Work In Progress Vote Kicking Disabled Temporarily

Really my main issue here is that we knew what was going to happen when this was disabled and it's still disabled. I'm okay with finding a solution with the kicking thing, but didn't everybody know that this was going to be the result? Lets turn it back on and figure out a solution then.

That's the issue with me. I would think that being a jerk or hold back the group is the main if not only reason to kick someone AND have the ability to do so.
I love that you are truly passionate about DCUO and making it more accessible to everyone but this seems a bit extreme to me. Again I'll say, like it or not, the option to kick is a needed tool.
If you really need some sort of abuse control it needs to be put on the account that abuses (overuses) the ability to initiate a kick.

For, hopefully, the last time: There is literally data gathering going on right now with VK turned off. We will compare it to data we gather during this VK disabled window with the data we have while it was turned on. This is an important part of our process in seeing the literal impact VK has on players in the game. Thank you for your patience.

We're not stupid, we knew there would be cases of abuse on the other end of this spectrum.

I have no gripes. This was communicated as a temporary change so that DGC could do some data gathering to help them make an inform decision before making a permanent change. I'm sure there have been multiple ideas discussed internally at their offices and they want to make sure they proceed with an option that will help solve a few different concerns they have before moving forward on any development.

Obviously kicking or the removal of group party members is a needed feature and it seems apparent that something will be developed in the future to help us as players and DGC better manage this. Currently the feature is of course used in proper situations but is also used in situations that do not help better the gaming experience of many players (i.e. griefing).

Limiting the number of players that are kicked due to a reason that may be viewed as unjustified is needed in my opinion, so I'm happy the time is being taken to review this feature and make enhancements to the game for future longevity.

Again, I don't see a problem with the majority getting what the majority wants.

I don't any scenario, whether it be in real life or a video game how 1 outweighs the majority.

Why is 1 person, so important they can ruin the experience for the rest of the group?

I for one have not seen any difference in game play since the VK was turned off in tier 6 or any tier. I did spend a better part of yesterday doing walk-in's with some tier 3 players teaching them their role so I might be a little out of the loop today.

I figured it was time to leave my feedback with my experience during the testing period so far.

I can say with confidence that I am not often one to kick in an instance. I believe in being flexible, making adjustments, and doing whatever we can to finish with the 8 people that are present. If the person not carrying their weight in one role has an armory where someone can help carry them in another role, that would be preferred. However, it isn't always the case.

Most of the time, I have felt that the vote to kick option isn't even necessary. Instead, it was there on the off chance that someone "disconnected" (rage quit) and we needed to get that slot back without waiting 10 minutes. For me, the solution of being able to kick a link dead player SHOULD have been fine. I THOUGHT that was the case until Saturday night.

We were in Throne of the Dead. Half-league, half LFG. We struggled at Ares, but absolutely obliterated the judges. By the time we got to Hades, there had been a bare minimum of an hour spent. We wiped Hades ONCE and a SINGLE PLAYER seemed to have "stepped away" from the game without warning. Not a BRB, no comment on voice chat. NOTHING.

His name read "(AWAY) Character Name" whatever. He'll get disconnected, right? Nope. Probably 8 minutes later, the AWAY tag disappears but he still has not moved. Same thing happens again. The other 7 people in the instance were communicating with one another and complaining. We were all in definite agreement that this person had to go. Our theory is that he was waiting for us to leave so that he could invite leaguemates in.

After about 20-25 minutes wasted, we finally gave in and left. This meant that the SEVEN of us who struggled to get to last boss had to start fresh again (for free thanks to loot locks...or pay to start fresh with replays) because one person wouldn't allow us to progress.

We could have attempted a 7 man, but most of us felt that it would be a waste of time and IF we did complete it, the jerk would get loot as well.

Aside from fringe instances like this, I still don't really miss the vote to kick feature. I know that this MUST be a rarity and only being abused because the feature is entirely missing. However, if the group leader can kick that will most likely solve the issue for me.

I am one of the people that thinks it would be a more interesting experiment to temporarily disable the scorecard and see how that effects kicking. You can still tell who isn't doing anything just by looking around or communicating. I think that seems like a logical next step in testing the kicking situation. If kicking becomes less common without a scorecard, it would suggest that the scorecard needs to be adjusted to prioritize different information. The scorecard does show helpful information but can be a huge factor in kicking from what I've seen. I think the tricky part will be trying to make it useful without making it harmful.

The currently implemented system on USPS is as good as it's going to get. Only the group leader can start a vote to kick. Works great limits abuse. Great job devs!

spytle another major issue I'm having when I try to play now is as a female gamer the guys feel they can speak to me in any form or fashion I've been called so many names and heard so many perverted comments since this no kick was initiated before they knew they would get kicked for this language the group would defend me now I'm forced to leave or face more verbal abuse I can't say the comments on the board they would be inappropriate but it is not right to be verbally abused in a video game just for being a girl and trying to help teach people game mechanics I'm sure I'm not the only female having these issues

I'm sorry to hear that.

There is no depths some people will sink to it seems. We'll have a solution for that long term. In the meantime, make sure you use the /ignore feature for text and the Voice Chat muting. You can go to group menu > players name > volume (or voice, I forget) and turn down their mic to zero. At the very least, you do not have to listen to them if they persist in that behavior.

Bludhaven Legends is going to be an absolute nightmare, between the difficulty of the alert itself and the no kicking feature. I really hope it's removed before that's released.

It's posts like this that make me wish for a blacklist function somewhere...nobody should have to group with a-holes who think it's appropriate to abuse (verbally, or via text) other players.

To be honest, if that sort of thing happend any any group I was part of and we couldn't kick, I'd be voting to disband and then reform the group sans the abuser.

Just have the group leader kick them. it's an easy fix. make your own group where you are the leader problem solved

You can't kick, that's the entire point of this topic.

Is the above statement accurate?
In the interim, it would be great for the group leader have the power to start a VK in extremely offensive situations like the one you're replying to.

Any time anyone initiates a kick, it should trigger a vote to eject either a) the kicker, b) the "kick-ee," or c) neither. In other words, if player A starts a vote to kick player B, the group votes on whether to eject player A, player B, or none of the above. This builds in some risk for all of those players - and there are many -- who truly do abuse the kick function. If they're starting a vote that could possibly get themselves kicked, then maybe we'll see a change in the behavior, while preserving the necessary option to eliminate abusive elements from the group.

Who taught you to gather data because disabling the kick function knowing full well what was going to happen and doing it anyway to "gather data" is like a doctor saying he wants to start cutting people's arms off to see what happens and "gather data"..... whoever taught you how to gather data on something like this needs to be "kicked"

This would be a great solution for random PUGs, where presumably, VK is abused the most.
In a group that is externally formed (LFG) the leader or leaders should have some control over who is in the group though. Someone who starts a group should retain some control over the members.

Without actual data, all we have is anecdotal stories. I'd rather put up with a bit of pain and have the Devs gather factual evidence than for them to simply base decisions on unverified feedback from the commuity.

I agree in principle, but what happens when someone DC's or has to leave, and the group votes to open it up for matchmaking?