Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > Star Trek Online General Discussion
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
04-09-2012, 07:09 PM
I think we need much more restrictions on who can join a STF. Which would solve the problem of people quitting to the extent that you could just dump the penalty. Also remove the replay timer. The loot drops are so crazy bad as it is. Let the player play. There are no replay restrictions on fleet events, so why STF?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
04-09-2012, 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nixboox View Post
This is exactly the thing I'm talking about. You both should be punished severely for leaving an active game.

Humans have spent millions of years learning how to communicate with one another and here, in one online game, you all are so anxious to throw your hands up and say: "its too hard, I want a different one" and leave your fellow teammates to suffer on their own. Where's your fighting spirit? So the odds aren't in your favor - did that ever stop Picard or Kirk or Janeway?

When I had that mission, the one that started this thread, I knew it wasn't going to be easy but I still made it happen. You have to be dynamic and you have to try NEW tactics. Giving up shouldn't be your first option and, if it is, then you should have to wait several hours before you go into another battle and let your teammates down.
I wonder if perhaps your reading comprehension isn't a little off.

I look at it this way - he had one team member that didn't want to communicate with his team at all (and ragequit, the first person that left), two people that he may not have been able to communicate with at all because of the language barrier, and one person that upon finding out how complex the situation was immediately bailed rather then try to stick it out and learn how to do it (the second person that left). When he left, it was only because it was statistically unlikely that 3 people were going to complete that STF, let alone three that were unlikely to be able to communicate, and the chances of getting people into the Elite at that point that were going to be any better were extremely low.

And he ate an hour penalty for it (presumably - as that's currently what happens when you bail out, or that's been my understanding) already for making that decision.

How draconian do we want to get with the punishment measures, here? Should it not matter what the excuse, reasoning, or logic goes into the leave, just punish them all as severely as possible for daring to leave something at all?

That's kind of heartless (nevermind perhaps tainted heavily with bias), and I'm certainly glad the decision isn't realistically up to you or I.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
04-09-2012, 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRQ
In the end he thanked me for the info and left.

Now I just sat and watched as the French and German players try has hard as they could to try and complete the mission on their own.

It was too sad to watch so I left.

:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nixboox View Post
This is exactly the thing I'm talking about. You both should be punished severely for leaving an active game.

Humans have spent millions of years learning how to communicate with one another and here, in one online game, you all are so anxious to throw your hands up and say: "its too hard, I want a different one" and leave your fellow teammates to suffer on their own. Where's your fighting spirit? So the odds aren't in your favor - did that ever stop Picard or Kirk or Janeway?

When I had that mission, the one that started this thread, I knew it wasn't going to be easy but I still made it happen. You have to be dynamic and you have to try NEW tactics. Giving up shouldn't be your first option and, if it is, then you should have to wait several hours before you go into another battle and let your teammates down.
It seems to the OP I was in error for quitting the STF


I did what I could with the player I was able to communicate with.

I would like to know how the OP would have handled the situation.
It seem it is easier to critic someone than to give helpful advice.
Please enlighten us all with your words of wisdom.

Make sure your words of wisdom are in English, French, German, and Spanish

We wouldn’t want your words to be missed by anyone.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
04-09-2012, 08:08 PM
I think it is perfectly fine as it is.

For starters, if you have four people, the next person in the queue should be routed there.

If you have less than four people for more than a certain time (five minutes I believe) you can leave without a penalty.

One our penalty for leaving is about right. If Cryptic were better at fixing the glitches and put in some safeguards, I might even support a greater penalty (like 24 hours if you leave before 30 minutes of play time have elapsed), but the fact is, with all the glitches, one hour is the maximum that is fair.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
04-09-2012, 08:23 PM
I've said it before. Penalizing people is only going to make them not want to bother trying it again. If you want people to stay through to the end, you have to make it worth doing. By that, I mean it has to be FUN. The rewards are nice, but if it's a tedious or frustrating experience, people are going to leave.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
04-09-2012, 09:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I've said it before. Penalizing people is only going to make them not want to bother trying it again. If you want people to stay through to the end, you have to make it worth doing. By that, I mean it has to be FUN. The rewards are nice, but if it's a tedious or frustrating experience, people are going to leave.
Mojo's rightness strikes again!!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
04-10-2012, 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adondria
I think a voting system to boot a bad player should be put in, and then the ability to get another player from the queue. If there aren't 5 players in the instance, the leaver penalty shouldn't apply to any who leave.
Coming from other mmorpgs that have this feature, it is not a good idea.

On paper it sounds great. Some is afk or having connection issues, sure those are legit purposes. But kicking someone because they are "bad" is a very very gray area. If they are trolling and doing on purpose sure but its not that easy to tell, I mean what if it's that persons first time running an STF? Or what if they don't know to use a remodulator? Or carry hypos?

If the person refuses to learn ok then I could lean more towards what you are saying but if the person is trying their best and are having issues that is no reason to exclude them from playing the game. It creates a bubble of the haves versus the have-nots (people who can and who can't be allowed to run STF's)

Or worse you join a pug and it's 3 or 4 Fleet people and they decide to vote kick you right before a boss so you can't roll on loot. You would need some form of checks and balances to keep it more honest, i.e. a uniamous 4 person vote, not 3 or 2. And if it's four buddies or four Fleetmates kicking a pug while they are pugging just to keep the loot, then the kicked player should be allowed to create a ticket to report those players from abusing the kick feature (many other games have this, HoN, certain SC maps, etc).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
04-10-2012, 02:05 AM
I think a voting system will be seriously abused. You already see Report Spam being used constantly against people who are not Gold Sellers, which the command was designed for. This is simply what happens when you grant players power over others - abuse and misuse.

Sorry to say but from my experiences running Normal STFs, there are lots of just plain impatient and selfish people out there. They have no tolerance for team members who are still learning and make mistakes. As soon as something goes awry a couple times they go off on a rant and quit instead of trying to help.

Imo, the only "voting" that should be allowed is a vote for all remaining team members to call "mission failure" and leave without any penalty. That way, these guys who rant and quit don't cause you to get a leaver penalty too when there's no other choice but to abort.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
04-10-2012, 02:21 AM
a more severe leaver penalty will really get the interest levels up, yep, to leave the game alot quicker. but im sure you dont care OP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nixboox View Post
I started STFs only a few months ago and in all that time I have never had a game as bad as the one I did last night. One player started ranting and whining because some part of the mission didn't go directly as scripted so instead of dealing with it, they wanted to yell and blame everyone but themselves for causing the problem...then, they left. A man down, we were still able to complete the mission most of the way but then another guy dropped out and it was just a mess.

I think A) there should be NO leaver penalty if you are the LAST person in a STF and, B) the leaver penalty needs to be far more severe...like having ALL STFs go on a 2hr cool down. Dereliction of duty should really be punished by hanging...courts martial, or being pelted with eggs and tomatoes...but something more should be done to stop quitters from quitting.

That's just my view...
one game with a bad player doesnt mean every one of them should endure a heavy leaver penalty. nerd rage aside, is there a point beyond this? because as i see it its just a way to vent rather then making a more signifcant point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adondria
I think a voting system to boot a bad player should be put in, and then the ability to get another player from the queue. If there aren't 5 players in the instance, the leaver penalty shouldn't apply to any who leave.
Voting system without restrictions is like suicide for the game and cryptic. it wont happen, ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberberus
Sadly as much as I think there should be some sort of blacklist for idiots bringing shuttles into STFs or parking at the spawn and waiting for the loot bags, I have yet to see a system that isn't full of abuse potential.

I do think that if someone leaves the rest of the party should be able to "request replacement" from the queue or end the mission without taking the penalty.

Of course I also think that the devs need to get a little proactive and set up filters (unselectable of course) to prevent some stupid stuff from happening at all, little things like low tier level ships/shuttles.
you have a blacklist to stop "idiot" players, its called the ignore feature and that is abused like crazy, having a blacklist for people joining stf's would be just as "idiotic". a filter is not needed, just slap a permanent requirement for Tier 5 ships and above and leave it at that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
04-10-2012, 02:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adondria
I think a voting system to boot a bad player should be put in, and then the ability to get another player from the queue. If there aren't 5 players in the instance, the leaver penalty shouldn't apply to any who leave.
This system is used in Dota 2, with great effect.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:04 AM.