Preventing One Rusher From Ruining It For Everyone

[MXXVI]

Pick-up group.

 

Basically a pug is a team formed of random people gathered by a matchmaking system, or by shouting "WHO WANTS TO DO STUFF!" on a general chat channel >.<

 

The distinction obviously being; PUGs tend to be disorganised and lacking in communication compared to a group of friends in a private game.

 

 

 

And if you just want to rush it by yourself over and over, play solo. You don't need to play public for that. I'm not even sure why you would.

 

They do it to show off. I mean, you gotta have an audience, right?

Edited June 24, 2013 by MXXVI

[DeadlyNerd]

OP is actually suggesting what's already being used at Jackal. The boss fight wont start until everyone's in the boss room. I don't understand why they haven't used that same logic on all other bosses.

[MXXVI]

Well, to be fair, the Jackal solution is kind of a blunt one which presents its own problems.

 

Namely, that if one person doesn't stick with the team and decides to go stare at a wall for 10 minutes, the entire team has to stand around in the Jackal's chamber waiting for him.

 

And this does happen rather a lot.

 

 

...that being said, it does offer the team a chance to have their picture taken with the Jackal before he gets all stompy and angry.

Edited June 25, 2013 by BoogieMan82

[Beelzebubbles]

OK, so maybe I am the only one who has ever had this happen. I am farming a boss but some jerk joins in and just slowly goes through the level. My farm is not so slow but he aggros every room and he has to trudge through every enemy, I finally reaches the boss. The waypoint for the boss is gone, and he can’t find the room and I have to run back to him then boss or wait 10 minutes.

 

This was really getting to me and a few others. This guy would ruin it for the group of us. Then a horrible thing happened, I hit a door that requires more than one person to open. This slow SOB made me wait for a good long while.

 

This gave me an idea. All doors leading to bosses should never require more than one person to open. This works out well for everyone. Slow people can’t ruin it for a group that wants to go for the objective, and a group that’s really rushing will have more than one person in the lead.

 

I don't know, man--I think the opposite problem is more of an issue, since the waypoints move and the items will despawn after a period of time, and if you can rush to the boss, then you most likely are more than capable of taking him out without the support of the slowbies.  My point being--you could easily avoid the problem you've described by not playing public matches, and it would be less of a problem for you than for the slow groups that you're joining into.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Beelzebubbles

[Runzu]

 

 

 

I'm a person who likes to loot everything. So something like this would be preferable. ^

[MXXVI]

@Enot83

 

Man, don't even try that. We've been over this.

 

Your mantra suggests that the problem is one of clashing yet entirely valid points of view in a team. This is how you sum it up: that the problem lies in a "fast" person joining a "slow team", or a "slow" person joining a "fast team".

 

This isn't the case. This suggests that the "fast" person cannot decide to move slower. That the "slow" person cannot make more effort to keep up. That their haste (or lack thereof) is somehow unavoidable.

 

The real problem lies with people who refuse to adapt to the team. You're right when you say "If you're playing in online mode, you are accepting that any of the above may occur"

 

But what you fail to say is: "If you're playing in online mode, you are accepting that any of the above may occur, but also accept that if you are the odd one out, you must change your behaviour"

 

Even if you're in a Rhino with a Thrak helmet, you can try to move faster; you can try to keep up with the team, by not lingering or taking side routes.

 

If you're the only fast one, you can simply... slow down.

 

To put it very plainly; my point of contention is that your oft-repeated bold, italicised passage fails to correctly identify the true root of the problem, and rather, dwells upon the symptom itself. That's all.

 

 

 

EDIT: To be more specific, I think the problem would lie in enforcing these game modes. If someone started trolling fast teams by being slow etc... how would you deal with it?

If you add a vote kick system, would this merely fuel the fires?

Edited June 25, 2013 by BoogieMan82

[Beelzebubbles]

One of my following posts.  Stated to keep the waypoint for the boss as a ! and change the extraction to and E in the diamond.  Since again 1 fast person can't start the extraction timer.

 

 

That's good, but with the items despawning, it still bones the slowbies, y'know what I mean?  I'd be one angry sailor if someone rushed Hyena, got a control module drop, and then it disappeared before the rest of us could get there.

[JusticeJack]

OK, so maybe I am the only one who has ever had this happen. I am farming a boss but some jerk joins in and just slowly goes through the level. My farm is not so slow but he aggros every room and he has to trudge through every enemy, I finally reaches the boss. The waypoint for the boss is gone, and he can’t find the room and I have to run back to him then boss or wait 10 minutes.

 

This was really getting to me and a few others. This guy would ruin it for the group of us. Then a horrible thing happened, I hit a door that requires more than one person to open. This slow SOB made me wait for a good long while.

 

This gave me an idea. All doors leading to bosses should never require more than one person to open. This works out well for everyone. Slow people can’t ruin it for a group that wants to go for the objective, and a group that’s really rushing will have more than one person in the lead.

sadly i am with this guy.

While it's kinda of a rude move to just super rush, you have to think that maybe,that "jerk" is a dude that has only10-15min of playtime every 6 hours.

And he needs blueprints or drops from the boss.And MAYBE he had done that level 10.000 times.

Look, everyone here has his goals.None of them is "better" or more "important" than the other.If you really hate to rush,you can solo.If you can't solo for too high difficulty grab friends.

I hate when i have to run for the 100.000 times to the hyena for control module,and someone just goes around chilling, killing every useless mob or security camera, BUT i respect their will to enjoy more than me the mission, so i don't type bad words or don't mark drops.Since a boss take quite some times, Anyo and Vor apart, you should be able to reach that place in time, and IF you see the boss fight starting, get a move, or don't complain,really.

Edited June 24, 2013 by JusticeJack

[MXXVI]

If that guy who only has 10-15 minutes of playtime can solo the boss, he needs to click "solo"

 

That's the issue we're discussing here: people who rush straight to the boss and kill it before the team even shows up.

 

If the reason you're doing this is because of time constraints, and you can solo it... then solo it. Don't play online, which almost by definition requires waiting for other people.

 

EDIT:

 

Additionally, there is currently a high probability of the schematic drops from bosses flying across the room and landing somewhere peculiar.

 

While this, I'm sure, could be fixed in a patch (and probably will be)... at the moment, it makes lone "rushers" even more problematic, because only they saw where the damn thing landed.

Edited June 25, 2013 by BoogieMan82

[Enot83]

@Enot83

 

Man, don't even try that. We've been over this.

 

Your mantra suggests that the problem is one of clashing yet entirely valid points of view in a team. This is how you sum it up: that the problem lies in a "fast" person joining a "slow team", or a "slow" person joining a "fast team".

 

This isn't the case. This suggests that the "fast" person cannot decide to move slower. That the "slow" person cannot make more effort to keep up. That their haste (or lack thereof) is somehow unavoidable.

 

The real problem lies with people who refuse to adapt to the team. You're right when you say "If you're playing in online mode, you are accepting that any of the above may occur"

 

But what you fail to say is: "If you're playing in online mode, you are accepting that any of the above may occur, but also accept that if you are the odd one out, you must change your behaviour"

 

Even if you're in a Rhino with a Thrak helmet, you can try to move faster; you can try to keep up with the team, by not lingering or taking side routes.

 

If you're the only fast one, you can simply... slow down.

 

 

 

 

 

Now would you like to address the other issues I raised, concerning segregation and the possible conflict caused by this? Because while I'm open to any solution to this ongoing speed debate, I do suspect that this would cause more conflict.

 

 

As to your other commentary, that is not what it states at all, it does not say that players can't change their behavior within a game, if a fast person did, then obviously in that game, they are not playing in that style, so there is not 1 fast person and 3 slow people, or any mix of scenarios.  What each of those lines indicates is exactly what you, and the OP and other threads complain about, then when someone chooses not to do so, and still plays with that mindset regardless of what is taking place, problems arise.

 

Again,

If a player who can play faster than others, joins a game and doesn't rush, are they a rusher that game? no.

If a player who can play faster than others, joins a game and does rush, are they a rusher that game? yes. <- this is what is pointed out as the problem.

 

 

 

That's good, but with the items despawning, it still bones the slowbies, y'know what I mean? I'd be one angry sailor if someone rushed Hyena, got a control module drop, and then it disappeared before the rest of us could get there.

 

Correct, though the materials vanishing is a problem in and of itself, that should be addressed, as this occurs in situations that are not even being described in this thread.

[JusticeJack]

Still, i think that waypoint should stay longer,AND drops must be fixed for flying away,or disappearing at all.

Edited June 25, 2013 by BoogieMan82

[Kachocalvo]

 

 

 

+1

The day this gets implemented, this game will be waaaay better for me.

[Niffilum]

This gave me an idea. All doors leading to bosses should require more than one person to open. This works out well for everyone. Rusher can’t ruin it for a group that doesn’t feel like rushing, and a group that’s really rushing will have more than one person in the lead.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Enot83]

Still, i think that waypoint should stay longer,AND drops must be fixed for flying away,or disappearing at all.

Fixes like these, help in all situations, not just for public games or what is pointed out in this thread.

[JusticeJack]

+1

The day this gets implemented, this game will be waaaay better for me.

Man, i can't wait to have that.

[MXXVI]

@Enot83

 

"Again" you say.

 

The point I'm trying to get across to you (yet again) is that your passage indicates a problem that could be entirely resolved by segregation. It suggests that people would stick to their boxes, if such boxes were provided.

 

 

What I'm saying is: the problem has nothing to do with speed, deep down. And everything to do with selfish behaviour. And I think we're actually agreed on this. Though I seem to recall that you had some major aversion to increasing game difficulty in specific areas in order to encourage teamwork...

 

Anyway, with that in mind, would you like to address my prior question:

 

Given that the core problem is player attitudes... would segregation actually solve anything? How would you enforce these game modes? If you implement a vote kick system, would this cause too many occurrances of "spiteful" kicks?

 

Like I said in an earlier post: what happens when these new added "rules" for playing (which is what would be implied by the presence of game modes) are interpreted too broadly by the players, and people are getting kicked because they opened a locker?

 

And what would you say to the idea of dramatically increasing boss difficulty, according to team count? (this could be fine-tuned according to Warframe level and/or player mastery rank etc)

[MEsoJD]

 Well, the problem is that your farming. Don't expect people to act according to your wishes. Try to solo when you farm, like meh!

[MEsoJD]

 

 

 

 I support this, if it keeps people from complaining in the forums.

[VoidWraith]

 

 

 

someone.... get this thing inputted already....its annoying sometimes....

Edited June 24, 2013 by VoidWraith

[MXXVI]

 I support this, if it keeps people from complaining in the forums.

 

 

But Does it?

 

I keep asking this question, and nobody seems to answer.

 

How would you enforce this?

 

If you enforced it with vote kicks, wouldn't you then get countless whining threads on the forums saying "I got kicked because I didn't get to the lift in under 3 seconds" or "I got kicked because I used super jump instead of the stairs"

 

If you didn't enforce it, then the game modes would be full of new players who didn't understand them, and trolls.

Edited June 25, 2013 by BoogieMan82

[VoidWraith]

But Does it?

 

I keep asking this question, and nobody seems to answer.

 

How would you enforce this?

 

If you enforced it with vote kicks, wouldn't you then get countless whining threads on the forums saying "I got kicked because I didn't get to the lift in under 3 seconds" or "I got kicked because I used super jump instead of the stairs"

 

If you didn't enforce it, then the game modes would be full of new players who didn't understand them, and trolls.

 

if theres any way to enforce things, there are ways to abuse it. usually by, like you said, trolls. trolls arent always dumb, sometimes they get a little smart and abuse the vote/kick system...

Edited June 24, 2013 by VoidWraith

[Enot83]

-snip-

It's not the first time.  You can save yourself the effort of trying to save face.  Apparently, according to you, those 6 lines are so complicated, you need half a thread devoted to explaining it solely to you.  Even as I explain what it means, you sit and argue, simply out of spite for having been wrong.

 

Thinking that I've ever supported a vote kick, or been averse to making the game more difficult.

 

I have supported increased difficulty, I have supported blacklisting (not vote kicking in a game), I have supported giving players flags for their gaming mindset in missions.

 

As to your theoretically scenarios, no gaming world will ever be perfect or devoid of trolls, problematic players, etc.  Nor does the proposal of the OP accomplish this.

 

3 people join 1 person, then sit by the door laughing at his inability to open the door.  Yes the OP's suggestion is devoid of problems isn't it.

 

The basis for both arguments is around that there is someone maliciously doing something, or with intent playing differently than others. 

Edited June 24, 2013 by Enot83

[JusticeJack]

votekicking is the worst idea possibile,and i think all of us agree.
That system (assault or explore groups) should not be enforced, it should be a choice for the player : if you choose assault but want to look every corner of the map, you can't blame the rushers,you are in the wrong party,same goes for the other case.
Freedom of choice,and accepting consequences of said choice.

[Enot83]

votekicking is the worst idea possibile,and i think all of us agree.

That system (assault or explore groups) should not be enforced, it should be a choice for the player : if you choose assault but want to look every corner of the map, you can't blame the rushers,you are in the wrong party,same goes for the other case.

Freedom of choice,and accepting consequences of said choice.

Yup.  Show up in the wrong group, don't come on the forums bashing those players for playing exactly the way they said they would and you agreed you would.

 

But we still have people who want to pick pick pick, "what about that crate that was broken, does that mean they aren't rushing anymore?" what a laughable argument, that it would be brought up as being a serious counter is just hilarious especially since it was desired to be taken serious.

[MXXVI]

@Enot83

 

"It's not the first time.  You can save yourself the effort of trying to save face."

 

Er what?

 

I've repeatedly pointed out the fundamental flaw in your copy'n'paste zero-constructive analysis of this issue... how am I trying to save face? I have nothing to save o.O

 

Oookay.

 

 

Anyway, we've already covered that the OP's suggestion is problematic, though if there was simply a 2 person door lock on bosses... that could not be "trolled" by slower players, could it? I mean, if one person lags behind in that scenario, they can't prevent the boss fight from starting, because you only need 2 people to open the door, right?

 

As for my "theoretically scenarios" (sic), we're not talking remote possibilities. We're talking certainties. You know how the online world is. You've played this game. The point I'm making is: if you implement these game modes, would it substantially lessen the problem? I'm not sure. Maybe. Maybe not.

 

But okay, let's approach this from a different angle.

 

Increasing boss difficulty, to prevent anyone from soloing the boss during a team game. Any problems? Is there any way in which this could still be abused or exploited to such an extent as to interrupt mission progress?

 

 

 

@JusticeJack -

 

"That system (assault or explore groups) should not be enforced, it should be a choice for the player : if you choose assault but want to look every corner of the map, you can't blame the rushers,you are in the wrong party,same goes for the other case."

 

I er... I think you may be missing the point. If you implement this game mode, and don't enforce it, then you'll have just as many complaints on the forum. Because the "explore" game mode will be full of rushers showing off, and the "assault" game mode would be full of trolls slowing people down.

 

Selfish people are gonna be selfish unless you actively do something to correct their behaviour.

 

 

@Enot83 again -

 

"But we still have people who want to pick pick pick, "what about that crate that was broken, does that mean they aren't rushing anymore?" what a laughable argument, that it would be brought up as being a serious counter is just hilarious especially since it was desired to be taken serious."

 

I... I'm really not sure how to respond to this. I think you need to give that some more thought. This is a little awkward...

Edited June 24, 2013 by MXXVI