OP was being enough of a jerk to deserve a kick (without knowing the details of the convo I can’t judge… it is extremely likely the OP was trolled but some people can be sensitive and may have been inadvertently offended).

3 of 5 people also felt that the OP’s friend was enough of a jerk to deserve a kick later in the instance… if they were just trolling, they most likely would have kicked both at the same time .. so clearly there’s more to it…

Hindsight:

Finishing a dungeon to Lupi; it would have made more sense to add guild members to the party (at least one, or someone from their friends list that they trusted) and recruited two more pugs max.. (I would consider it a lesson in GW2 street smarts)

Does the dungeon kick system need to be overhauled?

Possibly, but I can see potential for abuse/elitism if the dungeon owner retains instance possession as well… right now the benefit of the doubt is given to the party (i.e. majority rules) as long as everyone plays nicely together and tries to get along there’s no issue..

Also if I put out a LFG “3K+ AP, heavies only, experienced, link Achieve” and I got a group of elitist attitude dungeon runners in my party.. I would expect they would be looking at me with the same lens I applied to them (i.e. they would want to know my gear, AP, expect me to play dungeon spec only and be wearing zerker exotic gear…rightly or wrongly they would be judging me by the standards I set for them..)

If one of them found out I was wearing greens/blues, or did something that might be noob worthy (even if it was an honest mistake).. a kick might not be unexpected if they had quorum..

Galen Grey.4709:

PistolWhip.2697:

To answer your questions:

Yes I have been kicked before for being new, yes I have been kicked before for not having the right build, and guess what? That is perfectly fine. They had every right to do so as it was their party. I just learned the ropes and moved on. So yes it is okay and well within reason. If he has to teach newer players then it is only fair he is compensated? Right? Right? Isn’t that the very nature of a transaction? To earn profit for your efforts?

No the nature of team play is not to carry and teach. The nature of team play is cohesiveness, familiarity and being ABLE to rely on one another’s ability because a trust is formed. None of which is present within interactions with new players. The act of teaching newer players is rewarding in another sense, but not within the cornerstones of team play. That is why none of the ‘top’ PvP teams have new players cycling in every week because they are practicing with their old familiar friends and players to better their TEAM PLAY.

now imagine if every one acts like that. you join a group, get kicked, join another, get kicked again, another get kicked again. Until you get “lucky” and find a group of completely new players. How would that run go? plenty of wipes and no one teaching you what you’re doing wrong.. so there is no growth and next time you’re going through all this cycle… until eventually you get fed up and quit.

On the other side there are the vets who stick together only vets dont play a game forever. some quit, some take a break, some move on to another game. The pool gets smaller and smaller and no new players are replacing the vets that stop playing because we have segregated them. Until one day it starts getting bad. its hard to find a party without a long wait so one fine day they decide perhaps its worthed to let new players in the party and teach them only by now so many have quit out of frustration and the game is a shell of its former self.

Was it worthed?

Her aim was to finish off the instance. That they’re helping her doing it is already compensation. By helping them understand how to perform better they’ll finish her off quicker… isnt that also compensation? Next time she goes for it she might get them in her party again and now they’re even better from what they learned and practiced in the meantime.. isnt this also compensation ?

Above everything else she would most likely have actually finished the instance instead of having to start from scratch… more compensation.

not really. You dont always get to team up with people you’re familiar with. as for cohesiveness and trust, yes most certainly but you dont foster those values by essentially telling people they dont know what they’re doing and should listen just to what you say instead. As a matter of fact if you look up how to set up effective teams a few common suggestions are to share knowledge, give everyone a chance and top above all is no ego.

By your “logic” people would’ve already quit when they encountered something someone didn’t teach them LOL.

How’d you think the first players who cleared content did it? They figured out the in the first place.

No one is entitled to get their hands held every step of the way. The only thing that hinders growth is yourself.

If you’re not willing to learn from resources or figure things out yourself you won’t get anywhere, unless you get lucky and get things handed to you, just like in real life.

Galen Grey.4709:

Again, * your team is losing due to someone’s ineffective build and you ask them* thats perfectly fine but what happened here isnt like that at all. someone joined the team before the match even started you ask them to change, even if done politely with no shouting thats still not okey.

That is more than okay. Asking isn’t demanding. To have the knee jerk reaction of kicking someone ou of their own hard earned instance is what ISN’T okay. They had no right to come in, refuse to cater to the already established expectations of the HOSTING party (without even deliberating might I add) and then kick them only to waste the whole instance anyway.

That is what is truly wrong in this scenario. There is no malicious intent in OP’s situation it is merely for the convenience of not staying up all night.

Galen Grey.4709:

now imagine if every one acts like that. you join a group, get kicked, join another, get kicked again, another get kicked again. Until you get “lucky” and find a group of completely new players. How would that run go? plenty of wipes and no one teaching you what you’re doing wrong.. so there is no growth and next time you’re going through all this cycle… until eventually you get fed up and quit.

On the other side there are the vets who stick together only vets dont play a game forever. some quit, some take a break, some move on to another game. The pool gets smaller and smaller and no new players are replacing the vets that stop playing because we have segregated them. Until one day it starts getting bad. its hard to find a party without a long wait so one fine day they decide perhaps its worthed to let new players in the party and teach them only by now so many have quit out of frustration and the game is a shell of its former self.

Was it worthed?

Her aim was to finish off the instance. That they’re helping her doing it is already compensation. By helping them understand how to perform better they’ll finish her off quicker… isnt that also compensation? Next time she goes for it she might get them in her party again and now they’re even better from what they learned and practiced in the meantime.. isnt this also compensation ?

Above everything else she would most likely have actually finished the instance instead of having to start from scratch… more compensation.

not really. You dont always get to team up with people you’re familiar with. as for cohesiveness and trust, yes most certainly but you dont foster those values by essentially telling people they dont know what they’re doing and should listen just to what you say instead. As a matter of fact if you look up how to set up effective teams a few common suggestions are to share knowledge, give everyone a chance and top above all is no ego.

That isn’t how real life happens. You’re exaggerating in a a non-existent domino effect. What would realistically happen is, eventually I would encounter a group willing to teach (which is what HAS happened) or I would read or watch a guide, even asking friends who knew on advice. Map chat isn’t even a bad idea. I have done all of the above, and it has made me a better player for it. There is more than one way to gain the upper foot needed to be accepted into groups.

Your second point is irrelevant to what I said. No one is telling anyone anything, but a trust in each other’s abilities must be garnered to lead to that conclusion. You don’t just group up and think everyone is clever with good ideas. After months or years of playing together you know each other’s strengths, weaknesses and opinions. This means you know your teammates are knowledgeable and versed enough to make good suggestions and vice versa. That is the cornerstone of team play and team work. Trust. Reliability that stems from trust. There is little to no trust in strangers or pugs, especially this far into the game, which means none of what goes on in PUG parties has anything to do with the trust necessary to build a team network from.

Ego has nothing to do with this. It is about efficiency, effort, and enjoyment. All 3 of which a player should be allowed to choose how he/she fulfills that criteria. In this case, it was efficient for OP to seek experienced players, OP felt too tired and drained to exert the effort to teach newer players, and OP’s enjoyment would of stemmed from finishing the path but was hampered thanks to the clumsy recklessness of three stooges.

There are 2 solutions.

1 Get a third friend for running dungeons.

2 Dont start content if you dont have the time to finish it.

I dont see Anet being able to do much. It doesnt matter what system they design, trolls will abuse it. You just got unlucky with some inexperienced and insensitive players.

wait until another sale and use an extra account as a place holder…

BAM

you’re welcome

Myst.9182:

There are 2 solutions.

1 Get a third friend for running dungeons.

2 Dont start content if you dont have the time to finish it.

I dont see Anet being able to do much. It doesnt matter what system they design, trolls will abuse it. You just got unlucky with some inexperienced and insensitive players.

Reminds me of a certain quest for Teq’s first revamp. That week you hard to speak to Rox to finish a certain meta event or chain but people would constantly die next to her on purpose because she was programmed to auto-disengage whatever convo and run up to the nearest body to rez as priority. People would literally run into exploding corpses and pull mobs to die next to her to prevent people from finishing the chain.

Trolling has no bounds. Never underestimate it.

There will always be problems with people. You need to answer the question if it is better to prevent progress loss for party leader or to pretend that people are honest and are not abusing the current Looking For Griefers.

moral of the story, next time play with 2 friends not 1, so you cant be kicked..