Jump to content
Jade Shadows: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Solution To Kicking Unwanted Players, Etc.


sagebrushfire
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dealing with another player (or sometimes multiple players) who doesn't listen or want to be helpful to the group is seriously annoying. It also sucks when you have a good team but the host has terrible upload speed so everyone's game suffers.

 

I suggest, instead of a traditional "kick"system that lets people screw over others, a screen similar to the defense extraction screen that allows people to select new hosts and branch the current game-play session into multiple branches in order to exclude, but not totally screw-over, unwanted players.

 

Here's how it goes:

 

1. When a players have an issue with another player or players, they invoke the Host Branch Request (anyone can do it, possibly from the options menu).

 

2. A screen similar to the Wave 5 Defense Mission screen pops up, with 4 columns. A player's name is at the top of each column.

 

3. All players choose which host to migrate to by going to his/her column. The proposed host may Blacklist a specific player from migrating  to his/her column by clicking on a "Deny" button next to that players name. The player can still go to any other column which has not denied him/her or stay in his/her own column and continue solo.

 

4. When time is up, the current game is split into 1 game per final host and all players are migrated to their intended new host. Players who were in a host column of another player who chose a different host are assumed to just be in their own host column and will be branched off into a solo game.

 

 

This allows you to get rid of annoying people without kicking them. It gives them a chance to complete the reward on their own if they choose and it gives you a chance to continue the mission without their annoyance. It also has the potential to let groups of people split of 2 by 2 or simply CHANGE HOSTS when the host has a bad connection but another player might have a good connection (all 4 players can simply switch to a different host column and have a much better game experience.

 

It's just a suggestion but I think it has potential.

 

 

Edit - Someone brought this up: When playing in the void,  the host should have a traditional host role in which he or she may kick any connected players at his or her discretion.

 

Edit: Some Background Info

 

The main reason I eventually came to the conclusion of the 4 column System was due to the need for denying unwanted players. I originally thought of a simple, two-column system where all 4 players simply chose branch A or branch B. The problem here is that you'd have to be able to see which branches people selected so you could choose to go with the players you still wanted to play with; this opens up trolling from undesired players just following you around trying to be in your game.

 

Having 4 player-specific columns solves that problem and has the additional benefit of letting people collectively swap hosts when a player host has a crappy connection.

Edited by sagebrushfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I followed the link that you've posted in my own thread regarding griefers.  I have to say, I never considered any solution such as this.  It's quite impressive and I could see it being the best possible solution to the problem.  BIG thumbs up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting concept, but it won't work on missions requiring keys.

 

Good point with the Void (I assume you're talking about he void, the Derelict Vaults are a huge pile of crap and I refuse to waste brain power trying to fix that mess; they need to scrap it and just hand everyone out the 16 mods as an apology for the idiocy of that whole concept).

 

The host of the Orokin Derelict is the the one who has the key, the other players are taking advantage of a resource that the host has graciously decided to share. When playing in the void,  the host should have a traditional host role in which he or she may kick any connected players at his or her discretion.

Edited by sagebrushfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um... wouldn't the end result from this be the same/incredibly similar to a vote kick system? The only difference being that that player isn't completely kicked, and is instead stuck in a solo mission for him/her to lose on their own. You're still kicking the player.

And why are you complaining about the vaults? What's wrong with them? I have yet to experience any glitches related to them.

 

I disagree with any sort of vote kick system that is in the hands of those playing. A kick system (that is controlled by the players) WILL be abused.

Edited by SquirmyBurrito
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um... wouldn't the end result from this be the same/incredibly similar to a vote kick system? The only difference being that that player isn't completely kicked, and is instead stuck in a solo mission for him/her to lose on their own. You're still kicking the player.

And why are you complaining about the vaults? What's wrong with them? I have yet to experience any glitches related to them.

 

I disagree with any sort of vote kick system that is in the hands of those playing. A kick system (that is controlled by the players) WILL be abused.

 

Really? It seems to work fine in games like Dungeon Defenders; even at it's worst it gets pretty balanced out.

 

The only real issue with the vote/kick dynamic was the fact that people would potentially lose out entirely on the whole gaming session; take that away and it's pretty fair. If people don't want to play with you, they don't want to play with you - why force people to keep playing when they don't like the peers they randomly received?

 

Right now the system is already being abused, especially in Survival missions and Jackal/Hyena missions. Multiple  times in the past week I have had major headaches with people who just did not want to leave the survival session after 15 minutes even thought 3/4 people did, we couldn't because this guy was strong enough to keep the LS up. Good for him, I'm not leaving because I'm wimping out I have stuff to DO and I need to leave, give me a break!

 

I also had the pleasure of playing an alert with someone who apparently thought sitting and killing corpus in a corridor for 5 straight minutes was more important than coming to the boss arena with the rest of us.

 

When players have control, there's always going to be abuse in one way or another. If no one can kick/change hosts then you'll have trolls and newbies everywhere, dragging people's games down and wasting time. If people can kick/vote then you have elitists who "only play with certain frames" etc. and kick people based on prejudice rather than merit.

 

The  abuse is supposed to be mitigated by the fact that we have clans. The point of the clan is to have a pool of players to play with and agreed-upon rules, etc. If people are kicking you because of your frame or something, you should be able to turn to your clan for help. If people online are trolling your games and being idiots, likewise you ought to be able to find clan-mates to play with.

 

So either option isn't going to be significantly better or worse; either people will be kick-happy elitists or troll-happy griefers. Personally I think it's easier to deal with elitists and rage kickers than trolls and idiots, and that's why I made this suggestion.

 

About the Vaults:

 

Actually I was just feeling a bit snarky when I said that; I've had fun playing the vaults recently but it has come with some serious frustration. There are a number of bugs and issues with the way they work, especially with the fact that it seems to be random as to whether or not people can join your mission after it has already started. My friend tried to invite me (1st time) once and it said objective complete even though  they hadn't entered the vault OR killed all enemies (Exterminate). Then another time I invited a guy because he said he would wear a key and the idiot didn't actually have it on when he joined; I told him to abort and equip it and I'd re-invite him (I just wanted to get rid of him). Turns out it worked! And thankfully the key we needed was his! That was lucky but why didn't it work before? I'm mostly mad at the inconsistency .

 

The key debuff situation needs to change too. It's rather annoying to have to go into your gear and uneuip/reequip the keys back and forth; I keep doing regular missions in between derelict voids and halfway through realizing I accidentally left a key on (Bleeding key on Infested Survival is pretty damned annoying). They should either make the keys inactive on non-void missions or boost your rewards, credits and affinity for wearing the keys on regular missions because that would totally be cool and worth the debuffs.

Edited by sagebrushfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...