Opinions on a "Vote: Timer Reset" for DF parties on the cusp of a clear?

I've read some posts in various topics about people experiencing decent groups in DF, but not able to clear because they've run out of time. I was thinking that maybe implementing a Vote: Timer Reset option that pops up 5 minutes before the encounter ends might be a good idea. Sometimes you just don't have enough time with the same people to get a clear. If the vote passes, let's say 5 to 3, the 3 who do not want to continue have the option to leave without penalty and the timer is reset, allowing more people to join in progress. If no one joins within an allotted time, the instance ends. If a single person joins, the timer on the allotted time is extended by x minutes once. Do you think this would be a good addition to the game? What are some thoughts/comments about this (positive or negative)?

I only see this as being abused by groups to "No-Life" content such as coil. The timers exist for a reason.
Which is honestly the only thing you need the full timer for anyway. If over an hour has passed and you STILL haven't cleared, perhaps a break is in order.

Maybe you could give me an example of how it would be "abused"? Do you mean extending the timer so the same preformed group can continue doing content that they would otherwise just leave and reenter, saving a total of, let's say, 10 seconds?

EDIT: And sometimes, all you might have needed was one more attempt with the same group, rather than starting from the beginning another 30 times only to have groups break/rage/not even try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

Maybe you could give me an example of how it would be "abused"? Do you mean extending the timer so the same preformed group can continue doing content that they would otherwise just leave and reenter, saving a total of, let's say, 10 seconds?

---

The timer exists as an incentive to ensure you beat it in a timely manner. The same basic reason behind enrage timers. The way it can be abused is people resetting the timer just to enjoy a "private" instance all to themselves for whatever reason, which isn't the desired purpose. If people so wanted, they could abuse this system to bog down the servers.
Though that's hyperbole (but don't underestimate player assholery) it's also important that the timer encourages players to take a break, even if it's 10 seconds.
In addition, again, the timers are currently more than generous enough. If you're STILL trying to beat something other than coil after the timer expires, maybe you SHOULD be encouraged to take a break, maybe try something else.
Oh, and it can also be used to form "traps." Groups that will be accomplishing nothing, are incapable of winning the fight for whatever reason, but because one guy doesn't want to leave, people keep getting matched to it. This type of behavior helps no one and is already a possible problem in the current system.

This would be a pretty cool idea to be honest.

You often find that in the DF you have fresh people joining raids etc that are learning content at different rates, so not only are they trying to get used to the boss mechanics but they're adapting their play-styles to the others in the party. Something like this could probably give groups who are close to completing the extra bit they need to clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyuven

I only see this as being abused by groups to "No-Life" content such as coil. The timers exist for a reason.
Which is honestly the only thing you need the full timer for anyway. If over an hour has passed and you STILL haven't cleared, perhaps a break is in order.

---

I fail to see how giving players more attempts to clear content is an abuse of anything to be honest, similar systems have already existed in games like WoW for years with very little issues.

Right now if players want they're able to just re-queue instances anyway, but instead of having the same group / chance they did before they'll essentially lose the progress they made with the previous group only to start all over again with an entire new set of people, sometimes it's a positive but usually not.

As long as players are able to leave out of the instance as they wish once the time is over something like this seems like it would be a win/win for all.

Piggybacking on this it'd also be nice to add a queue with current group option to instances as well, a feature WoW actually has. Sometimes you end up with a cross server group that's pretty chill and it'd be nice to run more with them instead of just leaving the instance and never seeing any of them again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryel

I fail to see how giving players more attempts to clear content is an abuse of anything to be honest.

---

They why have timers at all? They exist for a reason. The content was designed to be done within this amount of time.
It's also to help keep the queues moving.
Sure it sucks you can't group with the same people you worked well with, but by "freeing up" your group and requeuing normally, you end up with different people this time who have been waiting in the queue for a chance at the same thing. Without this, with the option to just take as long as you want, the queues move slower as there's less "movement" in the queue.
Think of it like a restaurant. After a certain point, waiters will get rather passive-aggressively insistent that you pay your bill and leave because they need the table. The game's instance server is very similar.
Perpetual instancing was a thing in a few very, very early MMOs, but it turned out to be troublesome having people never leaving the instance servers, so timers are now standard.

I couldn't disagree with you more than I do right now. For one, 10 seconds is not a break. I did hardcore progression which consisted of 12hr/day raiding for 2.4. I never once considered leaving the instance and rejoining immediately a break. Our breaks were...breaks and usually lasted around 10-15 minutes. If we could vote to extend the timer, we probably would have unless someone had to exit to repair. I don't consider this abuse. If someone wants to enter a dungeon solo dolo or with their mate to RP, that's what restrictions are for (ie something like one vote-extend per session or no voting to extend without a full group in the instance). If there are people that want to join an instance to do these things, they're going to join an instance to do these things, whether you can vote extend it or not. I don't see how this would ADD to it.

In my example, people will have the option to vote no and leave without penalty. So the "trap" groups would only continue if everyone wanted them to continue. If three people in a "trap" group don't want to continue, they'll leave. If 4 or 5 people don't want to, the vote won't pass, and the instance will end. If you are getting to enrage with 30% left on the boss' HP, not very many people are going to want to continue that past the allotted time limit, or even to the end of the time limit. We're talking more groups that PROGRESS in DF together and manage to get the boss to 5-10% with 5 minutes left on the DF timer. It would seem pretty crappy, to me at least, if they didn't have an option to continue and had to start from the beginning for the next x days until they cleared. It's easy for people like you and me to say "no, you need a break", because we have groups that we do content with. This is directed towards people who DON'T have that luxury.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyuven

Perpetual instancing was a thing in a few very, very early MMOs, but it turned out to be troublesome having people never leaving the instance servers, so timers are now standard.

---

There would still be limitation, for instance, one vote-extend per instance for .x the initial duration. Issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

In my example, people will have the option to vote no and leave without penalty. So the "trap" groups would only continue if everyone wanted them to continue. .

---

You're missing the point of what the "Trap" groups are.
A trap group would constantly set the group to refill, and people would join constantly expecting to actually do the content. Even though they can leave at any time, the timer will be constantly reset so people will constantly get paired with this group, which is doing nothing.
In other words, a single person can screw with an entire data center by doing nothing but clicking a box every hour and moving his character every 5 minutes.

And this sort of thing already happens, but since they get kicked out of the instance after the time expires it's less of a problem.

And then there's the votekick problem. Let's say you're doing this wonderful group but one of your members is slacking, so you kick him. Then he rejoins. You can NEVER be rid of him. This actually happens a lot with certain less popular dungeons at non-peak hours, and would only be exacerbated by a lack of a timer.

And again: If this is the case, why not just get rid of timers?
Why bother having timers if you can just reset it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

There would still be limitation, for instance, one vote-extend per instance for .x the initial duration. Issue?

---

Again, then, why bother having timers?
And again, outside coil, if you're not able to beat it within the time allotted, you REALLY should take a break. The game is trying to tell you this.
Also, what about repairs? If you're going after this fight for 2 hours, you'll likely need repairs at some point. Not everyone is a crafter.

In truth, this would require a lot of effort and testing to pull off for very little return. Most parties who go into DF will either clear it in the time allotted, or not be able to clear it. The number of "Just 5 more minutes!" groups is far outweighed by the first two categories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryel

Piggybacking on this it'd also be nice to add a queue with current group option to instances as well, a feature WoW actually has. Sometimes you end up with a cross server group that's pretty chill and it'd be nice to run more with them instead of just leaving the instance and never seeing any of them again.

---

This would probably be an alternate but just as effective solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

This would probably be an alternate but just as effective solution.

---

Not a bad solution, but not one we'll see any time soon as the Data Centers are currently a huge mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyuven

Words

---

Stop saying constantly. I've already stated that to deflect this issue a vote-extend could only be done once per instance. How about add 1 vote-extend per day to avoid the .1% chance of what you were trying to say from ever happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

Stop saying constantly. I've already stated that to deflect this issue a vote-extend could only be done once per instance. How about add 1 vote-extend per day to avoid the .1% chance of what you were trying to say from ever happening.

---

First off a lot of my replies have been WHILE you've been typing your other replies sooooo...yeah.
Second, then why have it at all? For that one off-chance you maybe might run into a group that maybe just needs one more attempt?
It's not a situation that crops up enough to warrant having it, but the abuse angle can be done with anyone having a bad day or just wishing to waste people's time. And it would take development resources to add.
All for the, as you put it, .1% chance of a group needing an extra 10 minutes for a fight they've been trying for over an hour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyuven

First off a lot of my replies have been WHILE you've been typing your other replies sooooo...yeah.
Second, then why have it at all? For that one off-chance you maybe might run into a group that maybe just needs one more attempt?
It's not a situation that crops up enough to warrant having it, but the abuse angle can be done with anyone having a bad day or just wishing to waste people's time. And it would take development resources to add.
All for the, as you put it, .1% chance of a group needing an extra 10 minutes for a fight they've been trying for over an hour.

---

You're speaking from the standpoint of someone who doesn't need it saying why you think it's unnecessary. It's like having a conversation on food stamps with a rich person. Thank you for your contribution, though. I think you've actually given me more reasons why things like this are good for the game than I initially had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

You're speaking from the standpoint of someone who doesn't need it saying why you think it's unnecessary. It's like having a conversation on food stamps with a rich person. Thank you for your contribution, though. I think you've actually given me more reasons why things like this are good for the game than I initially had.

---

If you only want people who needs it to answer you would get around 100% positive feedback. But if I recall from your first post you ended it with, and I quote: "What are some thoughts/comments about this (positive or negative)?"

If you can't take it that someone has something to say that goes against your idea, this whole thread is a lie really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evergrey

If you only want people who needs it to answer you would get around 100% positive feedback. But if I recall from your first post you ended it with, and I quote: "What are some thoughts/comments about this (positive or negative)?"

If you can't take it that someone has something to say that goes against your idea, this whole thread is a lie really.

---

I never said I had a problem with them having a negative opinion regarding it. The discussion just became pointless back and forth. They came with issues why it would be bad which I offered solutions for. I just felt like no more needed to be discussed at that point because their stance was clear. The conversational comparison is pretty legitimate, though. I also thanked them for their contribution. Is there anything you would like to add to this topic or are you just interested in provoking an argument?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

had to snip due to length

---

If you saw that the conversation had gone to a stalemate someone has to end it, not let it keep going. Personal opinion.
I had no intention to provoke, I just saw that comment and the "You're speaking from the standpoint of someone who doesn't need it" part made it sound (to me atleast) as you were looking for a one sided thread.

And back to topic then.
Sure it could be usefull if people actually stay to learn the battle. Starting a new group means you have to adjust to every new player in the group, learn how they fair and such.
But I would not put this high up or even in the middle section of a To-Do list, as it works fine how it is now.
If you have a premade from your home server you could re-enter instantly so the extra timer would be absolete then.
The only addition this would give is to stay longer with good players from other servers.

The timers were originally put in to prevent people from hogging the dungeon instance slots for themselves for hours upon hours and preventing other people entering instanced content, which was apparently a thing at some point. As a more or less fun fact, Squenix already increased the duration once in beta by 30(?) minutes.

At most I could see this as an option for pre-mades, extending the timer by 50% or so.

Three issues:
1. If you have been going for the full duration, you will pretty much be entering the 'I might need to repair soon zone'
2. It will increase DF times as people might just continue extending the timer, rather than being kicked out and being forced to reque with others who have been waiting for a group.
3. The vote would have to be based on all 8 people saying they want to stay, because if one person wants to leave but the vote passes because the majority wants to stay, that person has to then leave and take a penalty.

It's not a bad idea however I would argue that you already have this feature and if you want to stick with the same group, that's what PF is for. DF is your random PUG groups for those who don't want to go through the PF system for whatever reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamein

.
3. The vote would have to be based on all 8 people saying they want to stay, because if one person wants to leave but the vote passes because the majority wants to stay, that person has to then leave and take a penalty.

---

From the original post. "If the vote passes, let's say 5 to 3, the 3 who do not want to continue have the option to leave without penalty and the timer is reset." Issue one is solved by those who have broken gear voting no to continue. Issue 2 is solved by only allowing a fixed percentage of the total initial time (let's say, 20%, so If an instance is 100 minutes long, it's extended by 20 minutes and cannot be extended again.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

From the original post. "If the vote passes, let's say 5 to 3, the 3 who do not want to continue have the option to leave without penalty and the timer is reset." Issue one is solved by those who have broken gear voting no to continue. Issue 2 is solved by only allowing a fixed percentage of the total initial time (let's say, 20%, so If an instance is 100 minutes long, it's extended by 20 minutes and cannot be extended again.)

---

So then what exactly is the point of this? You're essentially breaking the group up anyway as you've now got to get new people in to fill up the spots, what if those new people have never even set foot in the fight before, do you then go and vote abandon because the people who did stay wanted to carry on and push for the clear but with the new people it becomes unlikely? Therefore wasting their que time? What about those people just joining? What if they just waited an hour in the que to then be thrown in 20 minutes before the timer runs out? You do two attempts see it won't happen and hit vote abandon which is what usually happens in DF groups.

Like I said, I see your point, I just also do not see any real use for this, it causes more problems and issues than it solves. There is a perfectly good PF system. Now if you want something changing I would say ask them to implement cross server PF's for the data centers, instead of your idea, but that's a whole new thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamein

You do two attempts see it won't happen and hit vote abandon which is what usually happens in DF groups.

---

The only difference is you now have 5 people from the previous party who have been further into the fight than they originally started. There could be an option to join in progress and join extended, which left unchecked would ensure that you don't join an extended trial. It wouldn't be any different than choosing to join in progress and getting into a group that has 20 minutes left on the initial timer. Actually, there would be a difference. The people remaining in the group have knowledge of the fight and are willing to carry on. The same exact thing they would have to do if someone left with 20 minutes on the initial timer and new people joined. Literally nothing changes other than having the benefit of 5 people in the instance who know the fight well enough to carry on. The option to choose to join extended could have a pop up once checked, explaining that this is for people who are at least familiar with the fight etc etc. This would also raise the skill level of the extended trials by replacing members who do not wish to continue any further with members who are somewhat versed in the fight and are going for a clear.

EDIT: The PF system is not perfect on low population servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

The only difference is you now have 5 people from the previous party who have been further into the fight than they originally started. There could be an option to join in progress and join extended, which left unchecked would ensure that you don't join an extended trial.

---

Again, you are adding more options, which is going to create longer ques than we already have.

Quote:

---

The option to choose to join extended could have a pop up once checked, explaining that this is for people who are at least familiar with the fight etc etc. This would also raise the skill level of the extended trials by replacing members who do not wish to continue any further with members who are somewhat versed in the fight and are going for a clear.

---

Oh man, now you are just asking for problems. We already have a seriously bad DF culture where people get chewed and spit out, and then there are those who want the carry. I 100% guarentee you, that if you put an option like this in then you're going to get those groups filling up with people who have absolutely no idea what they are doing but will rely on the others to get them through it, and then you will have those who scream at them for joining a party not knowing what to do. Once again I am sorry I like your idea in theory, but in practice it will just create longer que times, screw up mis-matched ques, and cause havoc.

Quote:

---

EDIT: The PF system is not perfect on low population servers.

---

Hence why I said in my above post, they could change the PF system to implement a cross server PF, which in my opinion would be a better solution to your problem, you could leave the instance but take down the names of the people you just played with who were good, and invite them into your PF if it was cross server.

The primary purpose of the timers is to prevent system resources from being tied up unused for whatever reason. Even discounting trolls who might lay claim to a dungeon on purpose just to screw people over, there's other occasions where an instance with no timer might get tied up. For instance, if a group or individual goes afk in Brayflox and doesn't get booted, that individual could, theoretically, keep that instance running for hours just by sitting there doing nothing. There's a limit to the number of instances that can be running at once, and a timer ensures that those instances will be cleaned up and recycled in a timely fashion. A timer is a good and necessary thing.

That said, the ability to extend the timer with a vote doesn't sound like a bad one; I doubt there'd be many cases where a group would have the patience to troll-claim a dungeon when they have to re-vote every half hour just to keep it going. On the other hand there might be a lot of folks who feel like they have a good cross-server group going, and want to keep practicing a while longer.

To prevent folks from being held "hostage" in an instance they no longer want to continue in, though, the "early withdrawl" penalty should be removed after the first extend. If you've spent the full original duration in the instance, you've done your part and should be free to go unhindered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamein

snip'd for space

---

I disagree that it would create longer Qs or have any negative impact on the instance servers. I also disagree that it would be equal to or worse than the current situation. I feel it would be better. Thank you for your input, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

when they have to re-vote every half hour

To prevent folks from being held "hostage" in an instance they no longer want to continue in, though, the "early withdrawl" penalty should be removed after the first extend. If you've spent the full original duration in the instance, you've done your part and should be free to go unhindered.

---

There should be a one-time limit on the extension per instance (not person) to prevent trolling. I agree with your second point.

I feel like a more useful solution to this would be to somehow allow pre-formed parties across servers within the same datacenter for instanced content. If people found themselves with DF pugs and wanted to continue working with them, they could then do so.

Edit: Aaaaand I just realized someone above me said that same thing. Sorry. lol.

Personally I think the whole timer thing is idiotic. Is it me or is SE the only MMO out there right now having all these restrictions in place because of server "space" issues. Did they recycle the old FFXI servers or something?

"Sorry, we need timers to keep the line moving for server space"
"Sorry, we cant add more housing because of server space"
"Sorry, that dungeon is very popular right now, you have to wait ... server space"
"Sorry, we cant just open up more inventory space, unless you pay, because server space"

Seriously? Yet somehow we still get all the common server problems during times of high traffic. What exactly is the point then? Why is FFXIV the one MMO ive played in the last decade with all these restrictions yet improves nothing compared to other games?

/sigh .... anyway that said, the timers arent too bad. I would personally just prefer respawns like other MMOs do after such time passes but honestly, most teams quit when that happens anyway. If anything raids like coil should definitely have longer timers but thats it. There is such a thing as "losing" in video games... you shouldnt just be able to respawn and keep trying forever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saviorlito

There should be a one-time limit on the extension per instance (not person) to prevent trolling. I agree with your second point.

---

I think one extension per day would be fine. And also, I would say that ALL party members need to agree to the extension. And perhaps not a full timer reset - but just an extension of maybe 30 minutes or so.

I personally don't see an issue with a full timer reset, but a lot of people seem to think that SE is really trying to force us to take breaks (if that were the case, I don't think they would us be able to requeue instantly) or that it helps the queue flow. Perhaps a partial extension would be a happy middle-ground.