Why can’t the host kick people out of the squad while in the orbiter?

[DeMonkey]

28 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

 

 

Finally he understood. 

They were commenting on the fact that certain posters tunnel visioned so hard on a single word that they ignored the entirety of the rest of their post.

They are almost certainly not understanding or agreeing with you, they are disparaging people's overreactions, of which you are one of those people. The thread isn't hard to understand or follow at all, quite the opposite, you just need to not get overemotional about the "k" word.

Honestly, I feel sorry for the OP. The suggestion is literally just quality of life, making a 10 second process into a 3 second process with absolutely zero victims from the change.

[Felsagger]

Just now, DeMonkey said:

They were commenting on the fact that certain posters tunnel visioned so hard on a single word that they ignored the entirety of the rest of their post.

They are almost certainly not understanding or agreeing with you, they are disparaging people's overreactions, of which you are one of those people. The thread isn't hard to understand or follow at all, quite the opposite, you just need to not get overemotional about the "k" word.

Honestly, I feel sorry for the OP. The suggestion is literally just quality of life, making a 10 second process into a 3 second process with absolutely zero victims from the change.

Please. You are not paying attention to the board....tsk tsk tsk....^^

He wrote: 

"If people don’t like the host kicking, then how about an option to toggle keeping friends in the squad and randoms would load out of missions in their own squad if toggled on while you’re the host. That’s the only other thing I can think of off the top of my head to avoid lingering randoms. "

I wrote:

And you have options such as Invite Only, friends only and Solo. Use this and evade public PUGs. 

Why is that so hard to understand? 

Pugs are like that. 

[DeMonkey]

11 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Use this and evade public PUGs.

This is not helpful, and you know it isn't.

Patient: I broke my arm cycling.

Doctor: Don't ride a bike then.

I mean, seriously? I can only respond with your own words here, "shut up and move on", nothing about that is helpful nor relevant, it serves only to derail the thread and lead away from it's actual point. 

Public matches exist for a reason, and unless you're completely and utterly socially incompetent, there should be no reason to fear public matches or other people. Some people genuinely like playing with others. Some people just want to jump into a quick mission with their friends without worrying too much what the fourth person brings to the match, just that they bring additional spawns and loot with them.

This is completely besides the point however, as the OP deals directly with the post-mission orbiter. Not pre-mission, not mid-mission, post-mission.

Whether the OP disconnects and reinvites a couple of friends, or simply "kicks" the random out the lobby is completely immaterial, the random will experience the exact same thing in both situations, disconnection from the host and a move into a party of one. The second option would simply be quicker for the host, hence QoL.

If you and so many others weren't so triggered by an innocuous word, this thread would have gone so much better.

[Surbusken]

The only way to make sure people don't abuse their power is by not giving them any.

Just like you won't hand a 5-year-old a lighter they are just not fit to handle it.

 

[DeMonkey]

3 minutes ago, Surbusken said:

The only way to make sure people don't abuse their power is by not giving them any.

The host already has the power, DE wouldn't be giving them anything.

[Godmode_Ash]

29 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

They were commenting on the fact that certain posters tunnel visioned so hard on a single word that they ignored the entirety of the rest of their post.

They are almost certainly not understanding or agreeing with you, they are disparaging people's overreactions, of which you are one of those people. The thread isn't hard to understand or follow at all, quite the opposite, you just need to not get overemotional about the "k" word.

Honestly, I feel sorry for the OP. The suggestion is literally just quality of life, making a 10 second process into a 3 second process with absolutely zero victims from the change.

I guess you didn't read any post in this thread, especially not mine.

[Felsagger]

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

This is not helpful, and you know it isn't.

Patient: I broke my arm cycling.

Doctor: Don't ride a bike then.

 

If the patient is not dexterous doing cycling why he expose himself to a harsh road when he walked it before? 

If the player knows how PUGS behaves then why he expose himself to the tyranny of random users? 

See the problem with that type of logic? 

 

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

I mean, seriously? I can only respond with your own words here, "shut up and move on", nothing about that is helpful nor relevant, it serves only to derail the thread and lead away from it's actual point. 

But you came in doing a lawyer's defense right? No one called you for this right? You decided to step in. 

 

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Public matches exist for a reason, and unless you're completely and utterly socially incompetent, there should be no reason to fear public matches or other people. Some people genuinely like playing with others. Some people just want to jump into a quick mission with their friends without worrying too much what the fourth person brings to the match, just that they bring additional spawns and loot with them.

 

Problem with that logic. 

 

Public matches exists as an option. But it comes with trades and negotiations the player must make. Public is different than private. When a match is settled with friends only and invites only there are concessions between friends and invites. There are previous concessions that evades possible setbacks and counterproductive behavior. Public behavior is unpredictable and unexpected. Private invites and friends invite are more predictable and manageable. 

This game can be played solo almost all the time. I can do almost everything alone. If I deal with PUGS I simply understand what possible transaction I have to confront. When I am with PUGS I simply dispatch once the mission is done. If I want to continue with them and we AGREE typing without 'social incompetence' some consensus then I carry on with them. 

Talking takes LESS time. (Typing if people are not using microphones)

 

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

This is completely besides the point however, as the OP deals directly with the post-mission orbiter. Not pre-mission, not mid-mission, post-mission.

Easy. Break the squad. Form another. Getting random players is pretty fast. 

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Whether the OP disconnects and reinvites a couple of friends, or simply "kicks" the random out the lobby is completely immaterial, the random will experience the exact same thing in both situations, disconnection from the host and a move into a party of one. The second option would simply be quicker for the host, hence QoL.

 

We've been here seven years playing the game. Why all of the sudden few seconds matters that much? 

Mephane already stated a solution. An option that cleans out the PUGS but keep the friends. It's common in many games like Overwatch. I face this every day. It's not rocket science right? 

 

4 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

If you and so many others weren't so triggered by an innocuous word, this thread would have gone so much better.

 

It's not innocuous when such CONCEPT produces toxicity. You know exactly what kicking produces. So.......tsk...tsk...^^

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Invoky said:

I guess you didn't read any post in this thread, especially not mine.

I did, yours were one of the ones I considered to be completely pointless.

For example, this one:

On 2020-09-27 at 1:44 PM, Invoky said:

 

No, we get what OP is talking about. But like others said, we don't need any form of kicking at all. Let me cover some scenarios so maybe you will understand.

 

1) Kicking during mission: Absolute not. Imaging someone stayed 20 minutes for rotation C then get kick right before that.

2) Kicking before mission in obiter(public mode): No, a public game shouldn't have any rule to be force upon. People will abuse the kick or troll with it. Go read 2nd page, the first post I made in this thread.

3) Kicking after mission in obiter(public mode): If someone is AFK, so you can't continue the game or you need to fill the group with your friend, why not just reform?

4) Kicking in invite only or friend/clan mode: Why do you need to kick? They are people you know, just coordinate better.

5) Kicking in a premade group (recruitment): If someone joined your group and pretend to meet your rules/requirement. This is the only situation that kicking is justified. However, the kicking can't not be implement because the public game is not separate between "premade" and "random" group. Give the power to kick in premade group is the same as give the power to kick in random group(scenario 2). If you see idiots like those relic key-share leeches, just disband the group and reform.

 

There is no reason to add the kicking feature, it will only cause more harm than saving a few seconds of convenience of reforming the group.

 

 

You show clearly that you don't get what OP is talking about. Of your 5 points, 4 are not relevant. 80% of your points are worthless pixels on my screen, and wasted effort on your part. The only one that deals with the actual point is number 3.

Number 3 is already answered though, in the original post that you didn't understand.

They state that they reform, but reforming takes time. You have to leave the squad, wait for your friends to go through a the "host disconnection" and then reinvite them to the lobby, either by bringing up the menu or typing it in the chat. On a console this is going to be more arduous that it is on PC.

Having the ability to simply remove the random players would require less time, requiring one to two clicks. That's it, that's their suggestion. It's not abusable, it's not asking to boot people from missions, it can't be used to discriminate against another player for their gear selection, it is literally just a quality of life change that shaves off a few seconds post mission.

[Felsagger]

9 minutes ago, Invoky said:

I guess you didn't read any post in this thread, especially not mine.

Pretty much. 

 

[DeMonkey]

Just now, Felsagger said:

See the problem with that type of logic? 

No, because you didn't actually employ any logic there for me to see.

1 minute ago, Felsagger said:

You decided to step in. 

Correct. Pro bono.

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Easy. Break the squad. Form another.

Their suggestion is literally an improvement to what you're suggesting here. Getting tilted over their usage of the word "kick" has caused you to miss the fact that their proposal has literally the same consequences as the above, it just happens faster.

4 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

It's not innocuous when such CONCEPT produces toxicity.

Everything produces toxicity nowadays, your responses to this thread are a wonderful example.

Totally reasonable thread, unreasonably toxic responses.

As a word however, "kick" is completely innocuous. You're choosing to attribute malice to it where there is none. It is not a slur, no one is harmed by the word "kick".

[Godmode_Ash]

9 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

I did, yours were one of the ones I considered to be completely pointless.

For example, this one:

You show clearly that you don't get what OP is talking about. Of your 5 points, 4 are not relevant. 80% of your points are worthless pixels on my screen, and wasted effort on your part. The only one that deals with the actual point is number 3.

Number 3 is already answered though, in the original post that you didn't understand.

They state that they reform, but reforming takes time. You have to leave the squad, wait for your friends to go through a the "host disconnection" and then reinvite them to the lobby, either by bringing up the menu or typing it in the chat. On a console this is going to be more arduous that it is on PC.

Having the ability to simply remove the random players would require less time, requiring one to two clicks. That's it, that's their suggestion. It's not abusable, it's not asking to boot people from missions, it can't be used to discriminate against another player for their gear selection, it is literally just a quality of life change that shaves off a few seconds post mission.

Read my next post, I explained why I had to list all 5 scenarios.

And no, don't need to explain what OP said to me. I already explain why it would be use as abuse in the same post. If you actually read it.

Want me highlight it out?

[DeMonkey]

7 minutes ago, Invoky said:

Read my next post, I explained why I had to list all 5 scenarios.

And no, don't need to what OP said to me. I already explain why it would be use as abuse. If you actually read my post.

I read your post, you state that it will cause more harm than good, which is ridiculous since the proposed change will cause zero harm.

As has already been stated numerous times, it's exactly the same as just reforming. Whatever victims there are of this feature will simply be victims of a different feature with the same result.

Essentially, you are just making up this supposed harm that will arise from being able to kick from the orbiter post mission. Your "look at how toxic this thread has gotten" is ironic since it's people unreasonably tilting over the word "kick" that made it toxic, and it's also a slippery slope fallacy, to say nothing of what a stretch it is to draw a correlation between a toxic forum thread created by yourselves and a proposed in-game mechanic that literally wouldn't harm anyone.

Come up with an actual counter argument that isn't completely made up or a whiney comment on toxicity.

[Felsagger]

9 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

No, because you didn't actually employ any logic there for me to see.

What type of logic I should choose when you do not even read the title of THE thread? 

 

 

Why can’t the host kick people out of the squad while in the orbiter?

Quote

Correct. Pro bono.

Have fun with that. 

Quote

Their suggestion is literally an improvement to what you're suggesting here. Getting tilted over their usage of the word "kick" has caused you to miss the fact that their proposal has literally the same consequences as the above, it just happens faster.

The problem with the thread is the title of the thread. It's how he chose to present himself. 

 

If there is an algorithm that clean out the PUGS, such suggestion is welcome. 

Quote

Everything produces toxicity nowadays, your responses to this thread are a wonderful example.

Again look at the title of this thread. 

Quote

Totally reasonable thread, unreasonably toxic responses.

The OP suggested kicking few times even in the title screen. 

 

People are going to REACT. 

Quote

As a word however, "kick" is completely innocuous. You're choosing to attribute malice to it where there is none. It is not a slur, no one is harmed by the word "kick".

Because it can carry malice and ill intention. This happened before. 

[Godmode_Ash]

3 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

I read your post, you state that it will cause more harm than good, which is ridiculous since the proposed change will cause zero harm.

As has already been stated numerous times, it's exactly the same as just reforming. Whatever victims there are of this feature will simply be victims of a different feature with the same result.

Essentially, you are just making up this supposed harm that will arise from being able to kick from the orbiter post mission. Your "look at how toxic this thread has gotten" is ironic since it's people unreasonably tilting over the word "kick" that made it toxic, and it's also a slippery slope fallacy, to say nothing of what a stretch it is to draw a correlation between a toxic forum thread created by yourselves a proposed in-game mechanic that literally wouldn't harm anyone.

Come up with an actual counter argument that isn't completely made up or a whiney comment on toxicity.

I guess you never consider if host has the ability to kick post mission, he could be the first one to load the game and kick before anyone else finish loading. Hence possibility to create host mitgation for specific player(not the other friends in group)? Tell me that isn't a way to abuse or troll people.

Sure the host could just leave and mitgation entire group, but that is already in the game we can't do anything about it. We are talking about ADDING a new feature here, and why we should prevent it.

Host mitgation could make you lose loot/exp even after mission. I have seen it plenty of time after radshare.

[(PSN)SouthSideSwanga]

1 hour ago, Felsagger said:

The problem here is that you don't know when to shut up and move on.

The problem is you gave opinions like facts. You kept saying we don’t want kicking like every Warframe player agreed with you. I think enough people agreed with me to show that’s not the case and your opinion might not even be the majority opinion. If we’re gonna base what gets added to this game or not based on what “we” want, then kicking should probably be added. 

 

1 hour ago, Felsagger said:

Mephane provided one similar to yours but it is automatic and better suited for the game. 

 

How was my solution not automatic? I suggested a toggle option that allowed you to load out of missions with the full public squad or the premade squad. 

[(PSN)SouthSideSwanga]

6 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

The problem with the thread is the title of the thread. It's how he chose to present himself. 

 

If there is an algorithm that clean out the PUGS, such suggestion is welcome. 

Quote

The title is fine. Tunnel vision is the problem. 

[Felsagger]

Just now, (PS4)SouthSideSwanga said:

The problem is you gave opinions like facts. You kept saying we don’t want kicking like every Warframe player agreed with you. I think enough people agreed with me to show that’s not the case and your opinion might not even be the majority opinion. If we’re gonna base what gets added to this game or not based on what “we” want, then kicking should probably be added. 

Opinion as facts? 

 

Ok, let us throw my opinion away and see how this kicking that you suggests goes. 

Here is the problem, a very simple one. The game provides the tools to solve the issue. If the issue is solved then why bring a bigger mallet to squash the bug? Isn't that called over engineering? 

If there are ways that are passive instead of being that aggressive and harsh why not make things more diplomatic? 

 

So we reject the mindset of 'evade instead of remedy'? Why? 

Just now, (PS4)SouthSideSwanga said:

 

How was my solution not automatic? I suggested a toggle option that allowed you to load out of missions with the full public squad or the premade squad. 

Yes that is written in your post but is the TITLE OF THE THREAD that caused the commotion. 

 

I disagree with kicking options if there are other alternatives already given in the game. 

[Felsagger]

Just now, (PS4)SouthSideSwanga said:

The title is fine. Tunnel vision is the problem. 

Wrong. 

The title caused the problem. I'm not the only one opposing the kicking option. 

[Godmode_Ash]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)SouthSideSwanga said:

The problem is you gave opinions like facts. You kept saying we don’t want kicking like every Warframe player agreed with you. I think enough people agreed with me to show that’s not the case and your opinion might not even be the majority opinion. If we’re gonna base what gets added to this game or not based on what “we” want, then kicking should probably be added. 

 

How was my solution not automatic? I suggested a toggle option that allowed you to load out of missions with the full public squad or the premade squad. 

You forgot only people care about certain topic would comment on something. Some people might be against it just didn't care to make voice it out until it actually effects them.

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

What type of logic I should choose when you do not even read the title of THE thread? 

One where you don't overreact to a single word in a title to the point where you fail to read any of the main text.

3 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

People are going to REACT. 

To put it bluntly, learn some self control then. If "people are going to react" how exactly am I here arguing in favour of not reacting? Surely I should be right there with you, pitchfork in hand.

Self control dude.

2 minutes ago, Invoky said:

I guess you never consider if host has the ability to kick post mission, he could be the first one to load the game and kick before anyone else finish loading. Hence possibility to create host mitgation for specific player(not the other friends in group)?

Host mitgation could make you lose loot/exp even after mission. I have seen it plenty of time after radshare.

I guess you never considered that the developers of the game could simply have everyone load in at the same time, or apply rewards to your account at mission completion but before returning to the orbiter. There's a few seconds of useless animation as you get onto your ship, how do we know that isn't already when the items are granted? How do we know that the items aren't granted during transit, meaning that everyone gets the items mid-flight, before the host arrives on their ship. 

This is of course testable, as I just did. Counted the number of alloy plates I had, did a Capture on Venus, alt-f4'd when the diorama appeared, still received the alloy plates from the mission.

I asked for a counter argument that isn't completely made up, not another one.

[(PSN)SouthSideSwanga]

6 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Here is the problem, a very simple one. The game provides the tools to solve the issue. If the issue is solved then why bring a bigger mallet to squash the bug? Isn't that called over engineering? 

If there are ways that are passive instead of being that aggressive and harsh why not make things more diplomatic? 

 

So we reject the mindset of 'evade instead of remedy'? Why? 

I think the “over engineering” is justified if it creates a quality of life improvement. It might not seem like much, but small quality of life improvements can a make huge difference in how much people enjoy a game.
 

I’ve also played other games that had host kicking between matches and it very rarely caused issues. Even when someone did abuse it, it was easy enough to avoid them. 
 

It’s not that I’m rejecting evade instead of remedy, I’m trying to get a good solution instead of a good enough solution. 
 

14 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Yes that is written in your post but is the TITLE OF THE THREAD that caused the commotion. 

 

I disagree with kicking options if there are other alternatives already given in the game. 

 

14 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Wrong. 

The title caused the problem. I'm not the only one opposing the kicking option. 

You admit that you and the people who disagreed had tunnel vision because one word in the title. Y’all didn’t even read anything that was in the post, which is proven given how much people talked about vote kicking. I get that people don’t like the kicking option, but I don’t get why people didn’t ignore it and instead focus on the alternative that didn’t have kicking. 
 

Like I said, the title is fine. You can’t blame the title if people let one word trigger them into overreacting. 

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

I agree with the OP. I don’t get why people keep saying “just disband and make a new squad” when that’s the exact inconvenience that the OP is trying to avoid. It’s not better and the OP provides a viable alternative.

I have seen few actual arguments against it other than “it’s fine now, why not just leave it be”. The whole point of this thread is to suggest an improvement, so that argument doesn’t really make any sense.

Also, I feel like half of you aren’t actually reading the OP, maybe southside should start bolding/ underlining the important parts so you guys don’t keep repeatedly skipping over it. He said he wanted to maximize his void relic farming, so obviously he wouldn’t do solo.

And he probably had friends, but maybe only one of them was available at the time, so obviously saying “why don’t you just make more friends” doesn’t apply here. Some people DO have friends, but that doesn’t mean they’re always available, and it doesn’t mean all of them play warframe either.

Even people who don’t make friends aren’t going to make them just because it’s more convenient that way.

And it wouldn’t really be any more abusive than declining a new mission and dismantling the squad all together IMO.
Every time someone tries to start a new mission I just decline and leave the squad. And with the host, this almost always causes the entire squad to disband. How would this be any different? It’s just the same thing but more selective.

I don’t get you guys. Shooting down a perfectly good idea and giving the OP and incredibly hard time. Doesn’t really seem fair to me. This is what forums was made for; sharing ideas and discussing them. Stop being so close minded and give the guy a chance instead of acting like it’s the end of the world and ganging up on him.

[Godmode_Ash]

Just now, DeMonkey said:

One where you don't overreact to a single word in a title to the point where you fail to read any of the main text.

To put it bluntly, learn some self control then. If "people are going to react" how exactly am I here arguing in favour of not reacting? Surely I should be right there with you, pitchfork in hand.

Self control dude.

I guess you never considered that the developers of the game could simply have everyone load in at the same time, or apply rewards to your account at mission completion but before returning to the orbiter. There's a few seconds of useless animation as you get onto your ship, how do we know that isn't already when the items are granted? How do we know that the items aren't granted during transit, meaning that everyone gets the items mid-flight, before the host arrives on their ship. 

This is of course testable, as I just did. Counted the number of alloy plates I had, did a Capture on Venus, alt-f4'd when the diorama appeared, still received the alloy plates from the mission.

I asked for a counter argument that isn't completely made up, not another one.

So basically you are just coming up with excuse of "this could possibility..." instead of facing the reality of current game, and you are calling my points made up? Sure, you can dream on and say "one day WF will be free from peer to peer, instead it will be running on the dedicate server..."

The OP was originally only talking about adding a "remove teammate" feature. The idea like adding a separate mode, or whatever your end mission loading wasn't even in the topic to begin with. We were opposing the idea of "kick" in the current game. Because adding it would cause more harm then good.

I clearly stated in several post that OP's issue is only a few seconds of reforming inconvenience. You clearly proved my point by suggesting we need a completely rework on end mission reward to implement that feature. There  are probably even more issue we aren't talking about it yet.

So which is more problematic? the few seconds of inconvenience, or the possibility of people abusing it unless the completely rework of certain part of the game?

 

[Faras]

Love how you can clearly see DE's pets finding ways around the issue instead of commending this age old idea. 

[Felsagger]

20 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

One where you don't overreact to a single word in a title to the point where you fail to read any of the main text.

 

:-/

 

Sorry, I can't contain my human condition. 

If I where the only one overreacting then I concede. But there are many users reacting to the word. The problem is the title. You know it, I know it. He knows it. 

 

The user who established the thread recognized the problem. 

 

Quote

To put it bluntly, learn some self control then. If "people are going to react" how exactly am I here arguing in favour of not reacting? Surely I should be right there with you, pitchfork in hand.

Self control? 

Remember, when we use such phrase that phrase works both ways. That phrase doesn't make exclusions. 

Quote

Self control dude.

Mhm...:-/

Quote

I guess you never considered that the developers of the game could simply have everyone load in at the same time, or apply rewards to your account at mission completion but before returning to the orbiter. There's a few seconds of useless animation as you get onto your ship, how do we know that isn't already when the items are granted? How do we know that the items aren't granted during transit, meaning that everyone gets the items mid-flight, before the host arrives on their ship. 

I play in the PS4 I can't speak about how the game works on PC. Well I played few rounds in PC and then deleted the game due to space.

 

There is a bug that literally makes the mission start without me setting up the mission. I have that situation before making me withdraw the mission when other people started without their own intentions. The problem I had before happened a lot with the relic farm. When the mission is finished not everybody sees the same screen at the same time. Sometimes other players starts the mission or pugs literally force missions on other players. Yes, I can simply cancel the mission and abandon the squad. That is exactly what I do all the time. 

The way the game works may cause the problem. I really don't know. However if a mission finishes the voting should happen for the newer mission instead of an automatic launch triggered by another player. This is the issue SouthSide confronts and hence why he wants a solution. 

 

Quote

This is of course testable, as I just did. Counted the number of alloy plates I had, did a Capture on Venus, alt-f4'd when the diorama appeared, still received the alloy plates from the mission.

Then the discussion of the thread should be along these lines not any sort of kicking. 

I can understand this because the way is presented is CLEAR. See? 

Quote

I asked for a counter argument that isn't completely made up, not another one.

Again. The problem is the title in the screen and what people think. 

Presentation matters. You know this.