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

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

11 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

mhm...

But one word threw the topic to the left. If the OP focus on more ideas instead of kicking throughout the responses then the word would be left behind. But he insisted that kicking is a solution for him. Without any possible hesitation he went directly towards that option. 

If there were other options in the tread for example a poll then we would be seeing votes. 

?... This is just where I'm at right now.

[Felsagger]

Just now, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

I have no idea what you're trying to say here to be honest with you.

The title suggests one thing. 

His writing in the first post suggest the other. 

During his responses he points out the option of kicking. 

 

Just now, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

Did you just say you like punishing AFK players? You know what AFK means right? It means there is no player there to punish. This makes no sense.

It does. 

The player is not playing during the five rounds interval on Hydron. He is virtually absent. He is not contributing anything to the mission. The rest of the players leave him in the mission since he is not aware. 

Just now, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

Also, this doesn't explain why it would be a good idea to make everyone's vote for a mission mandatory.

It does. 

Some people press start while other are changing load outs. Sometimes a premature start brings the wrong build for the mission. 

Just now, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

Basically you are saying that you enjoy jumping through unnecessary hoops so that you can mess with a player that isn't even there... and that is the reason why it should be in the game... just cuz.

Nope. That's not it. 

I'm saying that if the player is not contributing why should I consider him in the first place. 

[Godmode_Ash]

10 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

And no, this would shave a few seconds of inconvenience in exchange for the possibility of something that already happens, happening again. As you said, this already happens, and it's the games fault that it happens.

Rewards are, and should be, given out prior to people returning to the orbiter. If they aren't then the game broke, and if the host causes a problem when kicking someone, then that is a problem with the game, not with the host and not with the proposal.

The game is broken I agree. If the host want to troll his entire group he can already do so in the current game. The difference of adding the kick feature is that he can now target one specific player he doesn't like. For example, if the host had argument with that player during the mission.

Sure you can argue that host can already disband group and ruining 3 other players. But that's already in the game we cant' do anything about it. Honestly I rather DE spend time fixing host mitgation than adding the kick.

If you want to blame the broken game allow host to troll, sure but we aren't getting fix anytime soon. But OP is asking adding something on top of this.

 

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

5 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

The title suggests one thing. 

His writing in the first post suggest the other. 

During his responses he points out the option of kicking. 

The title is about kicking, the OP is about kicking, most comments made in this thread are about kicking, seems pretty spot on to me. Why you would advocate for the TOPIC of the thread to be stricken from the TITLE of the post is beyond me.

[Felsagger]

12 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Yes, that's because that is the term attributed to a mechanic whereby you forcibly remove someone from a group, which is what the OP proposed. Why would they call it anything else?

Kicks happens when I leave the squad. I'm kicking myself out. Kick happens when a random user disbands when he is the host. 

Let us go back to what exactly this title says. It's revealing. It's not only the word kick in it. There's much more. 

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

Breaking a squad is not the same as issuing a kick  to a particular member in a squad of four.

There are many examples. "I don't like to play with those low ranks. Let me kick them out off my squad."

 

Quote

Our current system is also indisputably kicking, you are instead kicking everyone from your group instead of a select person.

True. No one debates that. 

Quote

I mean surely OP's proposal is fantastic by that logic, resulting in less kicking overall.

Fantastic for who? 

Quote

Also no, you threw this topic to the left.

Nope.

[(PSN)ErydisTheLucario]

Really now, another Non problem...my favorite!

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Invoky said:

The game is broken I agree. If the host want to troll his entire group he can already do so in the current game

Yes, mid mission, before rewards are handed out. 

The only way a host can troll post mission is if the game breaks and doesn't distribute rewards prior to returning to the orbiter, at which point there are going to be other more pressing issues than getting booted out of a group.

This is far less likely to happen than someone trolling mid-mission. It assumes both the game breaking, but not breaking enough to separate everyone automatically, and a malicious host to take advantage of that. 

I'm sorry, the chances of that are not worth considering.

Furthermore, this is still no different to the host returning to their orbiter and simply immediately disbanding the entire squad instead, forcing a host migration on everyone. I don't see any complaints about that, so why would there be problems with only one player leaving?

1 minute ago, Felsagger said:

Breaking a squad is not the same as issuing out a kick in a squad of four.

Yes, it is. It literally is. It has the exact same outcome, the player will still go through a host migration and will still end up alone.

4 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

There are many examples. "I don't like to play with those low ranks. Let me kick them out off my squad."

Which people already do by reforming, so what difference will be made with the addition of a kick? None.

Remember when you said you weren't going to respond anymore Felsagger? I really hope you see this as a lesson in self control.

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

6 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Nope. That's not it. 

I'm saying that if the player is not contributing why should I consider him in the first place. 

Consider? What are you talking about? You don't consider who should or shouldn't be in your squad, you get what you get. You're either lucky or you're not.

 

14 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Some people press start while other are changing load outs. Sometimes a premature start brings the wrong build for the mission. 

This is slower, not faster. The point of the post was a faster alternative. You seem to keep forgetting what this thread is even about.

[BDMblue]

34 minutes ago, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

I have no idea what you're trying to say here to be honest with you.

 

I think I'm going to stop taking you seriously now...

 

Did you just say you like punishing AFK players? You know what AFK means right? It means there is no player there to punish. This makes no sense.

Also, this doesn't explain why it would be a good idea to make everyone's vote for a mission mandatory. Basically you are saying that you enjoy jumping through unnecessary hoops so that you can mess with a player that isn't even there... and that is the reason why it should be in the game... just cuz.

You know if they allowed this we would have hosts kicking for every meta reason. Mission starts host clicks the x, countdown stops. Host does not like limbos kick, resumes mission. Host thinks we need 4 CP kick. Host thinks Inaros/Wukong  is useless kick. MR 7 in a sortie kick. 

 

Lets not give people this power. You just end up with that small group of players who can’t solo content, so they make sure to try and min max a party by kicking everyone they don’t think fits.

[Felsagger]

23 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Yes, mid mission, before rewards are handed out. 

The only way a host can troll post mission is if the game breaks and doesn't distribute rewards prior to returning to the orbiter, at which point there are going to be other more pressing issues than getting booted out of a group.

 

That alone hangs up the kicking solution with a tighter knot. Imagine if we have the option to select who is worthy and who is not worthy for the rewards? Can you imagine it? I really don't even want to be near when that Pandora's Box opens. 

Fine, now imagine this: a squad of players with ranks over 26 are formed before the mission and a player is booted out after the mission with a lower rank. The impression that he will send to the staying party is that the host doesn't like lower ranks. The one who got kicked will never know the reason but the others who stays will probably get that impression. 

 

Quote

Yes, it is. It literally is. It has the exact same outcome, the player will still go through a host migration and will still end up alone.

Hence there is no need for a kick option at all. The game provides alternatives. 

Quote

Which people already do by reforming, so what difference will be made with the addition of a kick? None.

Then why we need it in the first place?

Quote

Remember when you said you weren't going to respond anymore Felsagger? I really hope you see this as a lesson in self control.

You broke your promise. So I broke mine. :3

If you practice what you preach you will probably convince more people with PERSUASION. 

See? 

[Felsagger]

19 minutes ago, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

Consider? What are you talking about? You don't consider who should or shouldn't be in your squad, you get what you get. You're either lucky or you're not.

Instead of being dictated by the tyranny of probability with the PUGS. I plan ahead and evade random outcomes with people who has different interests than mine in a mission. 

19 minutes ago, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

This is slower, not faster. The point of the post was a faster alternative. You seem to keep forgetting what this thread is even about.

If this is about 'SPEED' by cutting middle steps then I select my team first. That evades kicks. 

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

1 minute ago, BDMblue said:

You know if they allowed this we would have hosts kicking for every meta reason. Mission starts host clicks the x, countdown stops. Host does not like limbos kick, resumes mission. Host thinks we need 4 CP kick. Host thinks Inaros/Wukong  is useless kick. MR 7 in a sortie kick. 

 

Lets not give people this power. You just end up with that small group of players who can’t solo content, so they make sure to try and min max a party by kicking everyone they don’t think fits.

It specifies in the OP that a player can only be kicked in the orbiter.

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

3 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Instead of being dictated by the tyranny of probability with the PUGS. I plan ahead and evade random outcomes with people who has different interests than mine in a mission. 

If this is about 'SPEED' by cutting middle steps then I select my team first. That evades kicks. 

That's not faster either. It takes even more time and energy to select a squad yourself than it does to get out of the squad and make a new one.

[Felsagger]

7 minutes ago, BDMblue said:

Lets not give people this power. You just end up with that small group of players who can’t solo content, so they make sure to try and min max a party by kicking everyone they don’t think fits.

 

That's exactly my argument. 

[DeMonkey]

15 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

The impression that he will send to the staying party is that the host doesn't like lower ranks. The one who got kicked will never know the reason but the others who stays will probably get that impression. 

Yay, more made up reasons. Maybe this will happen, maybe that will will happen. Maybe if I assume the worst in literally everything, something bad might happen.

No, the left over players in that scenario will just assume the other player left the squad. Obviously.

16 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Then why we need it in the first place?

Faster. Did that really have to be repeated for the 400th time?

16 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

You broke your promise

Where?

[Felsagger]

Just now, DeMonkey said:

More made up reasons. Maybe this will happen, maybe that will will happen. Maybe if I assume the worst in literally everything, something bad might happen.

The possibility is there. I'm not the only one showing these possible scenarios. 

Just now, DeMonkey said:

No, the left over players in that scenario will just assume the other player left the squad. Obviously.

Faster. Did that really have to be repeated for the 400th time?

Well, maybe because people are not understanding it? 

Precautions are far better than remedies. 

Just now, DeMonkey said:

Where?

Self control? ....nvm.

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

The possibility is there. I'm not the only one showing these possible scenarios

No, you're not the only one making up fake scenarios, guessing at potential worst case scenarios and acting like these are valid arguments against the suggestion.

In what world would two players see a fourth leave the group, something incredibly common, and immediately attribute it to malice on the hosts part? How is this even a problem anyway if they do?

How incredibly daft.

4 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

....nvm.

Yeah, that's what I thought, nothing.

[Felsagger]

19 minutes ago, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

That's not faster either. It takes even more time and energy to select a squad yourself than it does to get out of the squad and make a new one.

Yes, correct. We arrived to the real problem. We want an option that speeds things up. 

Ah....that's another problem. You have a recruit channel for such squads. But of course that takes time if you are not in a clan. Even in clan takes time to form dedicated farming squads. 

Let me put it this way. If you want things your way then you have to work for them like selecting a squad, talking previously and of course getting goals done with people who have the SAME interest. 

[Felsagger]

12 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

No, you're not the only one making up fake scenarios, guessing at potential worst case scenarios and acting like these are valid arguments against the suggestion.

I never sold those as valid arguments. 

Let me put it in a different tone. I've seen those things happening in the game in the current state. I've seen disputes against Limbo. I've seen disputes of people talking down lower ranks. I've seen exclusions even in Law of Retribution. 

If I say that such scenarios are not likely to happen then I'm faking reality. 

Quote

In what world would two players see a fourth leave the group, something incredibly common, and immediately attribute it to malice on the hosts part? How is this even a problem anyway if they do?

How incredibly daft.

Sorry but I'm not saying that. 

"Lets not give people this power. You just end up with that small group of players who can’t solo content, so they make sure to try and min max a party by kicking everyone they don’t think fits."

This better expresses what I'm trying to say. 

Quote

Yeah, that's what I thought, nothing.

If you say so. 

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

I never sold those as valid arguments

Then what on earth are you saying? What are you providing as arguments?

3 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

I've see those things happening in the game in the current state

So why is a kick feature bad if this already happens?

3 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Sorry but I'm not saying that

Honestly, I'm not sure you're saying anything, not of any value. Based on your recent posts you have completely lost the plot, with no idea what you're arguing, why you're arguing it or what the thread is even about anymore.

5 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

If you say so

Would you rather I accuse you of being a liar? I opted to simply comment on the fact that, as expected, you were unable to provide evidence of your claim, considering it to be a bit more tactful.

I can certainly just call you a liar instead if you insist.

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

1 minute ago, Felsagger said:

Yes, correct. We arrived to the real problem. We want an option that speeds things up. 

Ah....that's another problem. You have a recruit channel for such squads. But of course that takes time if you are not in a clan. Even in clan takes time to form dedicated farming squads. 

Let me put it this way. If you want things your way then you have to work for them like selecting a squad, talking previously and of course getting goals done with people who have the SAME interest. 

Are you saying that the game should become/ remain inconvenient because it teaches players to work for things? That's not exactly what the game is for. The game wasn't made to promote good work ethic, it was made to be entertaining and fun. Faster= better, especially for a fast pace game like warframe.

This isn't a rage game, it isn't supposed to make you jump through hoops for something as simple as a squad.

[(XBOX)SweatyPick3L]

I see no issues with OP proposals. Thank you OP. This would be a much needed QoL. 

[Felsagger]

9 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Then what on earth are you saying? What are you providing as arguments?

So why is a kick feature bad if this already happens?

Honestly, I'm not sure you're saying anything, not of any value. Based on your recent posts you have completely lost the plot, with no idea what you're arguing, why you're arguing it or what the thread is even about anymore.

Would you rather I accuse you of being a liar? I opted to simply comment on the fact that, as expected, you were unable to provide evidence of your claim, considering it to be a bit more tactful.

I can certainly just call you a liar instead if you insist.

I accept my defeat. ^^

 

Have a nice day. Take care. 

[Felsagger]

9 minutes ago, (XB1)Mentor0fHeroes said:

Are you saying that the game should become/ remain inconvenient because it teaches players to work for things? That's not exactly what the game is for. The game wasn't made to promote good work ethic, it was made to be entertaining and fun. Faster= better, especially for a fast pace game like warframe.

This isn't a rage game, it isn't supposed to make you jump through hoops for something as simple as a squad.

 

I see what you are going with this but if there are alternative I simply leave kick as the last resort in the bag. 

[(XBOX)Mentor0fHeroes]

10 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

"Lets not give people this power. You just end up with that small group of players who can’t solo content, so they make sure to try and min max a party by kicking everyone they don’t think fits."

Sounds like a lot of work to go through. Reviewing every member of a squad, analyze them, then decide whether or not to kick them out. If people would do this with the addition of host kicking, then they're already doing it. If someone would go that far out of their way to control/ bully everyone in their squad then I doubt the absence of the kicking feature has stopped them until now.

You think adding this feature is going to increase how frequently people get kicked for no reason? I doubt it. People that want to do it will do it regardless and people that don't won't. People aren't very well known for their willingness to change so I doubt we'll see an increase nor decrease in the number of bullies as a result.

Stop focusing on how people will abuse this feature, because those people do the same exact thing by dismantling the squad anyway. Instead try to focus on the people that wouldn't abuse it. They're the ones that this feature would actually effect. This is not the implementation of a new feature, the feature is already there. It's just a way of updating a feature that has been a part of this game for years.