Guild Wars 2

Andred.1087:

Players: “we really need to know that we won’t be kicked for kittens and giggles by bad people”

ANet: “I know, what if we just put in log messages so you can report people when it does happen, and maybe it’ll get looked into?”

Kudos to the developer who’s trying to do something about this. Anti-kudos for the solution being completely not what people are asking for.

concisely put

Lucyfer.9517:

When you are in party do you see party leader icon somewhere? Is some player marked differently? Has more power than other players? Nope? Because there is no party leader in anets system. All players in group are equal none of them own the others or host the others in their “home”. You don’t own anything being party leader is just some silly illusion you created for yourself to justify why you cant be touched and need to be treated differently than others. Your system will never happen, party leaders do not exist.

your so right lets add a party leader icon (since we now need one cuz of this update)

Sarrs.4831:

Duke Nukem.6783:

they made a choice to start the party, it is theirs regardless of how little effort it took to make it….its an issue of autonomy..and i didnt even think of swamp stealing WOW thats a whole extra problem to lump onto this thanks!

They made a choice to start the party. That doesn’t give them inalienable rights to do as they please without the threat of being kicked.

it….it literally does, thats literally what owning something means and what my constitution and bill of rights says about creating something

eekzie.5640:

TehPwnerer.7215:

eekzie.5640:

tweeve.3782:

Because not everyone can start the dungeon. There are many times I have gone to a party and the party leader can not start the dungeon because he/she did not do the story so someone else who has it unlocked has to do it.

Like I also pointed out that it would be nice if the party leader could tick a box where someone can’t get kicked.

That can also be abused. They’ll find a sweet spot. Honestly it’s as simple as just making 3 people required to kick. Do what other games do. Require 3 to kick and require a reason for the kick.

If 3 people vote for “kick for lulzzzz” then the person who was kicked gets notified that they were kicked by X person and for that reason and the griefers can be reported.

This is to prevent griefing.
Right now they’re creating a situation where it’s easier to do so.

And when can you support someone for griefing you?
Where’s the line between a valid kick and one that’s ‘’not allowed’’…

anet’s solution of reporting is a total cop out for exactly this reason? we r expected to trust them to handle that volume of reports? yea right its not even clearly definable. the party leader needs kick immunity its THEIR party!

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

its a classic issue of autonomy and freedom, those 4 playes are guests in the party of the leader and if they dont like the way they do it they can leave and get a new party, they are guests in his home and no matter what insane thing he asks of you in his home you do it or get out, you do not steal his home because you dont want it, dont assume that those 4 people are more qualified to make choices jsut because they are 4 and the leader is one, many parties will kick just bcuz u didnt stack (im a ranger and i use a longbow and i dont want to stack) and putting casual in the description means little as some ppl dont even read descriptions, if i start something, no matter how much or how little effort you think that is, i still started it, and i deserve a great say in what that thing does. many times 4 ppl are LESS capable of making good decisions than 1 (see the phenomenone known as groupthink).

So then what’s the big deal about kicking the party leader from the party? If those four people don’t like being in a party with the leader, then they have the right to kick the leader player. If this happens in a dungeon, then oh well. If you find that they kick you for no good reason, then report them. Or go find another group of players who want to play.

You keep mentioning that posts are “irrelevant” despite actually having something to do with the topic at hand. If you want relevant…

- A leaving dungeon owner is someone who leaves the dungeon instance. Currently, that boots everyone out as well, whether the act of leaving was intentional or not.

- A kicked dungeon owner is someone who is forced out of the dungeon instance because either the kick was deserved or the party had at least two griefers/trolls. Currently, that boots everyone out, just like what happens when a dungeon owner leaves.

ANet’s update will allow the instance to persist whether the “owner” leaves (on purpose or accidentally) or is kicked. Granted, the 2/5 vote is terrible (technically 2/4, since you can’t vote for yourself), but just accept the fact that you were booted and move on to another run.

You may have created the party, but you wouldn’t have a party if the other four players didn’t join on their own free will.

its different because in one the owner is choosing to go and the other the party is being stolen from , no matter what its stealing what they created,

and dont say “just start another one” or “just find another one” that completly ignores the feeling of being kicked from a party 2 hours into a hard fractal that went poorly for whatever reason, sometimes people look for a scapegoat or place blame in the wrong place and thats unfair to every1 but its especially unfair to the group leader, i say again, it is yours if you made it

and no you can be in a party by yourself as silly as that sounds, you still made the group and just like in gw1 thats YOUR group

“just accept it” is a passive way of admiting you know something is wrong, and since you know something is wrong with this you should also be either offering your own or amending mine (not arguing the fundamental philosiphy of autonomy)

Sarrs.4831:

Duke Nukem.6783:

your post is irrelivent as the suggested solution on the OP addresses the difference this thread is trying to make between a leaving owner and a kicked owner

Why should a dungeon not persist if the owner is kicked? There’s no fundamental difference between the dungeon owner and any other guy, except in a few particular cases.

Swamp stealing? Yeah sure that sucks. Is it really that hard though? Is it worth creating a labyrinthine system that tries to make a distinction between kicked and leaving dungeon owners?

they made a choice to start the party, it is theirs regardless of how little effort it took to make it….its an issue of autonomy..and i didnt even think of swamp stealing WOW thats a whole extra problem to lump onto this thanks!

and a few days after the patch il b sure to make a fustrated thread about getting kicked from my own party…..probably for not stacking where the loudest jerk with the most acheivment points told me to

Sarrs.4831:

Blade Syphon.4325:

So basically, you don’t want to be held accountable for your sub-par skill in a group that may or may not be the cause of it wiping, but you’re perfectly okay kicking people who are “Meany heads” to you when they call you on your inability to play your roll properly to the group’s composition.

Sounds to me that if people like you are in the majority, this change to the dungeons is a very needed one on that level alone, to say nothing about the sheer number of technical hiccups this is finally going to fix.

Just because you started the party doesn’t mean you’re suddenly not required to live up to the standards people expect when running a dungeon, or are some how immune to being kicked because you want to play sub-optimally in a pick up group setting.

If this change bothers you that much, than just run it with your Guild.

…Huh?

No I agree with you dude. I’m talking about the change to the dungeon ownership system. It’s a good change because a lot of the time people don’t understand or notice that they’re the dungeon owner, and they leave earlier than everyone else has their loot. The negative ramifications of the change (people stealing sold runs) are vastly outweighed by the positive (people don’t get screwed by an owner leaving).

your post is irrelivent as the suggested solution on the OP addresses the difference this thread is trying to make between a leaving owner and a kicked owner

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

I don’t understand where all the complaints about kicking are coming from. I’ve been playing for a year and a half (3,900 hours play time I think?) and have done many dungeon runs (including speed runs) with pugs and have only been kicked twice before, once as an engi and another time as a thief (because 4 warriors for CoF p1 isn’t enough apparently) both before even entering the dungeon. The new system is fine,
do you know how disappointing it is to get all the way to Mai Trin on a level 19 fractal only for the host to rage quit because we wiped -one- time? If you get kicked a lot you might want to consider what you as a player can do differently next time.

u kinda just answered your own question about the kick system with thsoe 2 experiences of yours but lets broaden the question for a second

what if some people in the group want to do the mai glitch and some dont? some might wana kick over that, what if their is another argument in the group? u have no right to hijack the party from the opener over this no matter what, EVER

Even if the owner is someone who afk’s mid-dungeon to make dinner, something he knew he would have to do in advance?

Also, if you notice my two experiences are before entering the dungeon, so it’s not like I had my progress erased. On top of that, it is 2 times out of several hundred.. not often enough to be a problem. Not nearly enough to complain about.

if the dungeon owner wants to have a slow relaxed run where he can take a break and make something to eat then thats his choice he created the party. im not saying its polite and i certainly wudnt do that but its still his party and you can still leave. if your heavily invested and dont want to leave just wait, if you dont have time to wait then you also didnt plan ahead now did you?

but these examples are becoming increasingly niche and represent less than 1 in a thousand chances and i think most of us know that

The guy I am talking about was afk for 30 minutes and was not the party leader. I was the one who created the party and I let him open because at the time we were friends. He knew it was a fast run for experienced players looking to get their gold asap but he still did this anyways. I felt really bad for the other people there… Yes, the fault is on me for trusting him but what about the other 3 people who expected something better? They shouldn’t have to suffer for our mistake.

thats very reproachable and i sympathise, but as inconvenient as that is i do think the party LEADER deserves autonomy, maybe it should no longer matter who opens but if im the first one in the party or if i start the LFG system i or any party leader out there deserves to be kick proof

Why do you think the party leader deserves immunity from a kick? What makes them above the opinion and wellbeing of the other 4 party members?

its a classic issue of autonomy and freedom, those 4 playes are guests in the party of the leader and if they dont like the way they do it they can leave and get a new party, they are guests in his home and no matter what insane thing he asks of you in his home you do it or get out, you do not steal his home because you dont want it, dont assume that those 4 people are more qualified to make choices jsut because they are 4 and the leader is one, many parties will kick just bcuz u didnt stack (im a ranger and i use a longbow and i dont want to stack) and putting casual in the description means little as some ppl dont even read descriptions, if i start something, no matter how much or how little effort you think that is, i still started it, and i deserve a great say in what that thing does. many times 4 ppl are LESS capable of making good decisions than 1 (see the phenomenone known as groupthink).

the fix i want is simple, make it so the party LEADER (not the opener but the person who psoted in lfg or invited the first person to the group) can NEVER be kicked, but the instance will not close if he leaves or logs off, (and he will lose his kick immunity if hes gone more than 5 mins)

vespers.1759:

Lucyfer.9517:

3000 hours, loads of dungeons done kicked only once and it was my fault. If you get kicked over and over and over there can be only one reason, you are simply a bad player.
Anet decided how things will be there will be no protection, why should one person be protected and 4 others not? Because he ran first into the portal? You can make your group, describe it as casual no skip and people who want fast runs will stay away. But i think thats not what you really want is it? You want to be the “holy cow” of the group, ineficient and untouchable while rest of people have to carry you on their backs because you cant be kicked.

This. in my experience the vast majority of my dungeon kicks come from party leaders leaving for whatever reason and getting everyone else shafted. I rarely actually get kicked, although it happens.

there’s absolutely no reason 4 people should be at the mercy of 1 person like this. And there’s no reason that a party leader should have special status just because they walked in first.

lets stop talking about “getting shafted” because the party leader left or d/ced as i have already addressed that issue with the original post and its no longer relevent to the discussion at hand, infact il update that right now on the OP becasue i fully aggree with you that that is not fair and should change, i just believe that the party LEADER (not opener) should have the right to decide how the party works and indeed IF it works at all

Lucyfer.9517:

3000 hours, loads of dungeons done kicked only once and it was my fault. If you get kicked over and over and over there can be only one reason, you are simply a bad player.
Anet decided how things will be there will be no protection, why should one person be protected and 4 others not? Because he ran first into the portal? You can make your group, describe it as casual no skip and people who want fast runs will stay away. But i think thats not what you really want is it? You want to be the “holy cow” of the group, ineficient and untouchable while rest of people have to carry you on their backs because you cant be kicked.

anet decided did they? you probably arnt aware they said they would like to re examine this issue then? and plz keep your junior college psych degree to yourself, i do not enjoy making my teammates suffer for fun but i do hate elitists who are the real holy cows here

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

I don’t understand where all the complaints about kicking are coming from. I’ve been playing for a year and a half (3,900 hours play time I think?) and have done many dungeon runs (including speed runs) with pugs and have only been kicked twice before, once as an engi and another time as a thief (because 4 warriors for CoF p1 isn’t enough apparently) both before even entering the dungeon. The new system is fine,
do you know how disappointing it is to get all the way to Mai Trin on a level 19 fractal only for the host to rage quit because we wiped -one- time? If you get kicked a lot you might want to consider what you as a player can do differently next time.

u kinda just answered your own question about the kick system with thsoe 2 experiences of yours but lets broaden the question for a second

what if some people in the group want to do the mai glitch and some dont? some might wana kick over that, what if their is another argument in the group? u have no right to hijack the party from the opener over this no matter what, EVER

Even if the owner is someone who afk’s mid-dungeon to make dinner, something he knew he would have to do in advance?

Also, if you notice my two experiences are before entering the dungeon, so it’s not like I had my progress erased. On top of that, it is 2 times out of several hundred.. not often enough to be a problem. Not nearly enough to complain about.

if the dungeon owner wants to have a slow relaxed run where he can take a break and make something to eat then thats his choice he created the party. im not saying its polite and i certainly wudnt do that but its still his party and you can still leave. if your heavily invested and dont want to leave just wait, if you dont have time to wait then you also didnt plan ahead now did you?

but these examples are becoming increasingly niche and represent less than 1 in a thousand chances and i think most of us know that

The guy I am talking about was afk for 30 minutes and was not the party leader. I was the one who created the party and I let him open because at the time we were friends. He knew it was a fast run for experienced players looking to get their gold asap but he still did this anyways. I felt really bad for the other people there… Yes, the fault is on me for trusting him but what about the other 3 people who expected something better? They shouldn’t have to suffer for our mistake.

thats very reproachable and i sympathise, but as inconvenient as that is i do think the party LEADER deserves autonomy, maybe it should no longer matter who opens but if im the first one in the party or if i start the LFG system i or any party leader out there deserves to be kick proof

eekzie.5640:

tweeve.3782:

Because not everyone can start the dungeon. There are many times I have gone to a party and the party leader can not start the dungeon because he/she did not do the story so someone else who has it unlocked has to do it.

Like I also pointed out that it would be nice if the party leader could tick a box where someone can’t get kicked.

this is a step in the right direciton the party leader deserves autonomy

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

i have no idea why your comparing the lfg system to being a meta sheep, every1 uses the lfg system it says NOTHING about you..

and i already said in my soluiton that if the owner does leave then yes, they can be kicked, thats fine, so that solves your trolling concerns right there.

but they absolutly do desrve to be immune to kicks, its their party. if you dont like it find a new one, and if they troll or greif you report them but few dungeon owners will have any way to troll or greif you if we make the leaving/going offline change

In the current build (not the feature patch), if the owner leaves, the party is forced out of the instance. Even if the owner gets kicked after that, the other members have to start over. The new patch allows the players to continue through the dungeon, even if the owner leaves or gets kicked. Which is what will happen, and what you essentially just said would be the “solution”, so I’m not seeing where you’re going with this…

There’s also no dedicated party leader (unless you’re in tPvP, but even then it’s just for a name), so even if you start the party, you’re still another player. You also have the right to leave the party and find a new one if you don’t like it, even if you started the party yourself. If you can’t find a party to dungeon with, then try again another time. So, again, I’m not seeing where you’re going with this.

did you just intentionaly ignore the part of my solution where the party leader getting kicked still closes the instance? u did didnt you….the change in my version is that the leader (or opener if you really insist) leaving will not close the dungeon but kicking the opener will

Um, no, I read your solution. Which is almost identical to the ANet change, except you want everyone to suffer for kicking the opener. Even if all they did was open the instance. The issue that ANet is addressing is simply to preserve the instance, no matter who leaves/gets kicked/DC’s.

Duke Nukem.6783:

thats an unusual circomstance but if you had known he was the opener i guess u wuda shut up and danced huh? besides there were probably signs he was immature before that and you cuda left long ago.

anyway if 1 person starts a party then yes you do deserve to be at that person’s mercy. 99% of the time ul b fine ESPECIALLY if we implement my leaver solution

Again, the change is to prevent immature trolls from doing this to people who actually want to run dungeons. If 1 person starts the party, but another member invites the other players, is the party starter still “God”? That’s not what ANet wants, and that seems to be what the vast majority of people in this thread believe too. Your “leaver solution”, as you call it, is ANet’s solution. If you get kicked as the “owner”, then find another party who won’t kick you. Griefers will grief, and life will move on.

well u can stop right there cuz anet has addreesed already today that they too aggree that my problem is a real problem and are looking into revamping their solution to fit better with our concerns so this is changing as we speak.

and your solution is just insulting really, you want me to survey them on wheather or not they r gana kick me b4 the party starts? you want to take away my time investment in the first place for playing the way i want to play?

TehPwnerer.7215:

Duke Nukem.6783:

vespers.1759:

No system will ever be flawless, but personally I love the new system. I’m really tired of openers leaving the dungeon (DC, spite, ragequit, repairs etc…) and kicking everyone else.

I had a guy in fractals refuse to ready up unless we all danced. nobody in the party had time for that so we kicked him… but it was him that opened and we were all returned to LA.

4 other people do not deserve to be at the mercy of one stupid person. 2 vote kick is already bad enough.

thats an unusual circomstance but if you had known he was the opener i guess u wuda shut up and danced huh? besides there were probably signs he was immature before that and you cuda left long ago.

anyway if 1 person starts a party then yes you do deserve to be at that person’s mercy. 99% of the time ul b fine ESPECIALLY if we implement my leaver solution

Dude I’m actually done replying to you after this, but try and at least understand what I am about to say.

The person who FORMS the group is not always the person to ENTER THE DUNGEON. Dungeon owner =/= party leader. That’s the problem with this.

Also, the fact that you really see no flaw in 4 people getting kicked cause 1 person leaves or gets kicked is just….

P.S. food for thought in my last reply to you; browsers come with a built-in spellchecker.

im ignoring u on party leader vs opener cuz its irrelivent and derailing

but i think if you read my solution on my first post you will c i did suggest a change for the opener leaving, so obviously i do see a problem with that, as for kicking the opener? the only problem i see with that is the opener can be kicked at all, in gw1 i had total control of any party i created no questions asked no exceptions, thats the way it should b here.

Aguri.2896:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Aguri.2896:

I don’t understand where all the complaints about kicking are coming from. I’ve been playing for a year and a half (3,900 hours play time I think?) and have done many dungeon runs (including speed runs) with pugs and have only been kicked twice before, once as an engi and another time as a thief (because 4 warriors for CoF p1 isn’t enough apparently) both before even entering the dungeon. The new system is fine,
do you know how disappointing it is to get all the way to Mai Trin on a level 19 fractal only for the host to rage quit because we wiped -one- time? If you get kicked a lot you might want to consider what you as a player can do differently next time.

u kinda just answered your own question about the kick system with thsoe 2 experiences of yours but lets broaden the question for a second

what if some people in the group want to do the mai glitch and some dont? some might wana kick over that, what if their is another argument in the group? u have no right to hijack the party from the opener over this no matter what, EVER

Even if the owner is someone who afk’s mid-dungeon to make dinner, something he knew he would have to do in advance?

Also, if you notice my two experiences are before entering the dungeon, so it’s not like I had my progress erased. On top of that, it is 2 times out of several hundred.. not often enough to be a problem. Not nearly enough to complain about.

if the dungeon owner wants to have a slow relaxed run where he can take a break and make something to eat then thats his choice he created the party. im not saying its polite and i certainly wudnt do that but its still his party and you can still leave. if your heavily invested and dont want to leave just wait, if you dont have time to wait then you also didnt plan ahead now did you?

but these examples are becoming increasingly niche and represent less than 1 in a thousand chances and i think most of us know that

vespers.1759:

No system will ever be flawless, but personally I love the new system. I’m really tired of openers leaving the dungeon (DC, spite, ragequit, repairs etc…) and kicking everyone else.

I had a guy in fractals refuse to ready up unless we all danced. nobody in the party had time for that so we kicked him… but it was him that opened and we were all returned to LA.

4 other people do not deserve to be at the mercy of one stupid person. 2 vote kick is already bad enough.

thats an unusual circomstance but if you had known he was the opener i guess u wuda shut up and danced huh? besides there were probably signs he was immature before that and you cuda left long ago.

anyway if 1 person starts a party then yes you do deserve to be at that person’s mercy. 99% of the time ul b fine ESPECIALLY if we implement my leaver solution

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

i have no idea why your comparing the lfg system to being a meta sheep, every1 uses the lfg system it says NOTHING about you..

and i already said in my soluiton that if the owner does leave then yes, they can be kicked, thats fine, so that solves your trolling concerns right there.

but they absolutly do desrve to be immune to kicks, its their party. if you dont like it find a new one, and if they troll or greif you report them but few dungeon owners will have any way to troll or greif you if we make the leaving/going offline change

In the current build (not the feature patch), if the owner leaves, the party is forced out of the instance. Even if the owner gets kicked after that, the other members have to start over. The new patch allows the players to continue through the dungeon, even if the owner leaves or gets kicked. Which is what will happen, and what you essentially just said would be the “solution”, so I’m not seeing where you’re going with this…

There’s also no dedicated party leader (unless you’re in tPvP, but even then it’s just for a name), so even if you start the party, you’re still another player. You also have the right to leave the party and find a new one if you don’t like it, even if you started the party yourself. If you can’t find a party to dungeon with, then try again another time. So, again, I’m not seeing where you’re going with this.

did you just intentionaly ignore the part of my solution where the party leader getting kicked still closes the instance? u did didnt you….the change in my version is that the leader (or opener if you really insist) leaving will not close the dungeon but kicking the opener will

Aguri.2896:

I don’t understand where all the complaints about kicking are coming from. I’ve been playing for a year and a half (3,900 hours play time I think?) and have done many dungeon runs (including speed runs) with pugs and have only been kicked twice before, once as an engi and another time as a thief (because 4 warriors for CoF p1 isn’t enough apparently) both before even entering the dungeon. The new system is fine,
do you know how disappointing it is to get all the way to Mai Trin on a level 19 fractal only for the host to rage quit because we wiped -one- time? If you get kicked a lot you might want to consider what you as a player can do differently next time.

u kinda just answered your own question about the kick system with thsoe 2 experiences of yours but lets broaden the question for a second

what if some people in the group want to do the mai glitch and some dont? some might wana kick over that, what if their is another argument in the group? u have no right to hijack the party from the opener over this no matter what, EVER

FriskiestSpoon.6289:

Duke Nukem.6783:

FriskiestSpoon.6289:

I’d say farmers are more hostile to those that inadvertently mess with their farming spot.

This just sounds to me like you are joining groups that have requirements you don’t fit. If making your own lfg is too much trouble, then don’t complain about being kicked from groups you don’t belong in.

uhhh r u saying the person who MADE the group, joined a group they were not qualified for?

Uhhh, you edited your post after I replied to say you were the one opening the group. Which if people are joining your groups and changing the description from what it was originally, thats not right. But you only changed it after people got on you about joining groups you don’t belong in. Seems, fishy to me…

u must be delusional the only post i edited was my OP and i only added the solution line to that……

TehPwnerer.7215:

Duke Nukem.6783:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

If you don’t want to be kicked then don’t join speed runs with your sup-par build and your lack of experience.

Make your own group and specify you want a slow inexperienced casual run.

i love the jerks who instantly assume im joining parties that im unqualified for when i clearly said these concerns are about being the opener

Well he’s being passive aggressive about how he wants to dungeons compared to how others do them. Just ignore him, honestly.

we would LOVE to ignore him but to continue doing that we need KICK IMMUNITY

TehPwnerer.7215:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

If you don’t want to be kicked then don’t join speed runs with your sup-par build and your lack of experience.

Make your own group and specify you want a slow inexperienced casual run.

lol way to not make yourself sound like a total knob, champ.

indeed, he thinks i should have to defend myself from his kind before the party even begins? sheesh

ZudetGambeous.9573:

If you don’t want to be kicked then don’t join speed runs with your sup-par build and your lack of experience.

Make your own group and specify you want a slow inexperienced casual run.

i love the jerks who instantly assume im joining parties that im unqualified for when i clearly said these concerns are about being the opener

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

1, u just equated the lfg system with those pugs, thats wrong

2. i might choose not sometimes say “casual” run in my description, but it is still not enough to stop someone who doesnt know they are a meta pug from coming into a party and barking at people for not doing things the “right” way and guess what? sometimes they bring a friend….we need protection from this

Did you just say that lfg (looking for group) and pugs (pick up group) are entirely different? Because they look pretty similar to me.

You also said that you do fractal runs at 4am. When the vast majority of players are asleep (depending on what your time zone is). Of course it’s going to take a long time to find people for your party. And who wants to wait around? When I use the LFG tool (because, you know, it’s there for a reason), my party fills up pretty fast, regardless of what time of day it is. Perhaps you just have bad luck?

Duke Nukem.6783:

the solution is to make the dungeon persist after the owner has left but NOT if the owner is kicked, thats all

Assuming that the dungeon owner is a god and should be immune to kicks, despite possibly being a griefer him/herself? Dungeon owners are players too, and can be trolls, so why keep their immunity? Especially if the other players actually WANT to keep running the dungeon. The owner leaves to troll, and the players are back to square one. It’s not a fun time for anyone (except for the troll).

Duke Nukem.6783:

i agree with you about the going offline thing if the owner leaves then yes ownershp should change

but about “fault” you are wrong, this is a matter of perspective and it does not matter, you do not come into my house and tell me how to do things and you do not come into my party and order me around either, if im not good enough and im the one who started the party, then you are overqualified for the party, and that is YOUR fault.

There’s a reason why this is a game and not real life. The dungeon is not your living space, you do not own it (despite having the title of dungeon owner simply because you started the instance), and thus- … I keep reading that you’re the one starting the party. So… don’t start the party, be a part of someone else’s, and see if that changes.

i have no idea why your comparing the lfg system to being a meta sheep, every1 uses the lfg system it says NOTHING about you..

and i already said in my soluiton that if the owner does leave then yes, they can be kicked, thats fine, so that solves your trolling concerns right there.

but they absolutly do desrve to be immune to kicks, its their party. if you dont like it find a new one, and if they troll or greif you report them but few dungeon owners will have any way to troll or greif you if we make the leaving/going offline change

FriskiestSpoon.6289:

I’d say farmers are more hostile to those that inadvertently mess with their farming spot.

This just sounds to me like you are joining groups that have requirements you don’t fit. If making your own lfg is too much trouble, then don’t complain about being kicked from groups you don’t belong in.

uhhh r u saying the person who MADE the group, joined a group they were not qualified for?

VOLTCIEAGE.3029:

Duke Nukem.6783:

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

VOLTCIEAGE.3029:

no opener system is good we need new kicking/party owner system

if i start the party then it should be up to me who stays and who goes, il admit if i want to LEAVE the party then they should get their own instance but if i get kicked then yes the dungeon should close.

Sounds like you can’t decide what you want. You’re okay with leaving your dungeon-mates to fend for themselves in a dungeon, but don’t want them to continue playing if you’re kicked. Don’t forget that it takes only two people to kick someone; that leaves two others who may not really get a say in this. This update is for those two others who may not have wanted you kicked, but got kicked anyways.

Sure, there are plenty of griefers in PUG runs, but I’m not okay with being kicked from a dungeon simply because the owner D/C’ed or abandoned his teammates.

i know exactly what i want, i never leave anyway and its TOO EASY to get kicked in the elitist dungeon community, this update will just isolate even more people from dungeons and give thos pugs more power that htey dont deserve, this is a far bigger problem than the opener leaving as we would assume the person who put hte effort in to form a party would be the most dedicated

You seem to be forgetting that not everyone who runs dungeons are elitist speed-runners dedicated to, well… dungeons. I may not run dungeons regularly, but I do enjoy teaming up with guildmates and friends to clear some paths. It’s tedious to have to restart an instance simply because the dungeon owner “left” for one reason or another.

Besides, the dungeon owner is ONLY the person who initiates the dungeon run. They do not have to do a thing to recruit party members, even if many do. They could be the least dedicated person in the party, but if they start the dungeon, they have all the power. Not cool.

This update definitely takes things in the right direction, allowing players to keep their progress if the dungeon owner leaves/DC’s/gets kicked/whatever.

starting the party is more work and requires more time than any1 else and starting the dungeon means that you can’t leave while every1 else mills around in lions arch or even does a boss while they wait for the party to fill, so it is a bigger commitment and does take dedication, if you need proof of that just look how fast the 5th person always shows up in a fractal at 4 in the morning, the 2nd person takes 30 minutes sometimes but the 5th person is always there seconds after the party hits 4 ppl, why? because they DONT WANT TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT OF WAITING IN A PARTY!!!!

i can accept that the owner of D/cing should not close the dungeon, but we can do that WITHOUT changing the system simply by making the dungeon last aslong as the original owner isnt kicked, nobody deserves to hijack my party, not if they think im bad, not if they dont like me, not if they think im slow because it is MY party and it is based exclusivley off of MY standards. if they dont like it they can make THEIR party and base it off of THEIR standards.

so much dedication , iam looking for party members and somebody only join my party and run through portal to open dung , such a hard work . We need party leader who can kick , inv etc not dung opener who becomes god doing nothing . party leader should be changed after 10 mins of beeing offline then next person get it and party keep going . Right now i see many idiots who only open dung and then start lfg but they are noobs as hell and you cant kick them because they opened so you have to suffer because you dont want to waste 50% of dung . there are some idiots who starts blaming people without any reason but mostly on my speedruns parties when somebody is blamed it was his/her fault .

i agree with you about the going offline thing if the owner leaves then yes ownershp should change

but about “fault” you are wrong, this is a matter of perspective and it does not matter, you do not come into my house and tell me how to do things and you do not come into my party and order me around either, if im not good enough and im the one who started the party, then you are overqualified for the party, and that is YOUR fault.

TehPwnerer.7215:

This needed to be changed. Person who walked into the dungeon leaves after a long run in Arah or Fractals? Everyone gets kicked.

No other MMO does that – or should do that.

The system can be revamped, but the dungeon “owner” system was flawed and I’m glad to see it go.

the solution is to make the dungeon persist after the owner has left but NOT if the owner is kicked, thats all

Sorin.4310:

Duke Nukem.6783:

i do not pug and i do things my own way.

You don’t PUG and yet you are concerned about getting kicked out of groups when using the LFG system. Am I missing something?

I find your hostility in this thread ironic, considering your first sentence in your original post. Just shows there are jerks in every aspect of the game. I use the LFG tool to do 4-5 dungeons a day usually, and not once have I ever seen a person get yelled at/kicked for not running “metas”, except for in cases where the LFG clearly stated the “ping gear, know skips” stuff. I do see people getting kicked when they refuse to do things like stand in a brazier in CoF and not telling us that it’s their first time there, despite us trying to explain it. IMO, this is an okay kick. This isn’t “not following the meta”, this is just bad playing and you’ll get kicked for it.

And nothing is stopping you from making our own LFG with “no skips, casual, play how you want” groups. Trust me, the speed clearing people don’t want to play with you and will avoid that group. There will be plenty of people interested in that, seeing as how a “I hate zerk” thread opens up on this forum every 17 minutes.

1, u just equated the lfg system with those pugs, thats wrong

2. i might choose not sometimes say “casual” run in my description, but it is still not enough to stop someone who doesnt know they are a meta pug from coming into a party and barking at people for not doing things the “right” way and guess what? sometimes they bring a friend….we need protection from this

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

VOLTCIEAGE.3029:

no opener system is good we need new kicking/party owner system

if i start the party then it should be up to me who stays and who goes, il admit if i want to LEAVE the party then they should get their own instance but if i get kicked then yes the dungeon should close.

Sounds like you can’t decide what you want. You’re okay with leaving your dungeon-mates to fend for themselves in a dungeon, but don’t want them to continue playing if you’re kicked. Don’t forget that it takes only two people to kick someone; that leaves two others who may not really get a say in this. This update is for those two others who may not have wanted you kicked, but got kicked anyways.

Sure, there are plenty of griefers in PUG runs, but I’m not okay with being kicked from a dungeon simply because the owner D/C’ed or abandoned his teammates.

i know exactly what i want, i never leave anyway and its TOO EASY to get kicked in the elitist dungeon community, this update will just isolate even more people from dungeons and give thos pugs more power that htey dont deserve, this is a far bigger problem than the opener leaving as we would assume the person who put hte effort in to form a party would be the most dedicated

You seem to be forgetting that not everyone who runs dungeons are elitist speed-runners dedicated to, well… dungeons. I may not run dungeons regularly, but I do enjoy teaming up with guildmates and friends to clear some paths. It’s tedious to have to restart an instance simply because the dungeon owner “left” for one reason or another.

Besides, the dungeon owner is ONLY the person who initiates the dungeon run. They do not have to do a thing to recruit party members, even if many do. They could be the least dedicated person in the party, but if they start the dungeon, they have all the power. Not cool.

This update definitely takes things in the right direction, allowing players to keep their progress if the dungeon owner leaves/DC’s/gets kicked/whatever.

starting the party is more work and requires more time than any1 else and starting the dungeon means that you can’t leave while every1 else mills around in lions arch or even does a boss while they wait for the party to fill, so it is a bigger commitment and does take dedication, if you need proof of that just look how fast the 5th person always shows up in a fractal at 4 in the morning, the 2nd person takes 30 minutes sometimes but the 5th person is always there seconds after the party hits 4 ppl, why? because they DONT WANT TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT OF WAITING IN A PARTY!!!!

i can accept that the owner of D/cing should not close the dungeon, but we can do that WITHOUT changing the system simply by making the dungeon last aslong as the original owner isnt kicked, nobody deserves to hijack my party, not if they think im bad, not if they dont like me, not if they think im slow because it is MY party and it is based exclusivley off of MY standards. if they dont like it they can make THEIR party and base it off of THEIR standards.

this update will be very bad for non elitist dungeon runners they should make it so the owner cant be kicked but can willingly surrender the party’s control to someone else

Blade Syphon.4325:

Sarrs.4831:

I think that at worst, it will be a neutral change.

For every malevolent player out there, there are half a dozen who do not understand, do not care, or don’t pay attention to dungeon ownership.

So basically, you don’t want to be held accountable for your sub-par skill in a group that may or may not be the cause of it wiping, but you’re perfectly okay kicking people who are “Meany heads” to you when they call you on your inability to play your roll properly to the group’s composition.

Sounds to me that if people like you are in the majority, this change to the dungeons is a very needed one on that level alone, to say nothing about the sheer number of technical hiccups this is finally going to fix.

Just because you started the party doesn’t mean you’re suddenly not required to live up to the standards people expect when running a dungeon, or are some how immune to being kicked because you want to play sub-optimally in a pick up group setting.

If this change bothers you that much, than just run it with your Guild.

wow you are exactly why this is a bad update

first off being polite and respectful and friendly is more important than doing well, this is a GAME we are here to have fun, besides im not bad , not bad at all, i have acheived lv 50 fractals and do them regularly with no complaint, but i DO NOT zerk, i do not pug and i do things my own way.

and while it is their oppinion that someone is sub par (and this may or may not be true but it is irrelivent) you do not get to go to a party in real life and tell the owner of the house you dont like the music so you are taking over just because you brought more friends, so yea starting the party DOES mean EXACTLY that, my party, my rules, dont like it? find a new one

and dont tell any1 to run it with just their guild, guilds are not that important in this game and some people dont even have one, while i do have a guild its a very small pool of recruitment and i bet less than 10 ppl are geared for 50 fractals and of those 10 how many r up at 4am when i like to do them? so no thats not a solution

ArchCalder.3258:

Duke Nukem.6783:

VOLTCIEAGE.3029:

no opener system is good we need new kicking/party owner system

if i start the party then it should be up to me who stays and who goes, il admit if i want to LEAVE the party then they should get their own instance but if i get kicked then yes the dungeon should close.

Sounds like you can’t decide what you want. You’re okay with leaving your dungeon-mates to fend for themselves in a dungeon, but don’t want them to continue playing if you’re kicked. Don’t forget that it takes only two people to kick someone; that leaves two others who may not really get a say in this. This update is for those two others who may not have wanted you kicked, but got kicked anyways.

Sure, there are plenty of griefers in PUG runs, but I’m not okay with being kicked from a dungeon simply because the owner D/C’ed or abandoned his teammates.

i know exactly what i want, i never leave anyway and its TOO EASY to get kicked in the elitist dungeon community, this update will just isolate even more people from dungeons and give thos pugs more power that htey dont deserve, this is a far bigger problem than the opener leaving as we would assume the person who put hte effort in to form a party would be the most dedicated

VOLTCIEAGE.3029:

no opener system is good we need new kicking/party owner system

if i start the party then it should be up to me who stays and who goes, il admit if i want to LEAVE the party then they should get their own instance but if i get kicked then yes the dungeon should close.

the dungeon community is the most hostile, most unfriendly, most eager to kick community in this game, and their is almost no fixing that. one of the only ways to be safe in a long run is to be the opener. this update will only give dungeon elitists more power to kick the person WHO STARTED THE PARTY. this update is just going to make them more hostile and aggressive and now theirs no protection from that.

its also a problem for dungeon sellers who can now be kicked by the buyer although i dont really like runners anyways.

i dont wana play the meta, i dont always wana roll swamp i dont wana keep a set of full zerker armor to do the catacombs and i dont wana rush past every enemy in the game just to quickly do the boss chest. and now their is no way for me to safely join a dungeon. you have taken away one of the only things i still do in this game anet.

SOLUTION
make it so the dungeon does persist if the owner goes offline and they can be kicked after being offline for a set amount of time (lets say 5-10 mins?) but the dungeon will NOT persist if they are kicked

heres a suggestion, tell us what CDI means instead of assuming that way you dont block out an entire group of new players……..

and ruin the distintness of each class? i consider the few “all professions” sets out there to be heresy we certainly dont need more of them

so this is still happening to me on occasion and this is absolutly unacceptable, do u realize anet, that it takes far more than 5 minutes to find one person for a high level fractal late at night? its bad enough you remove our listing thats inadvisable in itself but to count it as excessive messaging to re post this was nothing but thoughtless, i dont have much sympathy for the “its in beta” argument either as its been in beta for a year

not only are they ridiculously hard but they are not challenging at all, they are fustrating.

why do i have to do the entire thing once through before i can even attempt them?

why are they the WORST kind of acheivments where i have to start over if i dont do it EXACTLY right, thats not fun, that doesnt reward experimentation that encourages me to go read a guide and then borringly sludge through it

why am i nearly forced to get a full group for some of the acheivments to make them even remotely easy?

this type of content was a huge mistake anet i love dry top and all but the actual quests are terrible

aris.9567:

Great idea!!! I have wanted housing for such a long time!!! This would be the PERFECT way to input it into the game!!! Also love your ideas for the different rooms and such!!! Sure hope this is made!!! This would be AWESOME!!! However I don’t really like the idea of it being another crafting profession…

it needs to have a sense of progression, if not a crafting profession then what? i understand that that might sound boring considering how all of this games otehr crafting skills are stand around and do the same thing over and over but thats why is uggested it like this in the first place to get AWAY from all that stand still and grind

dislike, its nice to have rare items people can work for and eventually earn, not everything should be easy to get its nice to struggle for things you want it makes them worth having

Behellagh.1468:

John Smith, the market dev.

id love to hear from him on this =p but that other post with a similar (mind you not identical) suggestion never did reach a consensus

Obtena.7952:

I’d like to know what makes people think bumping any thread means it’s more likely to be taken seriously. I would think the opposite, especially on this thread, considering what JS has already explained many times.

what is JS? and i am not simply bumping a thread i am responding to posts when i get around to it on an issue i dont feel is settled

CureForLiving.5360:

DeWolfe.2174:

I wholeheartedly agree with this. GW2 needs to branch off from a “look what I killed” game and into becoming more diversified. Two examples of success franchises without combat would be “the Sims” and “Farmville”. GW2 should have customizable housing and a garden. The shear volume of virtual goods that could be added to the gem store could justify the development cost.

MMOs usually require some diversity as player can get burned out rather quickly by only a single form of gameplay. These non-combat gameplay forms (if done right) also have a slightly longer investment potential and can easily be scaled up.

DeWolfe.2174:

Dusty Moon.4382:

Want housing – go play in the sandbox where PvPers can knock it down and make you start all over.

Considering I JUST posted about developing more social responsibility in gamer, I’d be for this. IF, and it’s a requirement, damaging another individuals “stuff” branded you a criminal. Where your character would be placed in a jail and no other character on the account could be played. Not until restitution’s were paid in full. Essentially, all you could do is log into that one character and walk around a little instanced jail cell. What might also be fun would be using this jail as a wall of shame. Thus, players could see who was in jail. Maybe a rating kept of it too.

This would be interesting, if slightly annoying to the sort of players who would constantly do stuff that get’s them put in jail :P
Although I guess you could build a whole meta around the jail. Have the characters try and escape the jail, give them a reasonable chance at success or failure.

right, we really need this variety in gw2 for the game to have any longjevity cuz im not gaan stick around here for 3 to 5 years or more just to kill different colored griffons and unlock a slightly different sword once a month

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Duke Nukem.6783:

Wanze.8410:

Duke Nukem.6783:

mtpelion.4562:

How about a compromise?

You can now buy the lowest listing (the undercutter) or the highest listing. The ones in the middle are still off limits until the ends have been bought out.

This lets you reward the only guy who didn’t undercut by buying his item first if you want to.

if we are going to allow that why not allow me to pick the one that didnt undercut by 1c, as iv said before undercutting is fine and natural and it has to be there, undercutting by 1c however….does NOT

Another shameless necro on a dead horse…

really? cuz we just started taking about compromise that sure sounds like progress to me, u mark my words anet will make a change to this feature someday and u can resist it all u want but it will come

No they won’t. We know this for a fact because of the following:

1) There is no problem, thus no solution is needed.

2) Why spend days rewriting code to benefit one person?

it is your opinion that it is not a problem, , (and 1 and 2 are really the exact same thing) just voice YOUR opinion dont speak for any1 else

I don’t speak on opinions. I speak on facts derived from sound economic principals. And the current fact of all this is that the economy is working well, thus no change is needed to satisfy the opinions and needs of one person.

can you please present your sound evidence that it is only the opinion of one person?

am i rich yet mom?

SkyShroud.2865:

no persistent effect in overflow system
in the end, it will be nothing but instances and more instances
it will never be on par with game that design to implement housing and guild housing from the start

oh rly cuz the best housing system iv ever seen in a video game, runescape, didnt even think it up till about 8 years in and they merged it seamlessly with the economy and every other reward system in the game that made it rewarding on its own and with the other skills.
instances have NOTHING to do with quality, saying that something wont work cuz it will just be lots of instances is like saying loot wont be exciting because itl be just a bunch of stuff you can sell, it sure will be! and thats kinda the point instancing stuff allows us to give everyone their cake and let them eat it to, or decorate it with bejeweled throwns that certainly shouldnt be on your cake if you plan to eat it at all unless you plan on giving it to that one friend you dont really like but she has a firm bum so you keep her around.

and if your going to tell me the gw2 servers cant handle each player having an elaborate detailed instance,…..dont, lots of mmo have already done it and we already have our own instance for each character which could quite easily be merged into one.

Aeolus.3615:

Game has instances and overflows, i dont see how this could work.
Lineage had a funny guild housing system but if i recall was a megaservers w/o overflows of it.

your post confuses me as instances are the solution not the problem, every house goes in its own area in the exact same spot as every other house…..whats the problem?

Vayne.8563:

So yeah, I like that whole portal stone idea. Too bad I have so many sylvari and Asuran characters. You know a charr, human or norn can portal into their home instance and they have all sorts of merchants.

Sylvari you can’t use the portal stone and say, buy a salvage kit, because you don’t have a vendor in there. Admittedly you can sell to the repair guy.

Why should some home instances have more options than others? Why isn’t there a merchant in the Sylvari or Asuran home instance.

What, only the big people get merchants? lol

because “equality” is another word for “everything is the same and boring”

its perfectly enjoyable that they are all different and have their own advantages and disavantages

vpchelko.4261:

no and never plz

my how thoughtful…..