30Minute LOCKOUT For Deserters

[KeltikTwo]

I think there should be a 2 week lockout for leavers minimum.

 

They should also send guys round to egg your house.

 

Publish your name and address on the forums too, so internet heros can .... well... stay anonymous and throw abuse like the snivelling weasels they are.

 

 

The pvp in this game is bad enough and you wan't to add penalties ? Christ how dumb are you people ?

[Quesadilla]

IMO make leaving the warzone cost you a win in your daily and weekly quests.

 

I'm sure they can figure out how to tell the difference between LD and click/click leave warzone. If it removed a victory from their daily/weekly quests BMs would leave ..hmm nvr or at least the cost to making someone else sitting in the queue who gets in for your spot in the lose is commiserate with your selfishness.

 

I love how BMs feel that their time is special, what about the BM who gets put in your queue because you left? Their time isn't important? and yeah im only Valor rank 53 who cares, when i am BM i won't leave a match. I thought you grinded BM because you like PVP not because you wanted to PVP for 5 matches a day to grind gear.

 

If you like PVP trying to win by coming from behind would be a better victory.

 

Then you could just Alt + F4 to leave a warzone.

 

To all these people using the, "what's the incentive to stay?" argument I am going to ask of you, what's the incentive to leave? If you have all the gear and valor you want, why queue for a warzone at all?

[Spartanik]

You will be able to pick which warzone you want to queue for when cross server warzones are implemented.

 

...If you do not have 15 minutes to spare for a warzone that you chose to queue up for then you shouldn't bother signing up in the first place...

 

Exactly thank god someone who gets it.

[Talkative]

How about this

 

30 Minute lockout if you quit a warzone. (if you can't play then don't signup. it's just that simple.)

 

1 hour lockout if you get caught afk in a warzone for more than 1minute. (seriously, if you are just going to go afk that is just like sabotaging your own team. You're scum and deserve punishment for this)

 

People play warzones for a multitude of reasons. I do it because I love PvP. When we have 8 vs 8 and 1 wimpy kid decides to hide in a corner and go afk that handicaps a team.

 

I also think this kind of thing should be tracked. If you receive enough of the above warzone punishments for committing either of these offenses then you should be locked out from doing warzones for 24hours entirely.

 

If you're not going to play don't signup. Its that simple

Your posting name is Drizzt DoUrden.

 

I rest my case.

[Kyrandis]

Surrender Yes.

-Prevents Farming (That's holding off on winning so you can farm more medals at the end)

-Allows for a fresh game which is all deserters want.

 

Deserter

- Well my team couldn't get past the first door. I don't need Commendations and/or am not able to get anymore, and I don't want to be farmed. So ill just AFK in the back somewhere. I'll finish studying for my exam while I wait for the game to end. Oh no activity for 30 seconds, Press W continue reading. I don't want to leave and not beable to requeue for 30 mins.

 

^ Thats whats going to happen, and no system bioware can implement will stop it.

 

Me personally I'd rather someone leave and get someone who will try, rather than an AFKer.

 

Not everyone is a tryhard, just how it is.

 

Edit: You should never force a player to do something he doesn't want to do. He'll find 1000 different ways to get out of it.

Edited February 11, 2012 by Kyrandis

[Liriana]

That's probably the dumbest idea I've seen in this thread. People that have already got to 60 and geared themselves should not be forced to carry undergeared new people if they don't want to.

 

 

And this is the whining that convinces me that half the BMs do not actually want to PVP they want to face roll people. Either A you like PVP and would stay even if it was a hard match to win shooting for personal achievements, or you don't like PVP and are just grinding gear. cause the 1.5-2 hours it take to win 4-6 matches a day even at an average win-loss rate is jsut too much time to take away from your PVE..wait you are PVPers right?

[Romanticyde]

I will leave WZs whether there's a lockout or not, stupid people who don't know how to play after being told 10-20 times aren't worth the effort I put in to carry them, PvP is supposed to be fun, where am I having fun when I have to drag along a team of idiots to the finish line?

[Liriana]

Then you could just Alt + F4 to leave a warzone.

 

To all these people using the, "what's the incentive to stay?" argument I am going to ask of you, what's the incentive to leave? If you have all the gear and valor you want, why queue for a warzone at all?

 

That's true, but then they are Alt+F4ing all day, losing 1-7 minutes logging back in, and honestly damaging their system.

[Cegenaus]

So teach them how-to play.

 

And don't even reply with "oh but they won't listen" because I've dealt with those players already, and eventually they learn to listen if they want to win.

 

Either way, what i'm saying is falling on deaf ears, because I can already predict that you're going to have an argument for every suggestion that anyone tells you, and let's be honest here. You're selfish, and will defend your selfish acts with any kind of justification you can come up with.

 

i try but ill admit i get more frustrated than i help at times. there are some who listen and some who ignore and most of the time i find the ones who ignore

 

i love the assumptions btw, shows your character pretty well

[eyelids]

In general I agree that deserters should get some debuff or punishment or lockout.

 

But form time to time, I'm thrown into an ongoing match to replace a deserter player. But due to horribly long loading times on my pc I often don't make it out of the starter area in time. So when I finally see my character and can move around, I have 3 secs left of the minute I'm allowed to spend in the starter area. And so I'm thrown out of the match. Getting a lock out or debuff because of THAT - no way.

[Caeliux]

It's coming, ranked matches that are coming soon will need a deserter buff. Would be redundant for people to leave and not get a penalty for it.

 

It's a problem at moment and is geting worse every day. Games are determined in the first 10 seconds, cause if someone leaves it's game over 9-10.

 

People are abusing the non-deserter buff to the fullest, and this needs nipped in the bud asap.

 

Why?

 

Cause people hate entering a game already in session due to some selfish player or players leaving.

 

Either it's half way through Void Star, 2 capped in Alderaan, 0-4 losing Huttball.

 

Play game you Q for, or get a deserter buff and wait it out is what needs to happen.

Edited February 11, 2012 by Caeliux

[Aribethx]

No, you're view of reality is that "everyone is out for themselves" because that is the narrow-minded way that you can justify your own narcissistic behavior.

 

You're either young, failed to develop abstract thinking, or have been utterly brainwashed by consumerism. People lived in structured communities, helping each other for 1,000's of years and it is only recently that this society of selfishness has spawned. In fact - the first mammals lived in burrows and would sacrifice themselves at the door to these burrows to ensure the survival of the species. People are dependent on everyone around them for everything, and if you believe otherwise then just ask yourself "how many people had to work together for X, Y, and Z to be a part of my life?" (Pick ANYTHING... video games, your car, the food you eat, etc) If you want to argue that all of those are possible because people were given rewards for their work, then I'll semi-agree with you because there's been a pretty heavy influence of brainwashing over the last 60 years telling people they need to be independent, and have a lot of junk to be happy. That's a totally different conversation though, and this documentary is a pretty eye-opening history lesson on the subject. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Century_of_the_Self )

 

 

 

The 7 other people in a Warzone depend on the 8 people who join to play the entire match, regardless of the outlook in the first minute because when you quit, that leaves the rest of those 7 players down a body for 2 minutes, ( 1 minute for you to idle out, and another minute for someone to load in) and a lot can happen in 2 minute. That's if only one person deciceds to quit. I can't even count how many times i've seen 2 - 3 quit on the first huttball score, or when 2 turrets are taken on the civil war. Then to make matters worse, those people queue up for another warzone and join back into the same warzone, only to spend another 45 seconds idling in the save zone to leave the warzone. So we're up to 3 minutes of being short 1 person, effectively 1/5th of the match.

 

Given that 7 players have to suffer because of 1 player's selfishness, I believe that warrants a penalty to be applied to the selfish player.

 

A timed lockout seems appropriate for the first couple of infractions, followed by (as another poster suggested) the loss of valor. In Asheron's Call there was a 5% experience loss with every death, and I feel like 5% valor loss would be quite appropriate for people who quit 5+ warzones in a 24hr period. If you fall under 60 ranks of valor, your BM gear is automatically unequipped.

 

Your argument and example may be relevant in an academic discussion. This is PvP. It's not a community that depends on the community's members for survival. It is a system built around progression of self.

 

You can't insert ethics into a PvP in a MMO.

[DrIzzt-DoUrden]

IMO make leaving the warzone cost you a win in your daily and weekly quests..

 

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

There will always be people quitting because they think their team is doomed and have no chance of winning. You people have no competitive spirit and are scared of being the underdog. You deserve to be penalized for this.

 

There will always be people quitting because their internet craps out. I am going to be honest I feel bad for you because punishing 100% of the populations because 68% doesn't have the decency to see a game from beginning to end. I dunno how Bioware could possibly penalize people for quitting without collateral damage. But something has to be done.

 

There will always be people going afk in warzones for a lot of reasons and you all deserve to be punished severely for it. I propose 3 strikes and you're suspended. I don't mean your subscription to the game, but your ability to receive daily / weekly missions entirely.

 

There is currently a debuff you receive for standing in your respawn zone in the warzones. If you do not move from that spot you will be booted from the game. I suggest Bioware makes another debuff like this but make it active throughout the warzone to prevent people from going afk in stealth or hiding in a corner. If you are standing in one spot without using an ability on your quickslots for 1 minute you get booted and are removed from all warzones for 1 hour.

 

If this happens 3 times in a month you get locked out entirely from daily / weekly warzone quests for 7-14 days.

[TostitoBandito]

Screw 30 minutes. It should be a 24 hour debuff that prevents tham from playing Warzones. These losers who quit are what make the daily quest a grind. Comeback wins can and do happen, but not when 3/4 of the team leaves as soon as you get behind.

[Jatraril]

Aribethx

 

Joined: Aug 2011 Today , 07:49 PM

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil_Santa

No, you're view of reality is that "everyone is out for themselves" because that is the narrow-minded way that you can justify your own narcissistic behavior.

 

You're either young, failed to develop abstract thinking, or have been utterly brainwashed by consumerism. People lived in structured communities, helping each other for 1,000's of years and it is only recently that this society of selfishness has spawned. In fact - the first mammals lived in burrows and would sacrifice themselves at the door to these burrows to ensure the survival of the species. People are dependent on everyone around them for everything, and if you believe otherwise then just ask yourself "how many people had to work together for X, Y, and Z to be a part of my life?" (Pick ANYTHING... video games, your car, the food you eat, etc) If you want to argue that all of those are possible because people were given rewards for their work, then I'll semi-agree with you because there's been a pretty heavy influence of brainwashing over the last 60 years telling people they need to be independent, and have a lot of junk to be happy. That's a totally different conversation though, and this documentary is a pretty eye-opening history lesson on the subject. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Century_of_the_Self )

 

 

 

The 7 other people in a Warzone depend on the 8 people who join to play the entire match, regardless of the outlook in the first minute because when you quit, that leaves the rest of those 7 players down a body for 2 minutes, ( 1 minute for you to idle out, and another minute for someone to load in) and a lot can happen in 2 minute. That's if only one person deciceds to quit. I can't even count how many times i've seen 2 - 3 quit on the first huttball score, or when 2 turrets are taken on the civil war. Then to make matters worse, those people queue up for another warzone and join back into the same warzone, only to spend another 45 seconds idling in the save zone to leave the warzone. So we're up to 3 minutes of being short 1 person, effectively 1/5th of the match.

 

Given that 7 players have to suffer because of 1 player's selfishness, I believe that warrants a penalty to be applied to the selfish player.

 

A timed lockout seems appropriate for the first couple of infractions, followed by (as another poster suggested) the loss of valor. In Asheron's Call there was a 5% experience loss with every death, and I feel like 5% valor loss would be quite appropriate for people who quit 5+ warzones in a 24hr period. If you fall under 60 ranks of valor, your BM gear is automatically unequipped.

 

Your argument and example may be relevant in an academic discussion. This is PvP. It's not a community that depends on the community's members for survival. It is a system built around progression of self.

 

You can't insert ethics into a PvP in a MMO.

 

It's group PVP, not a duel. You depend on your group to win. You should lose valor ( I would go up to 10%) if you consistantly drop out of matches because you do not like the makeup.

[Aribethx]

Aribethx

It's group PVP, not a duel. You depend on your group to win. You should lose valor ( I would go up to 10%) if you consistantly drop out of matches because you do not like the makeup.

 

I'm not saying that I am not in favor of penalties for habitual WZ abandons. I'm saying that these so called responsibilities of the MMO player in reference to some real world, outdated code of ethics based on communal support is not applicable to a MMO.

 

This is a game where it's "me first." The only way you can institute some group first attitude is in a guild. Or if BioWare inserts a rule or punishment, that will be most likely worked around by the majority of the player base. e.g. Instead of leaving the WZ, watch them run around in the back of the map, pretending to "scout."

 

Pretending that the PvP community is more than a mass of individuals is idealistic. It's been proven time and time again through player response to "Gank threads," "OP threads," and other similar QQ threads. A player comes to these boards to cry foul, complain about unfairness, or being griefed and ganked. The response is to deride and scorn that player.

 

Yet we should all now magically adhere to caring about you and other people's WZ fun and valor?

Edited February 11, 2012 by Aribethx

[Tyrias]

There is currently a debuff you receive for standing in your respawn zone in the warzones. If you do not move from that spot you will be booted from the game. I suggest Bioware makes another debuff like this but make it active throughout the warzone to prevent people from going afk in stealth or hiding in a corner. If you are standing in one spot without using an ability on your quickslots for 1 minute you get booted and are removed from all warzones for 1 hour.

 

But that won't work. If a person will be black-listed or kicked for performing/not performing an action, they will do the bare minimum to scrape by.

 

In this scenario, someone will just use a self-buff every time they need to to stay in the game. Or a ground targeted skill.

 

And if you then proceed to say that they need to be doing damage to people, or that they have to use skills on enemies, then what about people holding control points that the opposing team doesn't attack. So you could set up a mitigating factor that being near a control point counts as being active.

 

Then what about people who guard ledges at the back of hutball while the combat is at the other end of the arena for 1 minute. They are playing in a manner which they think is helpful, but will still be kicked. And because there is no metric to measure a person's intentions, it would be wrong to kick/penalise this person.

 

And even if that fails, how can you tell the difference between a player who is barely trying, and one who is just plain bad.

 

This is yet another reason that I say Deserter Debuff is a bad idea. It won't work. Whenever you try to force people to do something they don't want to do, they WILL find a way around it. And if you keep throwing in fixes to try and prevent this behaviour, you will end up having a negative effect on the very people who you are trying to help. The people who are newbies to PvP and need a group who are working together at every turn to win.

[Lectro]

+1 for deserter debuff

[ScapeGoats]

I do not leave war-zones unless I have a pressing RL matter.

 

That being said I do not care if others leave. Most of the time they are QQ rage morons who caps lock spam dumb strats they are sure will win. Many times we win ( or get pretty close) once those tools leave the game. Let some one else carry them for their easy win. I would rather see these people go than sit in the WZ trolololing about how much every one sucks.

 

I find it hilarious people complaining about fresh fifties on their team. These are the same types that use the "l2p", when stomping opposing team fresh 50s. They lack the sight to understand that under-geared guy may be a great asset in a couple weeks. A few pieces of gear and some exp vrs some good pvpers can make a difference.

 

If the opposition is an awesome premade, well I take it in stride, get my little bit of valor/coms/cash and move on.

 

Pvp doesn't need a purpose, PvP is its own purpose.

Edited February 11, 2012 by ScapeGoats

[DrIzzt-DoUrden]

But that won't work. If a person will be black-listed or kicked for performing/not performing an action, they will do the bare minimum to scrape by.

 

In this scenario, someone will just use a self-buff every time they need to to stay in the game. Or a ground targeted skill.

 

And if you then proceed to say that they need to be doing damage to people, or that they have to use skills on enemies, then what about people holding control points that the opposing team doesn't attack. So you could set up a mitigating factor that being near a control point counts as being active.

 

Then what about people who guard ledges at the back of hutball while the combat is at the other end of the arena for 1 minute. They are playing in a manner which they think is helpful, but will still be kicked. And because there is no metric to measure a person's intentions, it would be wrong to kick/penalise this person.

 

And even if that fails, how can you tell the difference between a player who is barely trying, and one who is just plain bad.

 

This is yet another reason that I say Deserter Debuff is a bad idea. It won't work. Whenever you try to force people to do something they don't want to do, they WILL find a way around it. And if you keep throwing in fixes to try and prevent this behaviour, you will end up having a negative effect on the very people who you are trying to help. The people who are newbies to PvP and need a group who are working together at every turn to win.

 

You make a good point. No matter what method Bioware uses to reduce the amount of quitters / afkers in our warzones there will more than likely be collateral damage. People who do not deserve to be punished will be punished. This is what we call collateral damage and I'm all for it.

 

They will hopefully implement some deserter debuffs and severely penalize quitters and afkers in their warzones. If I am part of that collateral damage I would welcome it. If I am unfairly penalized for no reason at all I would welcome it. At least Bioware is trying to keep people from quitting & going afk.

 

Something has to be done about this.

[tofu-]

I'm almost at the same point, but...because it's called not being totally selfish? Anyways, I've been in a number of warzones when what looks like a loss turns into a win.

 

I'm totally for a deserter penalty, but give people a grace period. Let them quit once, for real emergencies. Afterwards, let a 15 minute penalty apply.

 

And please don't implement until we have GMs to handle AFKers or group reporting for AFK.

 

don't you want that kewl war hero title, brah?

[Kelticfury]

So this happened to me the other day.

 

I joined a WZ and saw several people in the same guild and thought "Cool we can win this". But when 4 of us ran towards the middle to grab the cap, the three dudes from the same guild all stealthed out and left me being a zerg of one. These guys stayed stealthed and didn't do anything whatsoever to help the team, so I told them on opschat to go eff themselves and left the WZ.

 

So according to all you that are advocating the deserter penalty, I should have gotten flagged as a deserter for 30 minutes.

 

I don't think so.

 

I am completely against this.

[HelinCarnate]

So you get with a penalty to prevent you from getting into another match for half an hour if you leave. The match would take 10-15 min. So what is to stop you from just running around and not helping so the other team can win faster? This is exactly what will happen if you put in a deserter penalty. I would rather have a random replacement on my team instead of someone who just runs around so they dont get the afk boot.

[olagaton]

when:

 

• you can pick which warzone you queue for
  
• you don't get put into in progress warzones
  
• you don't get kicked from the warzone if you go link dead
  
• there is a system in place to report/action afkers
  
• when the queue system guarantees only 8 each side and not 8-11
  

 

you can start talking about deserter penalty.

qft

 

 

 

10chars

[Tyrias]

You make a good point. No matter what method Bioware uses to reduce the amount of quitters / afkers in our warzones there will more than likely be collateral damage. People who do not deserve to be punished will be punished. This is what we call collateral damage and I'm all for it.

 

They will hopefully implement some deserter debuffs and severely penalize quitters and afkers in their warzones. If I am part of that collateral damage I would welcome it. If I am unfairly penalized for no reason at all I would welcome it. At least Bioware is trying to keep people from quitting & going afk.

 

Something has to be done about this.

 

While I would applaud your self-sacrifice in the name of "the greater good" as many people like to see it, I personally don't think that would be the correct way forward. It could easily get to the state where people who are new to PvP and who don't know the plethora of Anti-AFK rules find themselves repeatedly suffering simply because they are new and have had no instruction about how to deal with is. Handing out such instructions is difficult to do in MMO's. People often don't read (or properly understand) those tutorial pop-ups they get. And if the rules are complex, it brings in an added dimension of difficulty.

 

When you have to follow strict guidelines JUST to stay in a war zone, your PvP has failed more spectacularly than when you have a whole bunch of people leaving. A game that wants to be successful should be easy to pick up and have fun, and hard to master.

 

My opinion is that a better way to reduce the number of people leaving (aside from fixing all the things that are broke and are exploited to give some players advantages over others) would not be to punish people who leave, but to reward people who stay in something which [is/is going to be] a devastating loss (not close run battles, because they are usually fun. Proper "roflstomp" matches where you didn't stand a chance). Not only are people encouraged to stay on in matches they would otherwise leave or fail to participate properly in, but the players who were too inexperienced or poorly geared to make a major contribution will get their gear faster, even if not the experience.

 

Even THAT is open to abuse (in that one team could just decide to do nothing and go for the "lame-duck" reward of an epic loss). But that's something that is probably more measurable than whether a person is "scouting" or just "avoiding PvP entirely" in a warzone.

 

As I've said, people don't like doing something for nothing. Ideally, PvP's primary reward is fun. In matches where fun is not obtained (for whatever reason), the secondary reward is commendations/valor. In matches where you know there will neither be fun, nor contain the chance of winning people feel (incorrectly or otherwise) that there is no real reward. And they will do everything in their power to minimise the effort they expend on the experience to compensate. It is simply a behaviour that you cannot stamp out through additional rules and regulations.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Tyrias