Resetting queue when someone doesn't join is simply mind-boggling.

[MisaCeliousa]

Players A, B, C and D queue for a dungeon.
Player D falls asleep.
The queue pops, players A, B and C click accept, and player D does not.
The queue fails. The dungeon finder takes the next-in-priority DPS from whatever group they are in, places them in the group, and re-pops the instance. Players A, B and C get their "average" queue time pop, plus a little bit extra for the failed player D, instead of potentially 4 to 5 times the "average" queue timer depending on their luck.

this is how it works already

[Furious]

this is how it works already

No, it isn't. My queue popped at 11 minutes. Someone (a dps) failed to accept it.
My queue popped again at 24 minutes. The Healer failed to accept it.
I am now sitting at 39 minutes, with an average queue time of 14 minutes.
I am a tank - this group has been "full" since the second that I clicked join.

[skiwi]

No, it isn't. My queue popped at 11 minutes. Someone (a dps) failed to accept it.
My queue popped again at 24 minutes. The Healer failed to accept it.
I am now sitting at 39 minutes, with an average queue time of 14 minutes.
I am a tank - this group has been "full" since the second that I clicked join.

Then it is a bug concerning "Reserving instance" and then losing a player in the process. Please check if it has been posted yet in the appropiate bug forum and if not make one to help your fellow players.

[Furious]

Then it is a bug concerning "Reserving instance" and then losing a player in the process. Please check if it has been posted yet in the appropiate bug forum and if not make one to help your fellow players.

It isn't a bug; it's a design choice. When you lose a member (because they failed to accept queue or because they withdraw), your group is considered a new group and is placed at the back of the queue. This isn't something done "by accident".

[Suellen]

It isn't a bug; it's a design choice. When you lose a member (because they failed to accept queue or because they withdraw), your group is considered a new group and is placed at the back of the queue. This isn't something done "by accident".

How exactly do you know it's a design choice and not a bug? There's lots of bugs in games where coders implemented something it works in the sense that it functions and doesn't crash. But the devils in the details and it's possible no one noticed this anomaly.

I'm still leveling I've only seen the reserving instance after I got a full group once. I've seen people fail to click the button when a group forms and I'm definately not being placed in the back of the queue. I don't see how that's possible when my Sastasha queue pops for the first time after a 40 minute wait then pops 3 times in 3 mins due to members not clicking their button. Hard to believe that would be an example of me being placed in the back of the queue.

It sounds like the queue system has two behaviors with the one your stuck in only happening in dungeons where there is a wait list to get an available instance. At least that's how I understand it from this thread. Same system with 2 behaviors depending on various conditions sounds like a bug to me.

[Furious]

How exactly do you know it's a design choice and not a bug? There's lots of bugs in games where coders implemented something it works in the sense that it functions and doesn't crash. But the devils in the details and it's possible no one noticed this anomaly.


I'm still leveling I've only seen the reserving instance after I got a full group once. I've seen people fail to click the button when a group forms and I'm definately not being placed in the back of the queue. I don't see how that's possible when my Sastasha queue pops for the first time after a 40 minute wait then pops 3 times in 3 mins due to members not clicking their button. Hard to believe that would be an example of me being placed in the back of the queue.

It sounds like the queue system has two behaviors with the one your stuck in only happening in dungeons where there is a wait list to get an available instance. At least that's how I understand it from this thread. Same system with 2 behaviors depending on various conditions sounds like a bug to me.

The behaviour is very clear. The process is two part. The duty finder creates a group, then puts you in the instance queue. If there is no-one in the instance queue, the instance pops as soon as your group is formed. The former part, creating the group, works how it should. Individuals are at the front of the queue until they get into the dungeon; if their group fails to come together, they get reassigned. Hence, when you queued for 40 minutes before a pop, you were waiting to get to the front of the queue for a healer.

Then, once the GROUP is formed, that group becomes a single entity and is placed in the instance queue. If this group, as a whole, fails to join, the group is broken and the individuals wait for another member to form a new group, which is placed at the back of the instance queue. The existance of the two step process is, I assume, the reason that the problem exists (groups based on individual queues, then instance based on group queue). It is not the same system twice, it is two mechanics within the same system.

[skiwi]

It isn't a bug; it's a design choice. When you lose a member (because they failed to accept queue or because they withdraw), your group is considered a new group and is placed at the back of the queue. This isn't something done "by accident".

How would this be a design choice?
In the simplified use case of the Duty Finder the observed and wanted behaviour is that when the condition holds that one player has failed to accept the queue, that then you are put in front of the queue.

Now take a look at the extended use case, namely that there is an instance to reserve. Why would you now suddenly be put back at the end of the queue? If the simplified version puts you always* in front of the queue.
*Except when you are a premade group and someone does not accept. But that special case makes sense, as you are with a premade, and you do not want one person to not end up in the instance.

This seems like a bug to me.

[Amayasu]

this is how it works already

No quite. I think what the OP is saying, and I also think this is the case, is that if you're not actually queuing to form a group but are infact waiting to be assigned an INSTANCE (i.e. AK) for your group, then when the instance is finally assigned should someone in the group fail to accept you'll be put to the back of the reserving instance queue.

I've only had this happen once to me, but i'm sure this was the case.