Needs a Vote to kick feature Bad

[Dabnician]

On 2019-01-20 at 8:54 PM, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

I knew the dont go public or solo would be mentioned the game is meant to be played with other people.

That doesnt mean you have to play the game with every single person in the world, you can filter who you play with.

there are missions that call for teams, there are ones that call for specific teams (like when im tring to crack a riven and i ask 3 people for help) and there are missions that are just there to play.

[MagPrime]

2 hours ago, Sloan441 said:

One of the better solutions that I've ever seen proposed. 

Or you could just not worry about it and drive on. It's worked for six years and I've found the claims about /afk players and the like to be mostly hyperbole.

The amusing thing, for me, is that I've proposed each individual item over the years and were shot down repeatedly. 

I don't want a vote kick option that everyone else wants.  I see the benefit of having the ability to remove a player, for whatever reason, from the team.  But I don't see the need for it with how fast and easy Warframe missions are, especially when people make their own teams. 

And yes, I know people will still get leeches and it cuts off exposure to new people but a vote kick isn't the answer for this game. I love that DE pushes it's player base to be creative with its problem solving and I believe that a better solution will eventually be provided, something better than vote kick or "just make a team"

 

[LupisV0lk]

8 hours ago, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

This i dont get, so you'll complain vote to kick will get abused like your not getting abused right now. Makes no sense. So your assuming everyones a troll. You are in denial right now 

No it's called having been an online gamer for the past 10 years and see what kind of abuse a vote to kick option get's. Sorry that it utterly destroys your fragile world view kiddo.

[DatDarkOne]

30 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

The amusing thing, for me, is that I've proposed each individual item over the years and were shot down repeatedly. 

But MP, we worked so well together in our little two person team.  😁 

[MagPrime]

Just now, DatDarkOne said:

But MP, we worked so well together in our little two person team.  😁 

We do make a good pair. xD

[Yxivi]

How about no fish, gems and ore IF there is an active bounty? So fishers and miners are forced to make their solo instance.
I know that the drops are affected by bounty tier...the higher the tier, the more drop you will get. However, AFAIK when aiming for incursions, people will purposely fail a bounty so that the incursion will be at the rotation they wanted (tier 4-5 bounty = rotation c), I'm not sure if drops works the same. If it does, then fisher and miners can just do what people do with incursions, no need to "accidentally" join an active public bounty because you want to mine 1000 pyrol.

But that wouldn't stop the leechers who just want to have a free ride on everything, as in they're not fishing or mining, they really just want to do some other stuff outside the game while leaving the team to finish the mission for them. I cannot think of other way to prevent this from happening except having the ability to remove the problematic player from the team.
No damage contribution is not a good measure because I've been in a team with MR20+ players and despite spamming all my skills, I still have the lowest, sometimes 0% damage because they kill everything so fast, so yeah, that might hurt some decent players because a spammy Saryn can make them look like they're not doing anything at all. Also, RIP support frames.

I don't understand why people are so afraid of vote to kick. I've played games where they have the system, and while it's not a perfect system at least those games don't have parasites leeching every group they join because the moment you afk, you get your bunghole kicked.
"BuT iT cAn bE aBuSed!11!!!" The same way leechers are abusing the current system of having no system at all. And who says that the vote to kick can't be improved? Let's think...
Problem: People are afraid that they will be kicked if the group wanted a specific frame or build. Welp, why would you want to play with those people when they are looking for something else? It's their right to pick the member they want. It's part of team composition, I think it's better for everyone.
How to prevent from being abused: But of course you may argue that someone will probably kick anyone for some weird entertainment. So what if we're only able to vote kick ONCE in a party. Requires 3 votes for a 4-man party, 2 for 3-man.
Making it better: After the kick, the player will return to their orbiter (Cetus if in the Plains, Fortuna if in Orb Vallis) but they are auto-cued for matchmaking for the same mission/bounty they were kicked, so it saves you a few clicks to re-do the whole process of taking the mission/bounty.

Problem: Troll host kicks when the mission is complete or near completion.
How to prevent from being abused: Vote to kick (or kick, if it's a 2-man) will be disabled after a certain time or condition depending on the mission type.
Examples (this is just an example, it can be improved) : after wave 1 in defense, when the rescue cell have been reached, after the 1st vault in spy, when the capture has been spotted (not captured), after the 1st bounty, etc...
Making it better: Game needs to be changed so late join won't be possible. Because sometimes you start of with the mission already at 50%, this is very often on bounties, and because vote to kick will be disabled, leechers can still take advantage of late join, since they can just auto-cue until they late join a game and then they can have fun afk-ing without fear of being kicked.

Those are the only problems I can think of for now but seriously, it's so weird to see people defending leechers OR making it seem like it's the player's fault that they are playing public instead of doing solo or organized team, kinda reminds me of rape culture, they blame the victim not the offender.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Yxivi

[(PSN)OriginalSilthos]

23 hours ago, LupisV0lk said:

No it's called having been an online gamer for the past 10 years and see what kind of abuse a vote to kick option get's. Sorry that it utterly destroys your fragile world view kiddo.

Ive been online gaming since EQ ill let you figure out how long that is. Played tons of games with vote to kick and yes its had it problems but why do you think so many games have it. Again this wouldn't break the game and yes it could be improved on or if an even better system came out implement that instead. Funny the people who come to threads and throw stones. Im looking for a solution which is why i even posted this. 

10 hours ago, Yxivi said:

weird to see people defending leechers OR making it seem like it's the player's fault that they are playing public instead of doing solo or organized team, kinda reminds me of rape culture, they blame the victim not the offender.

Tons of people feel the same way and are constructively trying to  find a helpful solution for this. Vote to kick might not be the best answer but we're here looking for suggestions. Its a serious problem in this game. Its been posted multiple times for a reason.

[DatDarkOne]

9 hours ago, (XB1)Cubic Clem said:

And you must be blind, I often saw devs chime in on off topic and GD threads, so.. 

True.  They read them more than most realize.  They just don't comment much for a few reasons.  

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

4 hours ago, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

Ive been online gaming since EQ ill let you figure out how long that is.

Roughly 19 years? Some of us used to play on MUDs waaaaay before that even went into production. 😅

Does that make our points more valid? 

[(PSN)OriginalSilthos]

21 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Does that make our points more valid? 

That was in response to another post. It was actually even quoted above. Pretty much meant the same as the last ljne in your statement.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 hour ago, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

That was in response to another post. It was actually even quoted above. Pretty much meant the same as the last ljne in your statement.

I understood that. I'm just trying to figure out how to line up if we're aiming for seniority. 

I didn't bother responding to the rest because of this line:

6 hours ago, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

Played tons of games with vote to kick and yes its had it problems but why do you think so many games have it.

It acknowledges that the system has problems, so implementing it is not a good idea. Regarding why so many games have it, well I look at it this way, roughly 50% of any given population has sub-average IQ. 😉

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

......some men just want to watch the world burn.

[(XBOX)MindedThunder81]

I started a thread on a Votekick feature a long time ago and it too was met with a lot of negativity. The only real argument against a votekick feature is that players may abuse it, but even then they blow it way out of proportion.

Our best Idea was to initiate a votekick against a player after being AFK or too far from the rest of the squad after about 2 minutes. It would require all players to agree with the kick before separating the other player into their own private instance.

We also had to outline what constitutes as "AFK" because some of the anti-kickers thought that standing in a hallway with a soma killing enemies would get flagged as AFK. So for all intents and purposes, "AFK" would be defined by having no change of input for an extended period of time. ie: Putting a rock on your keyboard, putting a rubberband on a controller, or just simply doing nothing with no input.

 

A Votekick feature would be greatly appreciated and highly valued; however, the vocal majority do not want a votekick feature. So my suggestion would be to 

Add an easier way to report leeches/afk players (especially on consoles)

Or, for sake of simplicity and to free up time for Support or whoever reviews the reports

Add a Votekick automatically triggered after 2 minutes of inactivity OR after 3 minutes of being more than 300 meters away from the rest of the squad. When kicked, a player is put into a private session and their game is paused, so it doesn't automatically fail them.

EVEN IN PUBLIC SQUADS, WHERE THIS PROBLEM ACTUALLY IS. 

You don't go into recruiting to ask for AFK players or Leeches, so why would you in a Public Squad?

Giving players the option to kick a player would promote communication. A simple "Hey brb, gotta go to the bathroom/pay the pizza guy/deal with a spontaneous bloody nose" would be enough to let the rest of the squad know you're not just leeching, and to not kick you.

Before you weigh in just to say "No" please just take a moment to look at the community and believe for a moment that not all players are Trolls or Frame Elitists who just want to kick people who are playing a frame that may not be best suited to the mission type. And most times when players have the majority in a squad, they're running invite only squads anyway. (At least from my experience) And if you can't see it from that perspective, then maybe you're just afraid that the votekick would be a yes against you.

[tipsy_princess]

no. there is instruments already: talk, when talking not works (often actually works) ignore+leave. or implement and start counting kicked limbo players.

i bet many of those who against this clearly know how it works/happens in other games and this is why they so care about, there is no good votekick system ever created yet and warframe not gonna be the one too. what 100% gonna happen it's abuse. so simply don't do work for leechers and be happy.

(3mins + 300m version just not worth to wait because of avg mission time)

p.s. also it's just 2 people choice system because 1 person initiate and 1 being kicked, so vote basing on left 2 players - it's too low amount and clearly should never be implemented for 4 persons squads.

[kotex073]

Sorry not going to read all pages from another we want a vote to kick thread.

For myself i never ever needed a vote to kick function, if i had someone leeching in group i just left or finished the mission quickly, i think it cost less time than voting will.

I also don't care much for a voting system, i already can see toxic teens using it whenever they feel like it, like in some other games.

 

 

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by kotex073

[(PSN)OriginalSilthos]

6 hours ago, lusty_buns said:

) ignore+leave. or implement and start counting kicked limbo players.

This is absolutely sad. So the player actually correctly playing the game has to be punished. If you did this you would almost never finish any mission. So the guy leeching stays until other people are qued into his group and its a vicious cycle. Being against the troll being booted while actually players have to go back to the orbiter and reque.

On 2019-01-24 at 4:24 AM, Yxivi said:

the player's fault that they are playing public instead of doing solo or organized team, kinda reminds me of rape culture, they blame the victim not the offender.

So far from chat ive seen it will be abused which is happening already with these leeches. The entire warframe base hates Limbo and he would be kicked out of everything. Missions are to short to care. People care its why its being posted. This keeps getting worse and its not healthy for the game. Unless your one of those people who actively does nothing or troll what fear is there to be kicked. Especially with your already not playing in public because most people say thats the best fix or dropping and requin. It seems most of the people against it doesnt even play public anyway.

6 hours ago, lusty_buns said:

just 2 people choice system because 1 person initiate and 1 being kicked, so vote basing on left 2 players - it's too low amount and clearly should never be implemented for 4 persons squads.

The person initiating the kick, thats his vote its 3. If a person is trolling and i initiate the process im already voting yes. Then the other 2 squad members would have to agree with me.

[Yxivi]

BuT wHaT if IRL stUfF hApPEnZ?! Then communicate with your team that you have to do something really quick. Now, if whatever you have to do will take you more than a minute, I think the most decent thing to do is you leave the team or ask if they're all cool to carry on with the mission while you do your IRL stuff. Consent. If they're cool, then okay, right?
Things likes this are very rare, so I don't know why everyone is so afraid that a vote to kick will harm them when IRL interferes while they're playing. Are you always getting interrupted by IRL stuff when you're playing? 

ThEy wiLl kiCk mE iF I uSe x frAme1!! Probably the same people who complain that their team was angry at them or telling them to stop using certain abilities. Why do you think people do that? Because they don't want to run with that frame. I know, discrimination is a downside of vote to kick, I have suffered that but it's not much of a pain because you will end up running with a team that accepts and allows whatever you wanna do (so yeah, leechers will end up in a team that tolerates leeching, everyone wins!). It's not perfect, but it's much better than having to deal with leechers. 

There's no need to appoint a staff to monitor this, if any, they would just receive more tickets from butt hurt players because they've been kicked, boo-hoo.

Not because you don't encounter leechers or you don't mind leechers, nothing should be done to stop them. "Hey, I have never been robbed, so thieves shouldn't be imprisoned." that's how some of the logic in this thread goes. Point is leechers should have the hard time leeching, not the other way around. People say "report the leecher", "leave the team", "play solo", "make a pre-made team", "play with friends" but that puts the inconvenience towards the honest, decent players and I find it really bizarre that most of you are fine with this.

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

9 hours ago, (XB1)MindedThunder81 said:

I started a thread on a Votekick feature a long time ago and it too was met with a lot of negativity. The only real argument against a votekick feature is that players may abuse it, but even then they blow it way out of proportion.

Our best Idea was to initiate a votekick against a player after being AFK or too far from the rest of the squad after about 2 minutes. It would require all players to agree with the kick before separating the other player into their own private instance.

We also had to outline what constitutes as "AFK" because some of the anti-kickers thought that standing in a hallway with a soma killing enemies would get flagged as AFK. So for all intents and purposes, "AFK" would be defined by having no change of input for an extended period of time. ie: Putting a rock on your keyboard, putting a rubberband on a controller, or just simply doing nothing with no input.

 

A Votekick feature would be greatly appreciated and highly valued; however, the vocal majority do not want a votekick feature. So my suggestion would be to 

Add an easier way to report leeches/afk players (especially on consoles)

Or, for sake of simplicity and to free up time for Support or whoever reviews the reports

Add a Votekick automatically triggered after 2 minutes of inactivity OR after 3 minutes of being more than 300 meters away from the rest of the squad. When kicked, a player is put into a private session and their game is paused, so it doesn't automatically fail them.

EVEN IN PUBLIC SQUADS, WHERE THIS PROBLEM ACTUALLY IS. 

You don't go into recruiting to ask for AFK players or Leeches, so why would you in a Public Squad?

Giving players the option to kick a player would promote communication. A simple "Hey brb, gotta go to the bathroom/pay the pizza guy/deal with a spontaneous bloody nose" would be enough to let the rest of the squad know you're not just leeching, and to not kick you.

Before you weigh in just to say "No" please just take a moment to look at the community and believe for a moment that not all players are Trolls or Frame Elitists who just want to kick people who are playing a frame that may not be best suited to the mission type. And most times when players have the majority in a squad, they're running invite only squads anyway. (At least from my experience) And if you can't see it from that perspective, then maybe you're just afraid that the votekick would be a yes against you.

 

Ok.  No.

1 hour ago, Yxivi said:

BuT wHaT if IRL stUfF hApPEnZ?! Then communicate with your team that you have to do something really quick. Now, if whatever you have to do will take you more than a minute, I think the most decent thing to do is you leave the team or ask if they're all cool to carry on with the mission while you do your IRL stuff. Consent. If they're cool, then okay, right?
Things likes this are very rare, so I don't know why everyone is so afraid that a vote to kick will harm them when IRL interferes while they're playing. Are you always getting interrupted by IRL stuff when you're playing? 

ThEy wiLl kiCk mE iF I uSe x frAme1!! Probably the same people who complain that their team was angry at them or telling them to stop using certain abilities. Why do you think people do that? Because they don't want to run with that frame. I know, discrimination is a downside of vote to kick, I have suffered that but it's not much of a pain because you will end up running with a team that accepts and allows whatever you wanna do (so yeah, leechers will end up in a team that tolerates leeching, everyone wins!). It's not perfect, but it's much better than having to deal with leechers. 

There's no need to appoint a staff to monitor this, if any, they would just receive more tickets from butt hurt players because they've been kicked, boo-hoo.

Not because you don't encounter leechers or you don't mind leechers, nothing should be done to stop them. "Hey, I have never been robbed, so thieves shouldn't be imprisoned." that's how some of the logic in this thread goes. Point is leechers should have the hard time leeching, not the other way around. People say "report the leecher", "leave the team", "play solo", "make a pre-made team", "play with friends" but that puts the inconvenience towards the honest, decent players and I find it really bizarre that most of you are fine with this.

I find it more bizarre that you listed all those different ways to avoid what you're complaining about, and yet want to open up an entirely new avenue of encouraging vindictive behaviour.  

I've been saying this for a long time: if you join a random lobby, expect random results.  I personally find the idea of "leeching" (really starting to get annoyed with reading that) distasteful, but I find the concept of being on a team where I can be kicked due to not using the frame, weapons, or tactics that some people just imagined were the only ones acceptable even more appalling. 

Stop trying to advocate mechanics that would lead to toxicity and abuse.

[(NSW)osueboy]

The only valid reason i find to kick a player is in some really extreme cases, nobody should play at your level in a random queue, if you got paired with new players, as long as they contribute im ok with that. even if they afk. 

The only thing i HATE and gets into my nerves is having those doors that will only open when 2 players clicking and the only other player going afk. This can be fixed removing those doors from every single instance. Because if you cant complete the level because someone went afk you are hosing the players who actually want to complete a mission. 

[(NSW)osueboy]

 

On 2019-01-23 at 8:25 AM, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Can confirm. 

I distinctly remember hunting for Terry's in public, and people kept joining and parting, host was a limbo. One person even made it clear that the Limbo was the problem. I can solo Terry so I don't really care what anyone else does. 

That Limbo took me on some of the best runs hunting for Terry that I have been on to date. 

People hate on Limbo because of some bad players, but there's also a lot of stupidity on their part. A good Limbo can totally change a mission, but those idiots would have definitely tried to kick him off the squad for using Limbo. 

 

I have a problem with Limbo players, my problem is this, for 99% of the content limbo is not necesary, i dont need Cataclysm over me 99% of the time, but Limbo casting it only slows down the mission, because thats what Limbo does, stall, is the King of stall, but when you are farming you want to kill fast, so i would rather have a team that kills instead of putting everything into stasis and making the mission twice as long. 

[(PSN)OriginalSilthos]

55 minutes ago, (XB1)Thy Divinity said:

I personally find the idea of "leeching" (really starting to get annoyed with reading that) distasteful, but I find the concept of being on a team where I can be kicked due to not using the frame, weapons, or tactics that some people just imagined were the only ones acceptable

Your assumption is that people will do that. Anything in this game can be done with any frame with the exception of what VERY long survivals maybe something else. Those activities are premade groups as is which are asking for certain group compt. Alert, regular star chart missions and bounties who would care what you use ad long as your helping. Cache finding, spy missions for example is a hell of alot faster when everyone is active. Again its not the power of 1 person but the group. Is the whole group gonna kick because u got said gun/frame doubt it. 

1 hour ago, (XB1)Thy Divinity said:

find it more bizarre that you listed all those different ways to avoid what you're complaining about, and yet want to open up an entirely new avenue of encouraging vindictive behaviour. 

What is he encouraging? Hes trying to find a solution to the problem that exists now. He/she is constructively giving scenarios and examples of ways to improve the regular vote to kick method 

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

11 minutes ago, (PS4)OriginalSilthos said:

Your assumption is that people will do that. Anything in this game can be done with any frame with the exception of what VERY long survivals maybe something else. Those activities are premade groups as is which are asking for certain group compt. Alert, regular star chart missions and bounties who would care what you use ad long as your helping. Cache finding, spy missions for example is a hell of alot faster when everyone is active. Again its not the power of 1 person but the group. Is the whole group gonna kick because u got said gun/frame doubt it. 

What is he encouraging? Hes trying to find a solution to the problem that exists now. He/she is constructively giving scenarios and examples of ways to improve the regular vote to kick method 

We already have examples of vote kick options being abused in other MMOs.  Spare me the naive routine please.  YOUR assumption that this feature would not create more problems than it fixes due to human nature is interesting to say the least.

There are other ideas that have been brought forth that don't involve enabling rampant toxic elitism that can be worked into the game.

Just because you don't want it for nefarious purposes does not mean that others will feel the same.  A few instances of that trend and we're worse off than we started.

 

In short, no.

[SneakyErvin]

A simple vote kick that removes the kicked player to a solo instance would be perfect. The vote kick mechanic would obviously only be available if you've picked up an active mission and not running a free roam. They could test this out in PoE and OV first then if it is stable enough they can implement it to sorties, arbitrations and other missions. Just leave it out of free roam.

edit: They could even add a range check to it in OV/PoE so you cant vote on people that are within your range. This way it would more likely only be used against the habitual leeches that fish and mine far off from the objective. They already have a bunch of range indicators and mechanics tied to that like bounty areas etc. I'm sure they could work with that if they implemented some kick system.

Edited January 25, 2019 by SneakyErvin

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

29 minutes ago, (NSW)osueboy said:

 

I have a problem with Limbo players, my problem is this, for 99% of the content limbo is not necesary, i dont need Cataclysm over me 99% of the time, but Limbo casting it only slows down the mission, because thats what Limbo does, stall, is the King of stall, but when you are farming you want to kill fast, so i would rather have a team that kills instead of putting everything into stasis and making the mission twice as long. 

What does that have to do with a well played Limbo being an excellent choice for Eidolon hunting because he can protect against most of the attacks on command without hindering operator damage? That's what this guy was doing, he wasn't slowing the fight down, everyone who bailed, probably did so only because he's not meta and because they've never run with a good Limbo. 

 

Have I had negative experiences with Limbo? Yes. But that's also true for most frames. 

Volts who mess with parkour, or put shields in useless places. Frosts who put bubbles all over the blasted place blocking lanes of fire. Slow-va doing her thing during defense missions. Nova dropping wormholes that pitch you all over the place instead of just bullet jumping. Rhinos that turn on iron skin the moment they load in, losing a lot of potential shielding. Rhinos that never roar. Banshees, Embers, and Saryns that wipe the map before their teammates can get a shot off. Anyone using weapons with the blinding energy colours. 

 

The list of things that new/bad players do that cause others difficulties is large. Deciding that everyone using a frame, playstyle, or weapon you don't want them to should be kicked should not be an option. Ever. 

[(NSW)osueboy]

I agree, i would ask Limbo to cast cataclysm for half a second and then click 4 again to stop it, before kicking him out.
Im not totally against limbo, i use it for lua spy. and i think everyone should, but i have to run lua spy solo because others enter with random stuff and fail. So there is a way to circunvent undesirable players. its called Invite only/ Solo.