Guild Wars 2

It should be pretty easy to measure inactivity. The game already does this if you don’t move till the start of a match saying you’ll be kicked in 50 seconds etc etc. I’m pretty sure the code for detecting AFK can’t be that complicated. The system can raise flags and maybe someone can verify it before assigning dishonorable points.

Seriously, going deliberately AFK is a betrayal of your team. And I’m not talking about hotjoin, but team q.

Report for botting is all you can do as of now…also dont report them once,Spam report those kittens because imo they have no place in tq or sq at all,let’s keep these lamers in hotjoin or let em go back to pve instead.
But yeah they should add smthing different to deal with the afkers,some way or the other…They need to get a dishonerable buff from it,and be disallowed to continue to pvp onwards for several hours or even a day.

dmg done/received = 0 for 1 min is afk for sure
even the MM sitting on close all game is afk

but dont know why would need more afk detect – it dont help the other 4 players

edit: maby when close gates on enemy team and dont let respawn the next dead player so game is a 4v4 it would be a step

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

Evan Lesh.3295:

Shockwave.1230:

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

I’m going to assume this has been on y’alls radar, perhaps as part of ladders etc. So you may have already begun working on this.

If you haven’t already you’ll probably run into a problem where you need to solve for filler player wait times. A good way to solve for this, is to check parallel matchups that are already in progress of being built and ‘borrowing’ players from those. This would likely require some parameters to be updated on the fly in the other matchup that a player was borrowed from in order to update the player ‘quality’ you’re looking for in the other matchmaking that’s occurring.

It is an overhaul, but whenever you guys get it done, we’ll be happily 5v5ing and largely forgetting about 4v5s involving afks. Raging unfortunately will still happen, but I think it’s safe to say that is less impactful, and perhaps less frequent.

Evan Lesh.3295:

Shockwave.1230:

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

No interactions with any mechanic necessary to win for X minutes.

Mechanics would include: capture points (contesting or defending decapping or capping), combat interactions, secondary objectives, etc etc etc.

Whether or not that’s realistic to implement is a different story altogether. But IMO and I believe many others would agree, if a player is not actively seeking any of those objectives/mechanics then he is in practice and in theory afk, even if he is not literally afk.

Running around in base to bypass the auto-kick mechanism or even running around outside of base should still be punishable—IMO—unless they are seeking any form of mechanic that could influence the game for the better.

Without a proper report function for that toxic behavior in-game an acceptable alternative would be a feature that can detect if players are not meeting -any- objective-based mechanic.

Lux.7169:

Evan Lesh.3295:

Shockwave.1230:

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

No interactions with any mechanic necessary to win for X minutes.

Mechanics would include: capture points (contesting or defending decapping or capping), combat interactions, secondary objectives, etc etc etc.

Whether or not that’s realistic to implement is a different story altogether. But IMO and I believe many others would agree, if a player is not actively seeking any of those objectives/mechanics then he is in practice and in theory afk, even if he is not literally afk.

Running around in base to bypass the auto-kick mechanism or even running around outside of base should still be punishable—IMO—unless they are seeking any form of mechanic that could influence the game for the better.

Without a proper report function for that toxic behavior in-game an acceptable alternative would be a feature that can detect if players are not meeting -any- objective-based mechanic.

I don’t know that these kinds of detections really would be useful for afk. You don’t want an afk person in match in the first place.

It seems more like stuff to detect rage quitting. I’ve seen rage quitters just give up and sleep on a point, jump off skyhammer all game, just plain leave map. If you’re trying to detect and punish these kinds of rage cases, implementions around the above still don’t necessarily solve the problem. People can always just run to a point and do nothing.

Shockwave.1230:

Lux.7169:

Evan Lesh.3295:

Shockwave.1230:

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

No interactions with any mechanic necessary to win for X minutes.

Mechanics would include: capture points (contesting or defending decapping or capping), combat interactions, secondary objectives, etc etc etc.

Whether or not that’s realistic to implement is a different story altogether. But IMO and I believe many others would agree, if a player is not actively seeking any of those objectives/mechanics then he is in practice and in theory afk, even if he is not literally afk.

Running around in base to bypass the auto-kick mechanism or even running around outside of base should still be punishable—IMO—unless they are seeking any form of mechanic that could influence the game for the better.

Without a proper report function for that toxic behavior in-game an acceptable alternative would be a feature that can detect if players are not meeting -any- objective-based mechanic.

I don’t know that these kinds of detections really would be useful for afk. You don’t want an afk person in match in the first place.

It seems more like stuff to detect rage quitting. I’ve seen rage quitters just give up and sleep on a point, jump off skyhammer all game, just plain leave map. If you’re trying to detect and punish these kinds of rage cases, implementions around the above still don’t necessarily solve the problem. People can always just run to a point and do nothing.

Even so, it would force players who are ‘intentionally sabotaging their team’ to constantly run back into a combat situation or onto a node-point. That alternative is far more appealing to me than someone ‘QEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQ’ strafing in base—even if they are just feeding the enemy team kills.

I don’t see any suitable alternative, regardless. If someone is hell-bent on afk’ing in a match then they will. However making it more difficult for them to get away with strictly QE afking is better than what we currently have.

What would you suggest being a superior method? I’m all for anything except what’s currently in place.

With regards to your initial proposal in the thread I have no issues with it. It seems like there are two veins of discussion—preventing genuine afkers and preventing voluntary afkers and my suggestion is for the latter.

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection

It involves getting in touch with the NSA.

Seriously though, if you have a match where one team is suddenly 4v5 due to one person being AFK, you’re pretty much screwed. Yes, you can manage an unlikely win, but any kind of AFK detection will require giving that 5th player a little window of time to be judged within, and then if he/she gets kicked you’ll need to rush another in, so at the very least 1 minute passes at best, but more probably 2-3 minutes… if the teams were balanced, the team with 4 have likely lost the game by then.

Or do you disagree?
(this is ofc in situations with a balanced 5v5 where loss of an AFKer puts one team at disadvantage. If you got a skewed 5v5 where 4v5 still manage to hold, that’s an exception)

At the very least include an AFK option in the reporting screen…that way if two or more people report it, it’s a very strong indication that it’s happening. As of now, we can’t even do that.

And yeah, I was talking about intentional in-game AFK due to raging etc..

If intentional in-game AFK could be detected and penalised with a Dishonorable (or kitten) debuff, that would probably counter a few situations where you would otherwise end up with 4v5.

Anything like this would be terrible. Why? Because Anet needs to fix the 4v5 and unbalanced matchmaking system.

I intentionally AFK quite a lot. Not every game or every other game, but when there’s a 4v5, as we all know, happens frequently, then I give it a shot. If it’s obvious that we can’t win, especially depending on the map (as some maps heavily favor 5 players over 4), then I’ll sit in spawn. I want the match to end asap so I can get to the next match that, hopefully, has 5 players.

There’s also that more rare instance where there are 3 warriors and 2 guardians of high ranking matched against 3 thieves, and 2 mesmer type of thing. Or how about when 3 members of your team don’t give a kitten at all about playing the map and just want to gank people.

So, yeah. Until those issues are fixed (Which isn’t hard. I’ve made other posts about them), don’t punish me and force me to play in a terrible match.

Spurnshadow.3678:

Anything like this would be terrible. Why? Because Anet needs to fix the 4v5 and unbalanced matchmaking system.

I intentionally AFK quite a lot. Not every game or every other game, but when there’s a 4v5, as we all know, happens frequently, then I give it a shot. If it’s obvious that we can’t win, especially depending on the map (as some maps heavily favor 5 players over 4), then I’ll sit in spawn. I want the match to end asap so I can get to the next match that, hopefully, has 5 players.

There’s also that more rare instance where there are 3 warriors and 2 guardians of high ranking matched against 3 thieves, and 2 mesmer type of thing. Or how about when 3 members of your team don’t give a kitten at all about playing the map and just want to gank people.

So, yeah. Until those issues are fixed (Which isn’t hard. I’ve made other posts about them), don’t punish me and force me to play in a terrible match.

You’re not the only one in your team. It’s highly disrespectful to your team mates to sit out a match. All AFK’ers should be punished regardless of the situation. I don’t care if you think the match is lost or if the score is 400-0. Dishonorable points must be awarded if you go AFK.

No one is forcing you to enter solo q or team q either. If you queue up, those are the risks you take.

Make the base a zone that if you don’t leave with-in a minute of spawning you get marked as AFK and kicked from match to be replaced.

After that you have to be careful with how you detecte it and punish it, since if they have a dedicated home bunker it is shoddy to punish them if the other team does not press home. But I am sure you will figure that part out.

Now the last piece, you need to fix how disconnects are detected compared to AFKs, since as of the moment they seem to be treated the same way. I got a 3-day dishonor because I lost connection during a match. I say if it looks without a doubt a dis-connect then just have it auto-replace the player say after 1 minute, or vote-kick by team in team-arenas. Past that, if they get proved to be afkers or rage quiters (I am sure you can detect alt+F4) then give them dishonor.

How to make AFK detectable? Simple… use the system you used in guild wars 1 where reporting someone for leeching would give them dishonorable.

I know this is an extreme suggestion, but how about a PENALTY of rewards taken away for AFK. If it is made SO damaging that players would NEVER attempt it, that might, “nip it in the bud” (Barney Fife reference FtW).

Yes, I see the draconian, slippery slope the suggestion presents, but until you make it the OPPOSITE of profitable to do, AFK will not stop. Banning the player for whatever period of time AFTER they get rewards for doing nothing does not seem to be working.

Here is my idea:

Add zones on the map, say a radius 1200-1800 around nodes. Any time people enter the zone their timer is taken to zero. When they deal damage, the timer is set to zero. Then take the peak time and establish a cutoff time for afk.

Say over 90s without damage or being at a point = afk.

I personally understand that AFK detection is very difficult to do. So don’t insult the developers by saying “simple code” because I can tell you it isn’t easy to distinguish between an AFK person and someone who is actually playing the game besides movement detection. For example think of a bunker who may not have been there for a capture of a point, but is now sitting protecting it, they aren’t scoring points, but they aren’t afk and an AFK person who afks on a point can look exactly the same to the system. There is no easy automated way to detect these people if they make sure that they are moving.

The only solution I have is to utilize the people in the match. In many other games, if a majority of the people on the team report someone for being AFK, they are kicked from the match and replaced. I understand why this is something that you guys are probably wary of implementing because of the potential for abuse. I would say, however, that when you review the reports against someone you can punish people who reported someone for being AFK when they in fact were participating, and maybe were just a bad player. I think it is better to deal with abuse of a feature than to deal with 4v5s all the time because of no features.

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Please give us a report option ‘Leeching’ like we had in GW1. You can then check player details (did his character move, did he go into combat, were any skills activated, did he damage enemies, was he damaged himself, and more of those criteria) and judge if that player was leeching or not. In the first case send an automatic mail with a standard message: “You have leeched in a PvP match and have been given one charge towards Dishonorable status”.

Some games have a timer in spawn so that you can’t sit in it for extended periods. Perhaps have something similar, if you sit in spawn for X amount of time you are kicked from the game and get dishonor. It’s not a perfect system because they could just leave spawn but in addition to a report for leeching option it would be helpful.

If that happens there could be a /surrender option that the team that just lost a player can use that give the other team a win but doesn’t give them a loss. Nothing is more annoying than having to fight a losing battle because you don’t want to get dishonor.

BurrTheKing.8571:

Some games have a timer in spawn so that you can’t sit in it for extended periods. Perhaps have something similar, if you sit in spawn for X amount of time you are kicked from the game and get dishonor. It’s not a perfect system because they could just leave spawn but in addition to a report for leeching option it would be helpful.

If that happens there could be a /surrender option that the team that just lost a player can use that give the other team a win but doesn’t give them a loss. Nothing is more annoying than having to fight a losing battle because you don’t want to get dishonor.

system is already in play; is it not? If you sit in spawn for 2 minutes or so, you’re kicked to main menu, and if you don’t return to game before match ends, you are dishonored.

Evan Lesh.3295:

Shockwave.1230:

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

Initial thought is before starting the countdown timer for a match start force players to manually ready up for the map.

So do your match making, where you try and find 10 players of similar ‘quality’, utilize whatever existing logic there is to expand that quality range over time.

Give players X seconds (60 for example), to ready up prior to joining the map. Give players 2 options when requesting ready up, Ready | Cancel. If not all 10 players have readied up to join the map, boot the ones that haven’t, and search for fillers. Don’t allow players that have already been booted/cancelled to be found for the same match, to prevent potential abuse. To avoid syncing, flag players that cancel / are booted for inactivity, and avoid matching them up together in the same matches.

After 10 players ready up, match up the teams based on whatever ‘quality’ balancing logic y’all have.

Finally send them to the map.

What problems do you forsee with this kind of suggestion?

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

Canceling match unless all 10 pressed “join” surly does not require major overhaul and it would be good first step… Forcing afk players into match doesn’t accomplish anything. Every player that did Queue for game should be present when it pops, if he/she is not then that person is removed from queue and other 9 are returned to it, also not accepting queue puts your queue on cooldown, simple right?

Lux.7169:

No interactions with any mechanic necessary to win for X minutes.

Mechanics would include: capture points (contesting or defending decapping or capping), combat interactions, secondary objectives, etc etc etc.

^

This is a good start. No interaction with key mechanics for X minutes = griefing. The player would be considered griefing, and therefore be penalized accordingly.

Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Solo que would be excellent.
Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Team Que would be awful.

Fight the matches you can win, Dodge the ones you can’t, Top 100 NA all day.
No rewards for Matches Forfeited for either side.
Accounts should be flagged as deserter instantly if they are not logged in. 1 day ban.
Implement Better Rank decay; 20 slots on 2nd day not played. Deserters auto-eat the rank decay and won’t be able to stay on top of the leaderboards.

Also this assumes leaderboards will actually be meaningful at some point in time.

This would really hurt me the most, as I have dc’d pregame 1000 times now.

Darnis.4056:

Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Solo que would be excellent.
Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Team Que would be awful.

Fight the matches you can win, Dodge the ones you can’t, Top 100 NA all day.
No rewards for Matches Forfeited for either side.
Accounts should be flagged as deserter instantly if they are not logged in. 1 day ban.
Implement Better Rank decay; 20 slots on 2nd day not played. Deserters auto-eat the rank decay and won’t be able to stay on top of the leaderboards.

Also this assumes leaderboards will actually be meaningful at some point in time.

This would really hurt me the most, as I have dc’d pregame 1000 times now.

IT CAN WORK. If you can not see the roster of the other team/your teammates. But I understand what you are worried about. Dodging good teams/players by not pressing accept. But the “ready up” button prior to matches NEEDS to be the first thing implemented. Does not seem too difficult but what do I know

Darnis.4056:

Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Solo que would be excellent.
Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Team Que would be awful.

Fight the matches you can win, Dodge the ones you can’t, Top 100 NA all day.
No rewards for Matches Forfeited for either side.
Accounts should be flagged as deserter instantly if they are not logged in. 1 day ban.
Implement Better Rank decay; 20 slots on 2nd day not played. Deserters auto-eat the rank decay and won’t be able to stay on top of the leaderboards.

Also this assumes leaderboards will actually be meaningful at some point in time.

This would really hurt me the most, as I have dc’d pregame 1000 times now.

Would not be a problem if implemented correctly. For example players are ported to match map only after all 10 have accepted. They are not shown enemy team before that.
Also still if you do not accept you should still be penalized. Idea is so that people who did show up are not awarded lose and waste 10 min because of one afker(soloq).
In case of teamQ there should be some penalty for team for not accepting(time out or something of sort) just to keep them on ball, since they are not supposed to know anything about forth coming match there should not be any rank penalty in this case.

Also if you have connection issues you should change ISP, you are screwing your team mates.

Xbon.9086:

BurrTheKing.8571:

Some games have a timer in spawn so that you can’t sit in it for extended periods. Perhaps have something similar, if you sit in spawn for X amount of time you are kicked from the game and get dishonor. It’s not a perfect system because they could just leave spawn but in addition to a report for leeching option it would be helpful.

If that happens there could be a /surrender option that the team that just lost a player can use that give the other team a win but doesn’t give them a loss. Nothing is more annoying than having to fight a losing battle because you don’t want to get dishonor.

system is already in play; is it not? If you sit in spawn for 2 minutes or so, you’re kicked to main menu, and if you don’t return to game before match ends, you are dishonored.

Many intentional leechers will just tap the movement key every now and again while in spawn. Something like this would force them to at least leave spawn which means they can be killed, which means they go back to spawn again. It would make leeching fairly annoying to do as a result.

I had a question for devs, if I want to do soloq or w/e but I don’t like conquest can I just fight people? Not afk, just not interested in capping or defending things?

Not interested in other players opinion just want to know if this is against some rule?

Evan Lesh.3295:

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect. Not starting matches unless 10 people are actively present is another story. It requires a large overhaul to our PvP infrastructure, but it can be done.

This has been a large problem in all pvp matches from hotjoin→team for a long time now. With more people not caring about the matches themselves but the rewards it’s become an even bigger problem. I really hope this means something is being done about it.

Paddy.3985:

I had a question for devs, if I want to do soloq or w/e but I don’t like conquest can I just fight people? Not afk, just not interested in capping or defending things?

Not interested in other players opinion just want to know if this is against some rule?

No, it’s not against the rules, and it’s one of the biggest reasons why PvP sucks. It has only been made worse with the reward tracks as it has attracted a lot more players that just want to roam around and gank people while still receiving the rewards. That’s fun for you, and that’s fine. Unfortunately, it comes at the expense of other peoples fun, which is winning matches.

The fault really lays with Anet, as they should have come up with different PvP modes other than cap and hold that you can choose from, which the community has been asking for for the longest time.

bhagwad.4281:

Spurnshadow.3678:

Anything like this would be terrible. Why? Because Anet needs to fix the 4v5 and unbalanced matchmaking system.

I intentionally AFK quite a lot. Not every game or every other game, but when there’s a 4v5, as we all know, happens frequently, then I give it a shot. If it’s obvious that we can’t win, especially depending on the map (as some maps heavily favor 5 players over 4), then I’ll sit in spawn. I want the match to end asap so I can get to the next match that, hopefully, has 5 players.

There’s also that more rare instance where there are 3 warriors and 2 guardians of high ranking matched against 3 thieves, and 2 mesmer type of thing. Or how about when 3 members of your team don’t give a kitten at all about playing the map and just want to gank people.

So, yeah. Until those issues are fixed (Which isn’t hard. I’ve made other posts about them), don’t punish me and force me to play in a terrible match.

You’re not the only one in your team. It’s highly disrespectful to your team mates to sit out a match. All AFK’ers should be punished regardless of the situation. I don’t care if you think the match is lost or if the score is 400-0. Dishonorable points must be awarded if you go AFK.

No one is forcing you to enter solo q or team q either. If you queue up, those are the risks you take.

So, you want me to play your game? Get spawn camped, contiuously run to a node with 2 people on it and die over and over again. You want me to continually get killed without a chance at winning the match? No thank you. Sorry, that just isn’t fun for me. I can’t leave the match and do something else. I have to stay in it. I want it to end ASAP to get to a FAIR match with 5v5. I have tried, and succeeded in 4v5s, but it’s rare and very hard. The other team has to be really bad or have just a horrible group comp and builds. These matches and maps are carefully designed for 5v5.

No one is forcing me to enter solo que, but Anet has provided an incentive to do so. Don’t blame me for playing the game that Anet set up. Blame them. Why would I not enter solo or team que when that’s how I get the reward track?

I play a lot of PvP and almost never see someone afking in a 5v5. I only see it happening, and I’m not the only one who does it, is in 4v5s. Advocate a solution for the 4v5 and then revisit this issue.

Spurnshadow.3678:

Paddy.3985:

I had a question for devs, if I want to do soloq or w/e but I don’t like conquest can I just fight people? Not afk, just not interested in capping or defending things?

Not interested in other players opinion just want to know if this is against some rule?

No, it’s not against the rules, and it’s one of the biggest reasons why PvP sucks. It has only been made worse with the reward tracks as it has attracted a lot more players that just want to roam around and gank people while still receiving the rewards. That’s fun for you, and that’s fine. Unfortunately, it comes at the expense of other peoples fun, which is winning matches.

The fault really lays with Anet, as they should have come up with different PvP modes other than cap and hold that you can choose from, which the community has been asking for for the longest time.

I would love if we could have deathmatches as opposed to conquest ( I really hate conquest.) I’m not trying to ruin others fun but if me having fun does so well that’s an unfortunate side effect. =( It does seem very odd to me that there isn’t a deathmatch.

Evan Lesh.3295:

I assumed the OP was talking about intentional in-game AFK, which is much harder to detect.

Yeah, well, sir, how about you create some sort of a way for us to detect these AFKers for you and maybe I don’t know, use the report function? I’ve been reporting AFKers for botting since early last year and I still see the same guys going afk at 150-100. The majority of hardcore PvPers have already quit the game but these guys are here to ruin games day after day after day because they are sooooo hard to detect.

Darnis.4056:

Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Solo que would be excellent.
Matches don’t start without 10 people present in Team Que would be awful.

Fight the matches you can win, Dodge the ones you can’t, Top 100 NA all day.
No rewards for Matches Forfeited for either side.
Accounts should be flagged as deserter instantly if they are not logged in. 1 day ban.
Implement Better Rank decay; 20 slots on 2nd day not played. Deserters auto-eat the rank decay and won’t be able to stay on top of the leaderboards.

Also this assumes leaderboards will actually be meaningful at some point in time.

This would really hurt me the most, as I have dc’d pregame 1000 times now.

Do you even begin to realise how many matches will be forfeited with this? Fight the matches you can win, dodge the others… someone decides they don’t like a match which actually starts up 5v5 and can sabotage it and everyone else forfeits… Maybe I just read your suggestion wrongly.

But I agree with your points on rank decay.

Evan Lesh.3295:

How would you suggest expanding AFK detection?

How did Anet detect AFK’ers during LA Living Story?

I’d say that the best way to prevent players from intentionally AFKing would be to:

- set up a proper report option for it
- look into players who regularly get reported
- give out significant bans (say a week for first offence) to players who ruin matches by doing this

Boom! Once you get to the handing-out-bans stage you’ve got an effective deterrent (also just any deterrent at all, since we know Dishonourable doesn’t work), and if someone repeatedly does it they’ll get permabanned and either stop ruining pvp for others, or start new accounts and give y’alls steady cashflow (yey, income from PvP, now we can get more attention :P ).

Of course it’s not nearly that simple, with issues with both staffing (for report processing) and code/engine (hopefully you’re already working on relevant report options? They’ve been raised regularly since forever...).
It’s definitely not impossible, though, and solving the 5v4 problems along with strongly discouraging intentional afks would greatly raise the morale of soloq players - though probably not so much as removing Skyhammer would!

If they implant an more strict afk system , then i want a ‘’class ban’’ option like LoL ! it wont be trolled b the community dont worry !

Decay bar .
Splitted up in three parts (orange-yellow-green area) .
Start decaying from the 100% (casting spells or doing actions
refills it + can stack up to 130%) .

You loose 1 decay point every 1 sec (even in death) .
You loose faster the decay bar ( -2 decay points every 1 sec) ,
when the bar is more than 60% .
You loose evn faster the bar (-3 decay points every 1 sec) , if you stay on th base for more than 10 sec .

If you reach 0% you get a disshonor .
If your game ends and you have less than 30% decay point(orange area) you get 25% of the total reward .
30%-60% (yellow area) = 50% rewards .

Decapping a base +
doing a combo with a friend’s aoe field +
healing/stealthing/sharing boons to a friends =
awards ’’MASSIVE’’ decay points

Getting attacked by a player gives 3 decay points every sec
(while the bar is still decaying -1) .
Getting nuked by 5 players = 3 points x 5 players = 15 every sec .
The same rules aply to <<dodging>> = evade 5 different ’’sources’’ = 15 points
Using a attack/spell awards points (but not the auto attacks / the downstate auto attack
althought awards 3 decay point with each attack)

Romek.4201:

dmg done/received = 0 for 1 min is afk for sure

For sure this is not true.

Romek.4201:

maby when close gates on enemy team and dont let respawn the next dead player so game is a 4v4 it would be a step

Dangerous idea IMHO…it would make possible to a loosing team to decide to switch to 4v4 …up to 1v1 with carrefully selecting when they have to (waiting for the good opponent to be dead and thus out of play)

Killthehealersffs.8940:

If they implant an more strict afk system , then i want a ‘’class ban’’ option like LoL ! it wont be trolled b the community dont worry !

Decay bar .
Splitted up in three parts (orange-yellow-green area) .
Start decaying from the 100% (casting spells or doing actions
refills it + can stack up to 130%) .

You loose 1 decay point every 1 sec (even in death) .
You loose faster the decay bar ( -2 decay points every 1 sec) ,
when the bar is more than 60% .
You loose evn faster the bar (-3 decay points every 1 sec) , if you stay on th base for more than 10 sec .

If you reach 0% you get a disshonor .
If your game ends and you have less than 30% decay point(orange area) you get 25% of the total reward .
30%-60% (yellow area) = 50% rewards .

Decapping a base +
doing a combo with a friend’s aoe field +
healing/stealthing/sharing boons to a friends =
awards ’’MASSIVE’’ decay points

Getting attacked by a player gives 3 decay points every sec
(while the bar is still decaying -1) .
Getting nuked by 5 players = 3 points x 5 players = 15 every sec .
The same rules aply to <<dodging>> = evade 5 different ’’sources’’ = 15 points
Using a attack/spell awards points (but not the auto attacks / the downstate auto attack
althought awards 3 decay point with each attack)

Mate, have you ever bunkered a point? You stay standing on one point nearly all match, and occasionally fight enemies, but if you’re good enemies will start attacking other points cause they can’t take yours. So… you’d kick every bunker.

Sirendor.1394:

Killthehealersffs.8940:

If they implant an more strict afk system , then i want a ‘’class ban’’ option like LoL ! it wont be trolled b the community dont worry !

Decay bar .
Splitted up in three parts (orange-yellow-green area) .
Start decaying from the 100% (casting spells or doing actions
refills it + can stack up to 130%) .

You loose 1 decay point every 1 sec (even in death) .
You loose faster the decay bar ( -2 decay points every 1 sec) ,
when the bar is more than 60% .
You loose evn faster the bar (-3 decay points every 1 sec) , if you stay on th base for more than 10 sec .

If you reach 0% you get a disshonor .
If your game ends and you have less than 30% decay point(orange area) you get 25% of the total reward .
30%-60% (yellow area) = 50% rewards .

Decapping a base +
doing a combo with a friend’s aoe field +
healing/stealthing/sharing boons to a friends =
awards ’’MASSIVE’’ decay points

Getting attacked by a player gives 3 decay points every sec
(while the bar is still decaying -1) .
Getting nuked by 5 players = 3 points x 5 players = 15 every sec .
The same rules aply to <<dodging>> = evade 5 different ’’sources’’ = 15 points
Using a attack/spell awards points (but not the auto attacks / the downstate auto attack
althought awards 3 decay point with each attack)

Mate, have you ever bunkered a point? You stay standing on one point nearly all match, and occasionally fight enemies, but if you’re good enemies will start attacking other points cause they can’t take yours. So… you’d kick every bunker.

A good bunker rotates and doesn’t yolo camp his point 24/7, if it gets ignored.

Sirendor.1394:

Mate, have you ever bunkered a point? You stay standing on one point nearly all match, and occasionally fight enemies, but if you’re good enemies will start attacking other points cause they can’t take yours. So… you’d kick every bunker.

I understand that …
But if they implant a system where : You need 3 votes to ’’report’’ a person and give him istantly a dihonor , you are already doom …
Ppl that want to have fun(casual players = the majority in every games) > will troll the ppl that want to win (monirity) .
If the report you (just for fun or they dont like your attitude in the chat) atleast you have a chance to ‘’survive
Later on they will release more maps and we can choose an other ’’format’’

Just an idea here….

For hotjoin

At the start of each new map, allow 1 minute of “flex” time. This “flex” time allotted will allow a player to either join, or automatically be moved into spectate. Hopefully there is a code that understands spectate….hopefully!

Introduce a code that would show the status of a map (How many minutes into the game). So, if the map just switched, it’ll show >0. If it’s 5 minutes in >5, etc. etc.

Add a code that shows spectate players, and active players.

NO SPOILERS*********
Do not show game score. Spoilers = bad.

For Ranked Matches

*Standard starts as they already are.

*Once you are in the map waiting for the rest to que up……
-One more gump to display if you are ready.
-Once everyone clicks ready, the final 10s countdown will begin.

If you drop anytime during/after the 10s countdown*****

1. You will be required to que up (by yourself) for your next tpvp or soloq game (depending on which one you dropped from) with the same character. Basically, you have to play a random game. You cannot “preform” a team.

2. If you drop again, you will recieve 2 losses on your record based entirely on the ranking system (the players you were matched against ; ), but will be free to participate however you wish to from there on.

3. Rinse and repeat.

4. No daily/monthly/etc. progress will be granted until you perform the requirements.

All they need to do is watch matches for a little while. Even just a week or weekend.
They will catch some and when temp ban them the word will spread very quickly thru pve community. It will stop. For a while but prolly a long while.

Hardcore pve farmers will not risk 3 days no farm for anything.

Bumping this in hope of Anet response