This Game Needs A 'vote To Kick Player' Button

[-Praxa-]

it is so frustrating especially playing on survival and people keep activating life support at 70% it just wastes it, baring in mind the life support drops passed a certain amount of time drop so much... it just ruins the game and get everyone annoyed when youve asked the person nicely to only activate life support at a certain percentage.. but they dont listen and just ruins the fun game you were hoping to play with friends... 

 

I disagree. People would abuse that.

 

Instead, a block system may be useful, like if you block someone, that person can't enter the games you host. If they are really annoying and continue being so, more people would block them and eventually you would have less chance to stumble upon them in random teams.

[Cannamancer]

70+30= 100. It's not a waste, most of people don't even know how to play survival lol. By click it always at 60 or 70 you can trick the lotus into more capsules and I have lasted over 3 hours doing this. Learn how to play properly. As for vote to kick how about no, learn how to solo if PUBS bother or play with clanmeates or friends.

[(PSN)YoungRebel1997]

I never really met a troll while playing warframe but people who mostly play like that in survival are mostly noobs. So i guess try to play at higher level survival nodes or only play with friends :)

[fredbred]

That doesn't answer anything.  If life support is always restored 30% from the capsules then activating it at 60% or 30% gives the exact same results. You activate 2 at 60% each time and you have a total of 60% restored.  If you activate two at 30% then you still have a total of 60%restored.

 

The only way it is wasted is if you activate it before 70% or below. You could arguing that activating it right at 70% might be risky because someone might pick up a personal Life Support drop, wasting it, but that is it.  There being less capsules later is irrelevant.

that is not wrong but not correct :-)

 

If you are restore from 70 to 100, than any life support you collect is wasted, because 100 + 4 = 100!

 

If two of you accidentally activate LS at above 40, some of it gets wasted.

 

Yes, this is a problem when farming for neurodes or similar at earth(low level). A lot of the players do not speak english, so it's hard tell them not to do it, even though this is not their fault.

[OmegaDragotroid]

There should be a certain amount of time before a player can be kicked from a mission. This time can vary depending on the mission, of course. For example, an exterminate mission usually doesn't last long, so perhaps a minute into the mission and they're still douching, then they can be kicked. Or for a survival, perhaps 2 minutes? Anyway, you get the idea.

 

If that idea is a no go, what about a set number of reasons allowable for a kick? For example, kicking due to afk/inactivity and just idling in spawn, or rude and unsportsmanlike behavior. Perhaps even rushing ahead of the team and killing the assassination target before the rest of the team even makes it halfway across the map. Could be considered unsportsmanlike behavior in some eyes, I suppose, as you're being the I in the A-hole of Team. I think having only certain reasons allowed for a kick would potentially help reduce the amount of times this feature is abused.

 

But do I think a free-for-all kick system should be in place? Not at all. TF2 has such a thing, and it's abused so badly. Warframe is not a traditional MMO. Let's not make it play like one.

[Synthua]

I player a couple games that had vote kick and it was always abused. People didn't "vote", they just clicked the popup to get it off their screens because the vote instigator would spam it until he got his way.

 

If you have problems with people in public groups, play in invite-only groups.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Synthua

[MrsUnreal]

I don't really mind playing with noobs but there are too many occasions where you have to play with a huge d**k who spoils your game and you can't do anything about it. That is where I think the option to kick would be good.

 

However, I have one concern and that is that people will become elitist - only allowing players of certain conclave/mastery levels to play in a given squad. I think this may prove problematic, especially when you are levelling new frames/weapons. 

 

Part of the fun of playing online is that you play with a huge variety of people and they aren't huge a$$holes (most of the time). That is why I agree with 

direcyphre

[Methanoid]

vote to kick sounds great and all but is totally open to abuse, esp if used before before the end of a mission or a 5round defence reward as a means of humour.

[fredbred]

Players will always be able to abuse the mechanics of a game. Right now, one player can abuse the whole team because he CANNOT be kicked.

 

There must be a way to punish abusive and unfair behavior. Maybe Fuzzycoco could update the first post with some of the ideas in this thread (if he likes any). Some are inspiriting.

 

There could be some "rules" which could lower the current abuse.

 

Like

 

- players, who do not do any damage during a session, get NO rewards and do not complete the mission and get a message about it; there would be a statistics (AFK statistics) for the last 50 missions visible together with the mastery (eg. on mouse over). Surely, if someone would join my void mission lobby and had an AFK in the last 50 mission bigger than zero, I would consider asking him to leave. If he is good for 50 missions, he can remove it.

 

- this might be a problem for some, but I don't think, that players who complete a mission death or were death most of the mission, should be completing the mission. They should keep their collected resources, but not get the mission award. There should be an option to use an revival at the end, if they are currently dead at the time the mission is finished.

 

- if a player activates a Power Supply over 70%, he should get a big red informative text "Careful, X% of supply wasted"

 

For a vote kick option

 

- (AFK rule) players who are afk for more like 2 min during the any 5 min of the game, would be offered for others to be kicked; 

 

- players with a AFK statistics > 0 could be kicked by 2 players, otherwise 3

 

- a kicked player should keep collected resource

 

- there should be a statistics for how many times a player was kicked; i would suggest again to keep it for 50 (completed) missions

 

- a player (other than AFK from the beginning) should not be kicked after a boss is defeated

 

- if there are only two players, no one can kick the other unless the first 2 min rule

 

- no players should be kicked after 5 min of their gameplay except AFK rule

 

I know that many of you can might come up with many more useful rules / update these that could be implemented to minimize abuse. 

[Methanoid]

rules can always be abused/broken, hell i remember the first fps i played that introduced aerial/commander mode, on BF2 youd want to try out that new interesting feature, throw down some artillery strikes for your team only to have ppl on your team rush towards the arty strike to get killed intentionally so you got autobanned.

 

lots of other games have similar abuse "features", autokick or voted kicks in warframe would be no different.

[Lynxh]

I think the question has to be asked, which is the better of two evils, and do the benefits actually outweigh/change the balance for the better.

 

While I can understand people wanting tools to combat a bad situation(being powerless is not a happy feeling), I never actually felt more empowered in games that do use a votekick system(in various iterations). I felt just as powerless in just as much instances.

 

To me it represents a false sense improvement.

 

The only real cure for a good multiplayer experience is having decent people with you. Which sadly means having to actually put some effort into it. I have played the far majority of my time in WF with randoms. And while I def bumped into plenty cringe/derp situations, it is still only for minority of sessions.

 

Will adding this improve my WF experience? Not really, it will just be another factor I have to deal with, with both sides of the consequences.

[DSpite]

I... fail to see the good things behind this. Host only or pre-lobby only doesn't solve anything, why can nobody get that right?

 

Host: "I don't like *insert X unimportant thing there* KICKED!" Mid or pre game, it does not matter.

 

Also how are you supposed to tell who is a leecher from the lobby? How does that even work?

 

I hate to point his out, but if you do invite only and you get a full team, you can "kick" already. you just "exit" and everyone is dropped. A system that can kick a specific player on "Invite Only" games BEFORE the mission start is feasible simply because it saves the 45 seconds it takes to to kick EVERYONE, then re-invite who you think was better and start again.

[DSpite]

Players will always be able to abuse the mechanics of a game. Right now, one player can abuse the whole team because he CANNOT be kicked.

 

*snip*

 

Hey, you know what? If you want to impose your delusions of grandeur and decide who is worthy and who is not, start your own damn Dojo and get followers. You are also the one advocating "friendly fire" rules, so your track record of coming up with good ideas is already in dispute.

 

Should that mean that If I look at all the ideas in your posts and decide that since there is 1 bad idea in 50, I should also consider your ability to come up with good ideas impossible and just ignore all your future ideas?

 

"there would be a statistics (AFK statistics) for the last 50 missions visible together with the mastery (eg. on mouse over). Surely, if someone would join my void mission lobby and had an AFK in the last 50 mission bigger than zero, I would consider asking him to leave"

 

You don't control PUGS, you simply go along for the ride. If you don't like the ride, then get off the mission. the game does not need your archaic, arbitrary control rules to function, it functions already with Solo, Private Games and Invite Only to mitigate all of this.

[RahuHordika]

I hate to point his out, but if you do invite only and you get a full team, you can "kick" already. you just "exit" and everyone is dropped. A system that can kick a specific player on "Invite Only" games BEFORE the mission start is feasible simply because it saves the 45 seconds it takes to to kick EVERYONE, then re-invite who you think was better and start again.

Sure the kick options are less painful on invite only, since it makes more sense there. I was responding more to the posts that thought those ideas would solve the issue in the overall game.

Besides this does not rule out the possiblity of a douchy host to good people, but I guess all in all it's just variables and posibilities.

Edited August 18, 2014 by RahuStalker

[Qloshae]

it is so frustrating especially playing on survival and people keep activating life support at 70% it just wastes it, baring in mind the life support drops passed a certain amount of time drop so much... it just ruins the game and get everyone annoyed when youve asked the person nicely to only activate life support at a certain percentage.. but they dont listen and just ruins the fun game you were hoping to play with friends... 

Worse than this is the people who join invasions and just stand there in the insertion point doing nothing.

I'd say allow a 'vote kick' on anyone who has let's say done less than 10% of the damage.

The survival thing really isn't a huge issue tho in my experience, I mean, you might meet one of those like every 100th game, but the afkers seem to be in like 50% of the invasion matches.

 

So short answer is yes.

[CedarDpg]

Like

 

- players, who do not do any damage during a session, get NO rewards and do not complete the mission and get a message about it; there would be a statistics (AFK statistics) for the last 50 missions visible together with the mastery (eg. on mouse over). Surely, if someone would join my void mission lobby and had an AFK in the last 50 mission bigger than zero, I would consider asking him to leave. If he is good for 50 missions, he can remove it.

 

- this might be a problem for some, but I don't think, that players who complete a mission death or were death most of the mission, should be completing the mission. They should keep their collected resources, but not get the mission award. There should be an option to use an revival at the end, if they are currently dead at the time the mission is finished.

 

- if a player activates a Power Supply over 70%, he should get a big red informative text "Careful, X% of supply wasted"

 

For a vote kick option

 

- (AFK rule) players who are afk for more like 2 min during the any 5 min of the game, would be offered for others to be kicked; 

 

- players with a AFK statistics > 0 could be kicked by 2 players, otherwise 3

 

- a kicked player should keep collected resource

 

- there should be a statistics for how many times a player was kicked; i would suggest again to keep it for 50 (completed) missions

 

- a player (other than AFK from the beginning) should not be kicked after a boss is defeated

 

- if there are only two players, no one can kick the other unless the first 2 min rule

 

- no players should be kicked after 5 min of their gameplay except AFK rule

 

I know that many of you can might come up with many more useful rules / update these that could be implemented to minimize abuse. 

 

 

And if this gets implemented, until DE stops putting us in mostly completed missions when joining in public matchmaking, any lost rewards, credits, etc. should be deducted from your account. And if you don't have those resources, your account goes negative. An IOU to DE, so to speak.

 

I don't know how many missions (a hell of a lot) I've gotten placed in, in which the level is over 50-99% complete. Especially in exterminates. I've been dropped into exterminate missions where it's like, oh, 168/169 enemies...near the beginning of the map. Either I run to extraction, or I abort which adds to my "Missions Quit" stats. So the whole thing is a waste of my time with the exception of getting mission rewards and/or credits and whatever resources I can find before everyone extracts.

 

The only ones I don't get dropped in for instance are:

1) Defense missions on wave 6, I've been dropped into Defense missions where the loading screen comes up and the next thing I see is "Claim & Exit"/"Battle"

2) Interception past the first wave. Same deal as above.

3) Survival past 5 (or 10 in certain alerts). I've been dropped in as late as a few seconds before extraction is available.

4) Capture after all the targets have been captured. I've been dropped in missions where one was already captured but there was still one left to get.

And so on.

 

And just what I need, more distracting crap popping up on my screen. The game should not offer to kick anyone. If the feature is implemented, it should be user-initiated. And all that means is that people will kick people to get rid of the pop-up or any annoying and distracting blinking notification icons.

Edited August 18, 2014 by CedarDpg

[fredbred]

And if this gets implemented, until DE stops putting us in mostly completed missions when joining in public matchmaking, any lost rewards, credits, etc. should be deducted from your account. And if you don't have those resources, your account goes negative. An IOU to DE, so to speak.

 

I don't know how many missions (a hell of a lot) I've gotten placed in, in which the level is over 50-99% complete. Especially in exterminates. I've been dropped into exterminate missions where it's like, oh, 168/169 enemies...near the beginning of the map. Either I run to extraction, or I abort which adds to my "Missions Quit" stats. So the whole thing is a waste of my time with the exception of getting mission rewards and/or credits and whatever resources I can find before everyone extracts.

 

The only ones I don't get dropped in for instance are:

1) Defense missions on wave 6, I've been dropped into Defense missions where the loading screen comes up and the next thing I see is "Claim & Exit"/"Battle"

2) Interception past the first wave. Same deal as above.

3) Survival past 5 (or 10 in certain alerts). I've been dropped in as late as a few seconds before extraction is available.

4) Capture after all the targets have been captured. I've been dropped in missions where one was already captured but there was still one left to get.

And so on.

 

And just what I need, more distracting crap popping up on my screen. The game should not offer to kick anyone. If the feature is implemented, it should be user-initiated. And all that means is that people will kick people to get rid of the pop-up or any annoying and distracting blinking notification icons.

So basically you are saying that it needs to be ensured, that we cannot  join a game shortly before completion. That's a good point, no need to be sarcastic or offensive.

[MaxiTB]

Solution is pretty simple:

 

a) In-game List to block players. Done.

a2) Add a notification how many games are blocked for you because you got on a players ban list (learn effect).

 

b) Check EE.log, IP block those players with your firewall (works most of the time for me but can cause other issues).

 

Kicking could be abused. Blocking should happen "before" the game starts and it should be clear to player, that it is an option.

Edited August 18, 2014 by MaxiTB

[Tsukinoki]

@fredbred
Even if you do ensure that people cant join shortly before completion, what do you do about all of the high levels joining lower ranked players missions?

I've seen missions where a high ranked player in uber gear joined a team of R0's and R1's for an exterminate.
By the end he had 100% of the kills and damage done.

Under your plan that would tag all of the new players as AFKers for 50 missions, and all of the repercussions that would come from that.  And all due to absolutely no fault of their own.

Add to the fact that there is no easy way to stop that as you only need to be R2 to get the boltor prime through trades and such and that starts to become a bigger and bigger issue.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Tsukinoki

[CedarDpg]

So basically you are saying that it needs to be ensured, that we cannot  join a game shortly before completion. That's a good point, no need to be sarcastic or offensive.

 

One of my pet peeves about the game. Getting dropped in an almost complete mission in which you don't get to do anything and you've pretty much wasted time and bandwidth loading, etc. Another one is getting ripped off rewards. I did a 50 wave ODD last night until the game decided to derp and drop everyone in the squad. One of whom was the keyholder, which meant an automatic Mission Failed for all. So we all ended up spending a big chunk of time for nothing. Etc.

 

Solution is pretty simple:

 

a) In-game List to block players. Done.

a2) Add a notification how many games are blocked for you because you got on a players ban list (learn effect).

 

b) Check EE.log, IP block those players with your firewall (works most of the time for me but can cause other issues).

 

Kicking could be abused. Blocking should happen "before" the game starts and it should be clear to player, that it is an option.

 

Yeah, I would like "a." "b" is useful only if you are the host though, and has worked for me too.

 

@fredbred

Even if you do ensure that people cant join shortly before completion, what do you do about all of the high levels joining lower ranked players missions?

I've seen missions where a high ranked player in uber gear joined a team of R0's and R1's for an exterminate.

By the end he had 100% of the kills and damage done.

Under your plan that would tag all of the new players as AFKers for 50 missions, and all of the repercussions that would come from that.  And all due to absolutely no fault of their own.

Add to the fact that there is no easy way to stop that as you only need to be R2 to get the boltor prime through trades and such and that starts to become a bigger and bigger issue.

 

I have joined some games in which I got dropped into a low level squad and had killed almost everything myself while the player explored around and collected loot. (I finally noticed that the players were just exploring so I toned it back towards the end and I wouldn't have kicked them if I had the option to though.)

[Synthua]

- players, who do not do any damage during a session, get NO rewards and do not complete the mission and get a message about it; there would be a statistics (AFK statistics) for the last 50 missions visible together with the mastery (eg. on mouse over). Surely, if someone would join my void mission lobby and had an AFK in the last 50 mission bigger than zero, I would consider asking him to leave. If he is good for 50 missions, he can remove it.

 

Oh, wow, a big fat middle finger to all stealth players. How creative.

[JHarlequin]

 All sorts of modifiers and limitations are often brought up when it comes to inactivity or trolling behavior.  Sometimes it makes sense and some times there is a counter.

 

 No reward for no damage except that sometimes some people just mash four that much and move that fast that nothing is left behind.

 

 Idle players can be kicked after a minute.  They move at 58 seconds, and then the minute starts again.

 

 Player falls behind so many rooms.  Just keep up or legitimate players fall behind rushers and get kicked by another type of troll.

 

 Even combining several of them still leaves something to be desired.  If a kick system goes in, I never want to see it be in players hands.  It better be based on several of these concepts combined and be completely automated.  Players just can't have the choice except for a specific time that people have keyed on in a couple posts here.

 

 People have clued on the one fact that it is possible that when the squad is being formed, or in between missions, the host possibly should have the choice of dropping a player in favor of a different player.  No loss to the player at that time, and it keeps hosts from having to drop the whole group and reinvite specific people.  It probably won't hurt much or bother people too often that a host can chose their team better.  It does mean fewer people will get the chance to be invited to something they can't handle, but then again, that would improve the experience for players that are enjoying the game, and would only hinder the people that just want a shortcut.

[CedarDpg]

 

 Player falls behind so many rooms.  Just keep up or legitimate players fall behind rushers and get kicked by another type of troll.

 

 

Not to mention, in survivals not everyone runs in the same direction. It's not efficient from a spawn rate standpoint, but you could have the four people in four different ends of the map.

[RealPandemonium]

This is almost never needed and people would just spam vote kicks to outlet their frustration on random people instead of actually improving things. 

[RSITH]

No I don't think they should have cause it could ruin beginners experiences and others. Like if you say like I wanna do a T4 but, your supposedly not powerful or strong they just would kick you out. Get to play nothing. Players are very picky.