Work In Progress Vote Kick Update

Spytle said:

All with great intentions. I like most of it.

Here is an example of where ignore maybe become a hinder long term. At one point I was a horrible player. Got some guidance and became a much better player. Now if some put me on ignore when I stunk and now I do not, this person will never get a chance to play with me in this game again. This is a not good long term. Can the ignore liste have say a set timeframe, say 3 to 6 month. This gives players the ability to improve in maybe presentation of themselves or as a gamer in general.

I state this from experience from myself. One tank had me on ignore from my bad trolling days; however, when I ran breach he was like oh I had you on ignore, you are not all that bad. I adding you to my friends as you are a good troll and we need those. With that said, players can change and grow. Keeping the ignore players on permentaly maybe not good long term for the community.

Food for thought.

If you form the group, the alt will have no way to answer you on LFG as he is on ignore. You also cannot answer him searching on LFG as he is on your ignore. The only way to construct this is via somebody who is not ignoring anyone of you and building a group you both answer too. Rare, but interesting scenario To avoid it, build your own groups

No one is avoiding anything, other than a lengthy, unnecessary debate on the subject of our data. We're not looking to prove a precise point about full premade groups versus completely pug groups, or some combination in-between. It wasn't the important question.

We discussed this immediately when we decided to do this. It was immediately recognized as a possible distinction we could make, but would certainly make the endeavor more complicated and take more time to set up. The notion of "premade" means little in this test. You cannot really tell the difference between a preformed group of strangers from LFG from one based off a friends list and tells, or a full PUG from the queuing system for that matter. Even if you weeded out league groups there would be little point. The ratio of league versus non league runs aren't going to change that significantly. In the end, we deemed it to be a level of granularity we didn't need in order to get the information we wanted.

I explain what we were trying to prove, and that anecdotal feedback as well as the empirical, high level look at the data on instances run versus completed was what we cared about - to see what a world without vote kicking looked like. In the end whether it was a full pug or a full premade grouping, people still managed to be successful at the same level. They just had different griefing issues.

The real question is, do you agree with the result or not? If you do, great, what do you care? If not, why? You can leave comments about either here. I'm not interested in getting into the statistical post mortem with anyone. It serves no purpose going forward on this issue. I'm only responding because I feel you're saying we're ducking the issue and embarrassed about something we missed. We're not, and we didn't.

No. Most player make it to ignore for scamming, spamming and presenting other bad behavior with up to cyberstalking to make it to ignore. If you "stunk" performance-wise you will not have made many lists for that; if you "stunk" and "trolled bad" in behavior you deserve your spot.

However: I sense the ignore list will be abused to not be queued with underperformers from now on (or from the day it goes live).
Still: no timeframe. It kills the purpose of a ignore list completely.

Agreed. I'll say 3 months is a short period and will suggest 6 months to 1 year. Besides that I agreed that a person can mature and became well behave/better players learning from the experience of interacting with the community.

That will also free those that got in the ignore list for being under gear or wrongly geared.

My 2 cents.

I have no issue with what is being postulated as the changes to kicking and ignore/blocking... but I have a question, if you pay to play and lets say you are a legendary player who has and still spends a lot of money on this game... lets say buying market cash, etc..., do you not deserve the right to know who and why you are getting kicked or ignored?...I think it is fair for those who are being kicked/ignored/blocked to know why since they are the some of them are the ones paying to keep DCUO alive.... I know many people know me as fallenBlueLatern and I try my best to be a great healer and try even harder to allow others to get replays etc from me so they can get the most out of the game, this cost me lots of REAL money, I would like to know why I am being kicked or Ignored/Blocked, I think I have paid enough to know why! I say this so I can get better as a player and produce in game, to benefit other gamers. Trust me I would love to let Scammers and free-loaders know why I ignore them or kick them, but I also would like the ability to let someone get better, by letting them know why they were kicked, so they can grow and mature in game... granted some people are trolls and need to leave the game all together but that is just my opinion and i realize it is not worth a hill of beans to some of you, but my two cents are spent and now I will get off my soap-box.

It would also require us to keep up on our ignore list, make us as player accountable for keeping it up to date. Some players simply do not play and therefore should not be on the list any more.

I would rather the vote-kicking be left in the game and here's why...

Even with abuse, fewer people are being inconvenienced per event if kicking is allowed because it boils down to negatively impacting seven players versus negatively impacting one player.



Let me expound on this a little... If abuse occurs because of no ability to vote-kick (player lying to get into group then does not perform, holding the group up for some ransom, etc) then the other 7 folks are being negatively impacted in some manner as they are being held up by this one person.

If abuse occurs due to being able to vote-kick (kicking just before final boss, random kicking just to be a Richard, etc) then only the person being kicked is being negatively impacted.

Even when taking extremes into consideration, if the amount of issues are equal under both conditions, fewer people are negatively impacted if vote-kicking is in the game and thus it gets my vote.

The term "right" is thrown around far too loosely these days. To be blunt, no you do not have a right to know why someone doesn't want you in their group. Would it be nice? Yes. Would it be polite? Absolutely? But a "right"? No.

Did you read the opening post by Spytle? Vote kicking is coming back. It will get an UI update. The update on the ignore function is additional as it's also needed. So I don't get the "rather" in your post, as it is coming back.

It's because I've seen some attempts at arguing against it coming back.

I wonder. Did the completion ratio calculate leaving and going into a separate instance complete? Any individual instance can be completed once several players cycle through it from coming and going. And the people who just simply left will just requeue into a different instance. If thats the case then the % would of course always be minimal whether you compared 1, 2 or even 3 weeks of testing.

Even so the proposed changes are in fact some of the best ideas( many from the community) that need to be implemented.

I agree with the choices made. And the changing of the kick system.

Fair, enough I like your examples.

Ok, but really: the point of arguing is over What Spytle offers in the OP is a concept of enhancing the current situation for all sides involved (except for griefers' side, but they shouldn't get any support anyway ) with simple and more or less easy to add functions and updates; he also states that this easy enhancements are the preferred way instead of a complicated solution that by his opinion will in the end just get loppholed again by players.

As there is no "easy" addition to deal with blackmail- or hostage-situations without kicking, Spytle pretty much made a point here with arguing being useless - unless someone knows fast and easy solutions to keep groups free of griefers without kicking. There were some, but they were not of the easy kind as they'd use quite some time and manpower to be created and monitored. The argument on the rough how is done, it's time to take care of details now.

Here's my question: How oblivious as a human being must you (generally speaking) be to not realize that your d***ish actions would put you on someone's ignore list??? I'm sure at some point, someone who does tolerate that individual might tell him (or her) the consequences of getting put into people's ignore list. If that info is not enough to get them to change their ways, they fully deserve longer queue times with no further explanation.

What i'd say is, everyone tell someone. Tell the person you're about to ignore what's happening. If enough people do it, they'll at the very least be informed. No need to add extra complication to this system.

I agree, just offering a view I hadn't seen posted yet.

Doesn't need to be personalized. If you really think the population in DCUO will not get the info about ignore lists starting to impact queue times, then a "you have just been added to another ignore list; that's one less player you'll queue with" will do. As soon as a name shows up, those fools will feel offended and ask friends to ask the player why they got ignored. An anonymous hint will do as well. Or an entry on the ignore menu telling you on how many ignore lists you actually are, above the function to operate your own ignore list.

I have a genuine question regarding ignoring someone ... Dunno if it's already been answered ...

When you say you ignore someone and they nor their alts will be able to group you and I assume message you... Will you be able to see all their alts in your ignore list...

I ask this because this will be a tool for people who want to snoop around on people's alts then immediately take them off ignore after they found out ..

Te reason i ask is many people like to hop on an alt unknown to any one where we hunt collections and bits with out being bothered with tells asking us go do stuff or ninja invite when we just want to farm for a little while ... As there is no "do not disturb" feature...

Of course this is not a huge problem just would be a little disappointing ..

Appreciate the response.

It's good (interesting) to know that you cannot tell the difference between premade groups (LFG) compared to queued players. Without that distinction (and without raid completion time) you're not weeding out a problem, moreso than checking a hypothesis (that being - does removing the vote-kick option reduce the overall amount of content run).

It's my fault for extrapolating the problem. Like you originally stated - you wanted to see if this in-game feature limits content exposure, and you did.

Either way, thank you for testing it. I personally didn't care until it impacted myself directly, but I have seen the concern brought up daily on the forums - so this test can be the foundation for the direction you wish to go.