PUGs who flee on first sign of trouble

[ranks21]

so you want to punish players for aborting a mission << gosh the level of crazy has gone through the roof  ha ha ha ..

[armedpoop]

5 minutes ago, PureIcarus said:

No YOU get off your high horse... you are incorrect and cant give that up... this is TEAM based game... you leave your team, you get punished...

Seriously, what is your problem? You feel so right about this when you couldnt be more wrong. I dont understand how one can feel so right about something just so clearly wrong.

[armedpoop]

2 minutes ago, PureIcarus said:

IF a player crashes or DCs, the game allows them to rejoin the party they were removed from... They idea of punishment it to encourage players to stick to their teams... to DISCOURAGE players from leaving... its not about the punishment... its about the threat of punishment... Its a morality thing, do you stay and fight until the end, or leave and deal with the consequences... I'm so sick of people who cant just accept that there are bad people out there who quit because they dont like someone on the team... Thoes people need to be punished in order to encourage teams sticking together and working together... Im not saying you are incorrect about punishments... but even if its a casual pve game.... Leaving still need a penalty in order to discourage leaving.

No it doesnt need a penalty, and penilzing the types of players you are describing would not discourage them, this system would only be a problem for other players that have actual reasons to quit besides "not liking somebody on the team" (who leaves for this reason anyway?)

[Cray]

Just now, PureIcarus said:

IF a player crashes or DCs, the game allows them to rejoin the party they were removed from... They idea of punishment it to encourage players to stick to their teams... to DISCOURAGE players from leaving... its not about the punishment... its about the threat of punishment... Its a morality thing, do you stay and fight until the end, or leave and deal with the consequences... I'm so sick of people who cant just accept that there are bad people out there who quit because they dont like someone on the team... Thoes people need to be punished in order to encourage teams sticking together and working together... Im not saying you are incorrect about punishments... but even if its a casual pve game.... Leaving still need a penalty in order to discourage leaving.

You can't always rejoin the party. All too often, someone will take your place, or the mission is so fast, they finish by the time you log back in. Where's your chance then?

This would create so many problems, and solve very few, if any at all. This is a non-competitive PvE game. I think we'll be fine without penalties.

[(PSN)Cwellann]

Right there in the title... pugs.  You don't want to deal with the time to put a group together, you deal with whatever the hand you're given is.  Don't like it?  Make friends/run with clan/hit the recruiting channel.  "I had a bad match so now I demand shaming utility in game" ... no.  

[-Temp0-]

59 minutes ago, ThunderTitz said:

Read.

I said once the objective is met.

You can tell you're lagging from the host early on.

Not true. Plus,one thing is lags you can live with but often it turns into a slide show in a relatively long missions like interceptions. If a host have a toaster computer/internet, it often starts from minor lagging and progress further until host migration takes place or people start dying and quiting not being able to handle this bs. 

Sometimes there are no visual lags but your mods are lagging like hell - in this case dying once often resets them, but more often then not sooner or later people will lose connection to the host anyway so they don't bother unless it's a raid or a sortie.

Quote

Punish thoes who run away from a match... if you dont want a temporary debuff or something, then dont leave... if you can live with that debuff... be my guest and leave.

With all their faults, DE isn't known for "punishing" players unless they're straight up afking or abuse something. So not gonna happen anyway. As well as a kick option.

[Slaviar]

34 minutes ago, PureIcarus said:

No YOU get off your high horse... you are incorrect and cant give that up... this is TEAM based game... you leave your team, you get punished...

Ah, the righteous zeal...

[Vynstik]

42 minutes ago, ThunderTitz said:

OK, after reading the concerns and knowing the reasons.

I think the compromise is the following:

I) If you abort a mission when objective is met, the results happen.
1) Your name is yellow text to everyone (all chats).
2) It lasts for 15mins.
3) If you do it again, it adds an addition 15mins.
4) Once the time is met, your name reverts to white again.

II) Conditions where your name will not be turned yellow.
1) If you DC from the mission.
2) If you forced DC from the mission (this how you can abort a mission without yellow name).
- Reason to leave this option available to players is for legit reasons.
- Also those who abuse, will have to take time to relog which allows legit players to rePUG Sorties without them coming back in time.

This set will work.

If this was for PvP, I could understand why you're doing this proposition, but for PvE, like stated before me, it's easy to form a group and if it's in public games, someone will replace in 30-40 secs.

But I like the idea to be able to re-join games if you are disconnected from it, on normal missions, it have no uses but in endless (defence, survival, interception), that could be a great addition, avoiding reward losses from net crashes.

The color name would just be player shaming, Warframe doesn't need this kind of things.

Your ideas would be better for a PvP game, not PvE.

[--RV--Meta]

Player/Name Shaming is against Warframe's Code of Conduct.  -The actual rules

 

Just throwing that out there, fellas.

[Rekkou]

1 hour ago, PureIcarus said:

You SHOULD be punished for Aborting... you SHOULD be punished because you abandoned your team... weather or not you had a good reason does not matter. If its a temporary 15 minute thing, you can live with it. it happens in so many FPS games and people dont complain about it unless its unfair... you can deal with it... so stop trying to protect people who deserve to be punished for running from too many matches.

If you bring that attitude to a game, it's the more reason people shouldn't be punished for aborting, they're probably just trying to escape from team mates like you.

[Sennera]

I feel like this has about as much chance to get implemented as the option to kick players has.

Something like this would promote a more toxic community, which is undesirable and the reason kicking people from squads isn't a thing. Aside from that, I agree with previous posters that people aborting likely have reason to abort. I've had to abort for pizzas in the oven (as one of the early posts suggests) a couple times, or had to abort because of sudden lag late in the mission that leaves me unable to activate my powers (as another post suggests). I've also aborted willingly because the host just finds a safe niche in the map and sits there leeching off the rest of the group.

--

38 minutes ago, Vynstik said:

-sniiip-

But I like the idea to be able to re-join games if you are disconnected from it, on normal missions, it have no uses but in endless (defence, survival, interception), that could be a great addition, avoiding reward losses from net crashes.

-sniiip-

This is a thing. I had a frost drop connection at wave 38 in a T4D and rejoin near the end of wave 39. When you lose connection or crash mid-mission, you're given the option to rejoin once you're back in your liset, so long as the host's session is still active. He even retained all the rewards before wave 40!

Edited May 30, 2016 by Sennera

[-Temp0-]

8 minutes ago, Sennera said:

He even retained all the rewards before wave 40!

What. If you lose connection, you lose everything and game will begin to count your progress from the wave you rejoined from. It even states "wave 5", not 10 or 40 for example.

[Cray]

4 minutes ago, Nomen_Nescio said:

What. If you lose connection, you lose everything and game will begin to count your progress from the wave you rejoined from. It even states "wave 5", not 10 or 40 for example.

Recent change. Losing connection and reconnecting allows you to retain the rewards.

I had a guy drop just before a reward wave ended, and didn't get back in until after we voted to stay. When he got back in, that reward was in his progress window.

Edited May 30, 2016 by DeltaPhantom

[(PSN)Nyxn607]

22 hours ago, PureIcarus said:

No YOU get off your high horse... you are incorrect and cant give that up... this is TEAM based game... you leave your team, you get punished...

This isn't WOW or Dota 2 ... this is a free to play shooter game not a PVP match.  If you don't want people to leave in a PUBLIC MATCH, then either go solo, or play with friends/clan mates/recruit.  Punishing a pug player who leaves for what ever reason is not going to accomplish anything other than dividing the community even further than it already is. Someone said it earlier, if it was a PVP game then yea I would agree with having a punishment system for abandoning.  However if I join a pug mission I expect 1 or 2 players to leave, it happen.  If you think you are some kind of god tier play then I suggest growing up and looking outside once and a while.  There is more to life than warframe ....

[MagPrime]

On 5/29/2016 at 4:46 PM, ThunderTitz said:

Maybe I do play differently than most players.

 

When running Survival, my clan don't camp.

But with pugs, they chicken out sooo fast it's annoying.

If someone on the team dies twice it's like time to leave or bail.

 

Rescue or Spy, when alarms go off.

People start bailing.

Even though I can completed a Grineer Ceres alarm in 5 seconds or less (without cipher).

 

I guess when I PUG, there's less than 5% of players I bump into that ever see things thru.

 

So that's the reason why I want this, so I know who not to PUG with.

Wait.  Your system wouldn't show the names until after you've joined a pug, that is pick up group and used to describe random match making, so that means that if you get matched to someone you don't like, you would...abort, right?

You would willingly label yourself as a team deserter, all because you don't want to team with someone.

There's a word, that I'm thinking of.  Starts with an H, ends with ypocrite.

[MagPrime]

If it bothers you that much, put the offending players on ignore.  IIRC, they will not be able to team up with you via match making again.

Hek, I've had to drop teams due to my nephews having some kind of three second meltdown, someone at the door or even giant freaking spiders that drop from the ceiling.

Why should I be punished for leaving under those circumstances, especially when my team slot is easily filled by another random.

[-CM-Grendil]

On 5/29/2016 at 7:06 PM, ThunderTitz said:

I'll take 1 or 2 unranked gear player over Rhino+Tonkor30.

Can't tell you how many of those players are horrible.

Isn't that kind of assumptive, though?

While I have a Tonkor myself, I tend to use weapons other than Tonkor, because I feel as though one day it's gonna get the big nerf bat, and I want to be proficient in various types of weapons so I can immediately adjust when something like that happens to any wepaon, not just the Tonka-Toy.

Yesterday, I got stuck in a 5 minute loop of joining squads, and seeing the host leave because they saw a person with a certain frame/weapon combo they didn't like. And this wasn't a hard set of missions, either. I hate the elitist cherry-picking in this game because of some WoW-esque mentality of "OMGweaponAwithframeBisSCRUB".

[Big_Gunz]

18 hours ago, -CM-Grendil said:

Isn't that kind of assumptive, though?

While I have a Tonkor myself, I tend to use weapons other than Tonkor, because I feel as though one day it's gonna get the big nerf bat, and I want to be proficient in various types of weapons so I can immediately adjust when something like that happens to any wepaon, not just the Tonka-Toy.

Yesterday, I got stuck in a 5 minute loop of joining squads, and seeing the host leave because they saw a person with a certain frame/weapon combo they didn't like. And this wasn't a hard set of missions, either. I hate the elitist cherry-picking in this game because of some WoW-esque mentality of "OMGweaponAwithframeBisSCRUB".

I hate to be judgemental.

But so far, the PUGs I ran haven't proven it wrong to me (5/5 so far).

 

I know there are players who can be Rhino and Tonkor30 and be badass.

And the sample set I have is not reflective, but I guess I am very unlucky with that.

 

Don't get me wrong, I still ran with these groups.

Win or loose, I stayed for the challenge.

[John89brensen]

Shaming players is not the way to go, there are many reasons for aborting missions, and ultimately its a game, so you cant force people to play. 

Lets look at some problems implementing this system would create:

 -Being forced to stay, a player might follow the squad (assuming there are no lag related issues like doors not opening) but not cooperate with them.

 - Would this yellow text apply for private messages? if not, would you also implement a kick button to get rid of players bearing a "shame mark" that got into your squad? I can see that getting out of hand quickly and being abused by hosts.

 - Players that were branded, fairly or unfairly, would quickly come to resent this system, maybe even quitting the game. Not a very smart business plan for a game company.

Lastly you should appeal to the players best interest, ask for their help, even if you dont need it. If they call you a noob, or tell you to go F yourself, well you now have someone to add to your ignore list, or maybe there is a map/lag/bug/or other issue that prevents them from progressing.

Edited June 1, 2016 by John89brensen