Disable Mining,fishing and Skate during bounty would be good

[(PSN)Sgt_Buttscratch]

Here is life from another angle...not everyone is into efficiency. Some play like to have fun as well. Fortuna just dropped on PS4. I started a top tier bounty, Made my way to every part of the bounty to help. 2 players AW across the map to objective as quick as possible, myself and another random were making our way there having some fun, grinding rails, falling off...falling off some more.

So maybe we are not all leeching...we are just having fun. new map, new excitement. Why would I try make my experience of it brisk?

[MagPrime]

6 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Ignore is not tied to grouping so you could end up with people that are on your ignore list.

Hm I thought they changed that this year.

[Softballbryan]

Too many players for an ignore option, too random. 

Sharing resources is a good idea...

Public option is a mixed bag.... sometimes it’s a blast!

[Vosenedich]

48 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Then skip Cetus and go into PoE and do the missions that pop up while everyone farms. We arent talking about you 4- we are talking about the people in PuGs who just run off and farm making it hard for the rest of the group. There is 2 option here to solve the problem. Kick option or disable fishing and mining during bounies. Pick one or provide a solution.

44 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

NOTE I SAID BOUNTIES and no ALL missions. Read what;s being said instead of replying to reply

You should realize that Cetus has no option to go straight into the plains and then get a bounty from an NPC. You can get incursions which are not a certain thing to occur, nor are they on nearly the same drop table as bounties; at this point the "disable secondary equipment" option doesn't work for us anymore, in fact it hampers our gameplay while only tangentially attempting to solve the "leecher problem". And in terms of Fortuna, we can certainly go into the vallis first and then pick a bounty from the NPC, this however doesn't solve or clarify the issue that our resource farming equipment (according to the OP's starting proposition) would be disabled.

Secondly, I did pick an option. In fact, I made a somewhat point-by-point view of why the kick option is a far better option, and one that we've been hoping to get for a while now. However, as Lowk721 mentioned, kicking is abusable; I fear the only implementation that might be acceptable is kicking while out of mission (Orbiter/Cetus/Fortuna/Relay/Dojo), as a party management tool, exclusively.

Lastly, I'll add a small note that is meant for you @ThumpumGood, and I hope to leave any unnecessary confrontation at that:

Spoiler

Apparently you couldn't be bothered to read through the last paragraph of my previous answer, just like you would rather send out three posts with two nearly identical replies and then have a hypocritical call-out to somebody's text comprehension skills. This kind of attitude adds nothing to the conversation. Please take a moment to address others with the same kind of tolerance and understanding you expect from others.

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by Vosenedich
"plains" was used instead of "vallis" in one sentence

[Dabnician]

19 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Why force players to play with people they dont want to.?

Yet you all literally have a way to select "friends only" from the mission launch screen.

[ThumpumGood]

8 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

You should realize that Cetus has no option to go straight into the plains and then get a bounty from an NPC. You can get incursions which are not a certain thing to occur, nor are they on nearly the same drop table as bounties; at this point the "disable secondary equipment" option doesn't work for us anymore, in fact it hampers our gameplay while only tangentially attempting to solve the "leecher problem". And in terms of Fortuna, we can certainly go into the vallis first and then pick a bounty from the NPC, this however doesn't solve or clarify the issue that our resource farming equipment (according to the OP's starting proposition) would be disabled.

Secondly, I did pick an option. In fact, I made a somewhat point-by-point view of why the kick option is a far better option, and one that we've been hoping to get for a while now. However, as Lowk721 mentioned, kicking is abusable; I fear the only implementation that might be acceptable is kicking while out of mission (Orbiter/Cetus/Fortuna/Relay/Dojo), as a party management tool, exclusively.

Lastly, I'll add a small note that is meant for you @ThumpumGood, and I hope to leave any unnecessary confrontation at that:

  Reveal hidden contents

Apparently you couldn't be bothered to read through the last paragraph of my previous answer, just like you would rather send out three posts with two nearly identical replies and then have a hypocritical call-out to somebody's text comprehension skills. This kind of attitude adds nothing to the conversation. Please take a moment to address others with the same kind of tolerance and understanding you expect from others.

 

Yes Cetus DOES have the option. Maybe not the one YOU are talking about where there is a bounty guy right outside the door, but if you go into the PoE and start farming, good ol Lotus drops a mission on you.

[Vosenedich]

2 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Yes Cetus DOES have the option. Maybe not the one YOU are talking about where there is a bounty guy right outside the door, but if you go into the PoE and start farming, good ol Lotus drops a mission on you.

8 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

(...) You can get incursions which are not a certain thing to occur, nor are they on nearly the same drop table as bounties; (...)

You couldn't get to the second line of my reply this time.

[ThumpumGood]

4 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

You couldn't get to the second line of my reply this time.

So advocate for a dude outside like Orb Vallis has.

And Im so tired of *Well I have a group of friends... yeah, so does everyone but we all end up pugging and it's miserable because of all of the crap. Stop adding in negativity without a replacement to the idea presented. Kick, disable or ingnore list connection. Those are the three ideas on the table. Dont like any, add one of your own or just shut up. No is not a helpful response. This wouldnt work because but his might work is how this kind of discission should go. No is NEVER good when you have so many people who ruin the gaming experience for others because they wanna do their own thing but dont wanna miss out on the bounty rewards. Im sorry but you never asked me to carry you. I would say yes if you asked but if you're just gonna do it and treat me like garbage, you can forget it. I'll host migrate you out of the game.

[Vosenedich]

41 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

So advocate for a dude outside like Orb Vallis has.

That is actually a great idea. I'd love having a Cetus-stand in for jumping straight into Cetus and picking up bounties (or refreshing them after completing) without having to go through that damned gate twice.

That being said:

41 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

And Im so tired of *Well I have a group of friends... yeah, so does everyone but we all end up pugging and it's miserable because of all of the crap. Stop adding in negativity without a replacement to the idea presented. Kick, disable or ingnore list connection. Those are the three ideas on the table. Dont like any, add one of your own or just shut up. No is not a helpful response. This wouldnt work because but his might work is how this kind of discission should go. No is NEVER good when you have so many people who ruin the gaming experience for others because they wanna do their own thing but dont wanna miss out on the bounty rewards. Im sorry but you never asked me to carry you. I would say yes if you asked but if you're just gonna do it and treat me like garbage, you can forget it. I'll host migrate you out of the game.

On the subject of my refutals, you should go back and pay more attention to what I'm saying. On the first reply I was advocating the "Kick" option, as at that point that seemed like the better option, and I made a case as to why this option benefited the game over the others presented. However, due to what other players in this conversation have stated, I realized the flaws on that option outweight the benefits. And this is why I have been discussing.

While I agree that a discussion on game design shouldn't include flat rejections, this is not what I've done. There's a huge difference between "refusing" and "refuting"; I'm not denying the problem exists, and that we need to fix it, what I am doing is pointing out where the options presented have critical flaws which would lead to more harm than help.

On the comment about "Well, I have a group of friends", notice that the intention of my posts was not to deny the existence of the problem, or offer a way to bypass the issue of PuGs, but rather to point out that other ways of playing the game would be negatively impacted by changes aimed exclusively at the issues present in one of them. Side-effects are an issue that must be kept in check when talking about game design.

-----------------------

You are right, however, on the fact we need to provide more alternatives. So let's break the problem down to it's components first:

{1} A percentage of players refuses to cooperate with the main objective
{2} The mayority of incidents of {1} occurs in open world areas
{3} The mayority of incidents of {2} are related to mining, fishing and/or conservation
{4} "Leechers" care about either:
  {4a} Efficiency
  {4b} Minimum effort

And some of the aspects we need to be aware of:

{A} In open worlds, bounties can be selected from the town hub.
{B} In Orb Vallis, an NPC can grant bounties while in an active game.
{C} The game does not differentiate in mechanics when dealing with matchmaking settings (Solo mode pause being the exception).

So we need something that will deal with [1], [2] and [3] without affecting all other players and ways of playing the game. The proposed ideas so far:

"Kick" Option:
The ability to remove a player from the squad, either by mayority vote, or by a single action from the Host.
• Pros: Simple to implement, heavily discourages any kind of "leeching"
• Cons: Enables extremely toxic/exploitative behaviour.
• Worst case: Pre-made group of 3 toxic players in public matchmaking can continually take in new players and kick them, or wait until critical moments in a mission to maximize the griefing efforts, such as kicking the 4th player mid-way through a Hydrolist capture, thus denying them all efforts put in through Teralyst and Gantualist.

"Disable Equipment" Option:
While bounties are active, either by selecting them in the town hub or from an NPC (distinction made), disable the equipment used for farming.
• Pros: Simple to implement, discourages reputation farming.
• Cons: (If applied to all bounties) Affects players willingly splitting to cover multiple objectives and farms. (In all cases) Does not deal with player unwillingness to cooperate, nor other methods of farming.
• Worst case: Leechers continue as they are, shifting from material farming to Toroids.

Here's a few more propositions not mentioned before:
"Sharing" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal captures are shared with the entire squad, regardless of distance.
• Pros: Simple to implement, benefits currently affected players.
• Cons: Encourages or justifies leecher's activities.
• Worst case: Leecher numbers climb, as they can now justify their contribution to the run as their efforts grant material gain to the squad.

"Density" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal spawn rates are relative to the number of nearby squad members, with a full squad granting higher chances of spawning materials. This option can be combined with a local material sharing option.
• Pros: Lowers the effort-benefit ratio for Leechers
• Cons: Costly to implement, hard to balance, greatly hinders Solo players trying to farm resources.
• Worst case: The perception of grinding for solo players skyrockets, precisely the opposite effect to what was inteded with the current Fortuna release.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Vosenedich
removed an empty option, issue with using [] for bulleting being parsed as BB-code

[MagPrime]

19 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

That is actually a great idea. I'd love having a Cetus-stand in for jumping straight into Cetus and picking up bounties (or refreshing them after completing) without having to go through that damned gate twice.

That being said:

On the subject of my refutals, you should go back and pay more attention to what I'm saying. On the first reply I was advocating the "Kick" option, as at that point that seemed like the better option, and I made a case as to why this option benefited the game over the others presented. However, due to what other players in this conversation have stated, I realized the flaws on that option outweight the benefits. And this is why I have been discussing.

While I agree that a discussion on game design shouldn't include flat rejections, this is not what I've done. There's a huge difference between "refusing" and "refuting"; I'm not denying the problem exists, and that we need to fix it, what I am doing is pointing out where the options presented have critical flaws which would lead to more harm than help.

On the comment about "Well, I have a group of friends", notice that the intention of my posts was not to deny the existence of the problem, or offer a way to bypass the issue of PuGs, but rather to point out that other ways of playing the game would be negatively impacted by changes aimed exclusively at the issues present in one of them. Side-effects are an issue that must be kept in check when talking about game design.

-----------------------

You are right, however, on the fact we need to provide more alternatives. So let's break the problem down to it's components first:

{1} A percentage of players refuses to cooperate with the main objective
{2} The mayority of incidents of {1} occurs in open world areas
{3} The mayority of incidents of {2} are related to mining, fishing and/or conservation
{4} "Leechers" care about either:
  {4a} Efficiency
  {4b} Minimum effort

And some of the aspects we need to be aware of:

{A} In open worlds, bounties can be selected from the town hub.
{B} In Orb Vallis, an NPC can grant bounties while in an active game.
{C} The game does not differentiate in mechanics when dealing with matchmaking settings (Solo mode pause being the exception).

So we need something that will deal with [1], [2] and [3] without affecting all other players and ways of playing the game. The proposed ideas so far:

"Kick" Option:
The ability to remove a player from the squad, either by mayority vote, or by a single action from the Host.
• Pros: Simple to implement, heavily discourages any kind of "leeching"
• Cons: Enables extremely toxic/exploitative behaviour.
• Worst case: Pre-made group of 3 toxic players in public matchmaking can continually take in new players and kick them, or wait until critical moments in a mission to maximize the griefing efforts, such as kicking the 4th player mid-way through a Hydrolist capture, thus denying them all efforts put in through Teralyst and Gantualist.

"Disable Equipment" Option:
While bounties are active, either by selecting them in the town hub or from an NPC (distinction made), disable the equipment used for farming.
• Pros: Simple to implement, discourages reputation farming.
• Cons: (If applied to all bounties) Affects players willingly splitting to cover multiple objectives and farms. (In all cases) Does not deal with player unwillingness to cooperate, nor other methods of farming.
• Worst case: Leechers continue as they are, shifting from material farming to Toroids.

Here's a few more propositions not mentioned before:
"Sharing" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal captures are shared with the entire squad, regardless of distance.
• Pros: Simple to implement, benefits currently affected players.
• Cons: Encourages or justifies leecher's activities.
• Worst case: Leecher numbers climb, as they can now justify their contribution to the run as their efforts grant material gain to the squad.

"Density" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal spawn rates are relative to the number of nearby squad members, with a full squad granting higher chances of spawning materials. This option can be combined with a local material sharing option.
• Pros: Lowers the effort-benefit ratio for Leechers
• Cons: Costly to implement, hard to balance, greatly hinders Solo players trying to farm resources.
• Worst case: The perception of grinding for solo players skyrockets, precisely the opposite effect to what was inteded with the current Fortuna release.

@DatDarkOne

Warm up the cloning machine, we got a live one!

V, the only thing I would add to this is improved match making to encourage the creation of teams over rolling the dice with public.

[DatDarkOne]

5 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

@DatDarkOne

Warm up the cloning machine, we got a live one!

V, the only thing I would add to this is improved match making to encourage the creation of teams over rolling the dice with public.

Well I'll be damned.  Another fine Tenno who has taken up the role of Devil's Advocate on the forums. 

@Vosenedich thank you.  We need more good people who try to see the larger picture of things. 

[Vosenedich]

20 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

@DatDarkOne

Warm up the cloning machine, we got a live one!

V, the only thing I would add to this is improved match making to encourage the creation of teams over rolling the dice with public.

12 minutes ago, DatDarkOne said:

Well I'll be damned.  Another fine Tenno who has taken up the role of Devil's Advocate on the forums. 

@Vosenedich thank you.  We need more good people who try to see the larger picture of things. 

Awww, aren't you two the sweetest. Thanks for the positivity!

On the subject of matchmaking, I would look at the Honor system in League of Legends for inspiration. Admitedly, they have one of the most toxic (if not the most) communities, but their Honor initiative has had a greatly positive impact on that area. Lore-wise, Ordis could very well ask us to complete a survey of our last squad to improve his search of allies on our next mission, asking who was the most effective, most supportive or similar qualities. Then, when selecting to join a Public Game, instead of starting the search and jumping in, it will check if there are any squads with players that have received our accolades, and offer to join their active squads or to continue into random search mode.

This idea requires quite the investment of development time from DE however, so don't expect it to show up any time soon.

[MagPrime]

14 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

Awww, aren't you two the sweetest. Thanks for the positivity!

On the subject of matchmaking, I would look at the Honor system in League of Legends for inspiration. Admitedly, they have one of the most toxic (if not the most) communities, but their Honor initiative has had a greatly positive impact on that area. Lore-wise, Ordis could very well ask us to complete a survey of our last squad to improve his search of allies on our next mission, asking who was the most effective, most supportive or similar qualities. Then, when selecting to join a Public Game, instead of starting the search and jumping in, it will check if there are any squads with players that have received our accolades, and offer to join their active squads or to continue into random search mode.

This idea requires quite the investment of development time from DE however, so don't expect it to show up any time soon.

Honestly, I'd prefer a simple approach - select a planet, be given a short list of options.  

i.e., select defense, get a list of target waves.  Survival, target time, etc. With a secondary option of "speed run" "resource gathering" "unspecified"

This pairs you with people who have the same goal and we avoid rushers getting stuck with farmers, etc.

Won't get rid of leeching but, in my experience, the only way to make that happen is to go single player. /shrug

[Virtualxeon]

They can definitely make a compromise somewhere.

[Vosenedich]

4 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

Honestly, I'd prefer a simple approach - select a planet, be given a short list of options.  

i.e., select defense, get a list of target waves.  Survival, target time, etc. With a secondary option of "speed run" "resource gathering" "unspecified"

This pairs you with people who have the same goal and we avoid rushers getting stuck with farmers, etc.

Won't get rid of leeching but, in my experience, the only way to make that happen is to go single player. /shrug

I honestly think that is a simple and elegant way of solving it. It does have it's own issues however, such as how hard the population separation with it is. Consider the following case:

Survival Mission:
Options: Rotation A, Rotation B, Rotation C, 2 Full Rotations, Endurance

If Player 1 chooses the option to go to Rotation C, can he get paired with Player 2 who chose Rotation B? What about Player 3 choosing 2 Full Rotations?

Of course these are simple examples, and the likely answer after all is to do hard cuts around these ranges, simply having more hosts. But the risk is that with further segregated populations the game will tend to appear more single-player than multi-player.

[MagPrime]

4 minutes ago, Vosenedich said:

I honestly think that is a simple and elegant way of solving it. It does have it's own issues however, such as how hard the population separation with it is. Consider the following case:

Survival Mission:
Options: Rotation A, Rotation B, Rotation C, 2 Full Rotations, Endurance

If Player 1 chooses the option to go to Rotation C, can he get paired with Player 2 who chose Rotation B? What about Player 3 choosing 2 Full Rotations?

Of course these are simple examples, and the likely answer after all is to do hard cuts around these ranges, simply having more hosts. But the risk is that with further segregated populations the game will tend to appear more single-player than multi-player.

Make it a soft segregation.  If there is a conflict in matchmaking parameters, either give them the option to wait for other players or, go with unspecified parameters and you get paired simply with whomever is available. 

People change their minds.  There have been many times i jumped in to get the last 2 levels on something, every intention of leaving at first opportunity but wound up enjoying the team so much that I stayed for half an hour. 

 

[RX-3DR]

7 hours ago, Vosenedich said:

"Sharing" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal captures are shared with the entire squad, regardless of distance.
• Pros: Simple to implement, benefits currently affected players.
• Cons: Encourages or justifies leecher's activities.
• Worst case: Leecher numbers climb, as they can now justify their contribution to the run as their efforts grant material gain to the squad.

I'd like to point out that the "benefit" is entirely subjective and only people who need the resources or people who are obsessive with stockpiling non-essential resources benefit from it. If you're being given 20 Sapcaddies from someone fishing, there is almost no benefit to anyone. This also opens the flood-gates of leeching to Free-Roam as well. It goes beyond just encouraging and justifying leeching, it basically allows people to leech their way to absolute completion. The leecher will just move to either doing absolutely nothing because someone will get his gems and fishes, or he will repeatedly flip on a K-Drive around the elevator because it isn't shared and he can't leech it.

[Kevyne_Kicklighter]

On 2018-12-11 at 9:50 PM, EmberStar said:

Earlier, I went to the Vallis to go fishing.  I'm *pretty* sure that I set my mode to solo first.  But the game apparently disagreed, because I'd been zapping Tinks for a few minutes when suddenly people started joining my game.  Maybe I forgot, maybe the game glitched.  Either way, I was out there first, with NO bounty selected.

It happens because what I see is only a "+" sign and not a mode emblem to tell me on sight I'm in public or solo, then having to ABORT a mission WHEN I get to the location. Don't like getting abort counts like that, all because you do so many missions a night, and some are solo some are public, and will forget what mode you're playing on ... and there is no way to change it unless aborting the mission.

Can we get a conclave like choice screen? That way you're ensured you're in the right solo or group mode.

[(PSN)Derio23]

If you want to do bounties then you should select bounty from inside Fortuna and then it will matchmake you with players who also selected that bounty. If you just go straight out into the world you will be matched up with players who want to do whatever.

[YukimaruLegends]

Either solo it or make a premade, no one has to listen to you or do what you have to say. Your first mistake was going public.

[IgnatiuSgaming]

On 2018-12-13 at 2:22 AM, Vosenedich said:

That is actually a great idea. I'd love having a Cetus-stand in for jumping straight into Cetus and picking up bounties (or refreshing them after completing) without having to go through that damned gate twice.

That being said:

On the subject of my refutals, you should go back and pay more attention to what I'm saying. On the first reply I was advocating the "Kick" option, as at that point that seemed like the better option, and I made a case as to why this option benefited the game over the others presented. However, due to what other players in this conversation have stated, I realized the flaws on that option outweight the benefits. And this is why I have been discussing.

While I agree that a discussion on game design shouldn't include flat rejections, this is not what I've done. There's a huge difference between "refusing" and "refuting"; I'm not denying the problem exists, and that we need to fix it, what I am doing is pointing out where the options presented have critical flaws which would lead to more harm than help.

On the comment about "Well, I have a group of friends", notice that the intention of my posts was not to deny the existence of the problem, or offer a way to bypass the issue of PuGs, but rather to point out that other ways of playing the game would be negatively impacted by changes aimed exclusively at the issues present in one of them. Side-effects are an issue that must be kept in check when talking about game design.

-----------------------

You are right, however, on the fact we need to provide more alternatives. So let's break the problem down to it's components first:

{1} A percentage of players refuses to cooperate with the main objective
{2} The mayority of incidents of {1} occurs in open world areas
{3} The mayority of incidents of {2} are related to mining, fishing and/or conservation
{4} "Leechers" care about either:
  {4a} Efficiency
  {4b} Minimum effort

And some of the aspects we need to be aware of:

{A} In open worlds, bounties can be selected from the town hub.
{B} In Orb Vallis, an NPC can grant bounties while in an active game.
{C} The game does not differentiate in mechanics when dealing with matchmaking settings (Solo mode pause being the exception).

So we need something that will deal with [1], [2] and [3] without affecting all other players and ways of playing the game. The proposed ideas so far:

"Kick" Option:
The ability to remove a player from the squad, either by mayority vote, or by a single action from the Host.
• Pros: Simple to implement, heavily discourages any kind of "leeching"
• Cons: Enables extremely toxic/exploitative behaviour.
• Worst case: Pre-made group of 3 toxic players in public matchmaking can continually take in new players and kick them, or wait until critical moments in a mission to maximize the griefing efforts, such as kicking the 4th player mid-way through a Hydrolist capture, thus denying them all efforts put in through Teralyst and Gantualist.

"Disable Equipment" Option:
While bounties are active, either by selecting them in the town hub or from an NPC (distinction made), disable the equipment used for farming.
• Pros: Simple to implement, discourages reputation farming.
• Cons: (If applied to all bounties) Affects players willingly splitting to cover multiple objectives and farms. (In all cases) Does not deal with player unwillingness to cooperate, nor other methods of farming.
• Worst case: Leechers continue as they are, shifting from material farming to Toroids.

Here's a few more propositions not mentioned before:
"Sharing" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal captures are shared with the entire squad, regardless of distance.
• Pros: Simple to implement, benefits currently affected players.
• Cons: Encourages or justifies leecher's activities.
• Worst case: Leecher numbers climb, as they can now justify their contribution to the run as their efforts grant material gain to the squad.

"Density" Option:
All mining, fishing and animal spawn rates are relative to the number of nearby squad members, with a full squad granting higher chances of spawning materials. This option can be combined with a local material sharing option.
• Pros: Lowers the effort-benefit ratio for Leechers
• Cons: Costly to implement, hard to balance, greatly hinders Solo players trying to farm resources.
• Worst case: The perception of grinding for solo players skyrockets, precisely the opposite effect to what was inteded with the current Fortuna release.

Sharing will be good option

Let's hope DE put this features in-game to give benefit who carry leecher