CM AFKers

[CielWulfe]

Just don't reward them for failure to participate. In 1.0, when doing caravan quests, your reward was based on how much you participated. If you were a leech and just tagged along without doing much, if anything, you got little or no reward. Let's do the same here. Not participating is not participating, and you shouldn't get a reward for it. As other people have noted, simply kicking them for sitting idle won't work when they can just hit a button.

Also, for those running afk to go to the store or make food, I'm sorry, but you really should have thought about taking care of that before going into queue. It's selfish and inconvenient to the rest of the party, and could have either waited for the next run or been taken care of before you went in.

For emergency situations, since emergencies are just that, there's no timer as to when you'll be back. Exit the instance and make room for someone else. If you're a parent with a crying baby, I'm sorry about that, too, but that's a priority, not making people wait for you in a dungeon.

[Zezil]

btw i don't like idea about kick. it will have some case like some FC he lack of healer 1. so all go duty with duty healer but after join 10 min . his fc healer log in and all vote kick duty one and call his friend join duty by progress .... it possible so i want make penalty more then kick out

[Kikosho]

Funny how no matter what SE or any MMO dev does, people will always find a way to abuse things. Vote to Kick will be abused. Lack of Vote to Kick will be abused. AFK Kick will be circumvented. Only real way to "fix" this issue is by adding a contribution mechanic so you have to meet a minimum standard to get any credit but if something like this were to be implemented, it's possible to mess with legit players for a variety of reasons (fight mechanics/buggy implementation).

The AFK auto kick though should be implemented for PvP instances however since dead weight is even more detrimental. It's use though all depends on how PvP gear will be earned.

[nekochen]

I don't like AFK kick. There are many legit reasons why to AFK and the party always consents to it. Examples include:

Baby crying
Phone calls
Making a sandwich
Going Toilet
Go to the store around the corner for a soda
Any type of Real Life emergencies

Please let our party decide how we want to play !! Don't kick us from the dungeons because we had an emergency !!

Really? Making a sandwich?... oh it gets better, Go to the store around the corner for a soda? Wait! AFK, I gotta go watch The Matrix Trilogy, brb 4 hours.

[Mere]

It's selfish and inconvenient to the rest of the party, and could have either waited for the next run or been taken care of before you went in.

Really? Making a sandwich?... oh it gets better, Go to the store around the corner for a soda? Wait! AFK, I gotta go watch The Matrix Trilogy, brb 4 hours.

I'm sorry you guys have so bad and stressful parties... but not everyone play like you. Our parties are relaxed, and if someone needs to AFK in the middle of the run for whatever reason, we just let them. They usually come back in a couple of minutes, some times things get complicated and might take them 10 mins or more. But it doesn't matter since the party agree to it and are having no trouble reaching the next boss or even killing it while the other guy is AFK. We get the dungeon done and everyone had a good time despite of someone being absent for half of the run.

I guess this is all too strange to you. By your replies I can tell you have the worst time running dungeons and get angry at every little thing. I hope one day we meet on the Duty Finder so you can see what I'm talking about. Dungeons can be fun too!

Now back to the subject: There are many ways for Vote Kick not be abused.

Some things I can think of:

You cannot kick after reaching certain room (for example, first boss).
You can only kick within the first 20 minutes of the run (or any other arbitrary amount. You can tell when someone is just there to grief almost since the start of the run.)
The person cannot be kicked until the boss' treasure has been given to someone. (Meaning, everyone has to loot and the prize has to go to someone's inventory before you can kick anyone).
You cannot kick during a fight/boss fight.

I also like what other people said about checking for contribution. There is a system that do just that in FATEs, so implement it over to dungeons and check how much enmity has a player generated. After reaching a certain point (like it would be for bronze or silver medal in FATEs), that person cannot be kicked. It just means that this person is doing his job regardless if the party likes him/her or not.

Someone who is going to play and have fun should have no trouble meeting any of those criteria. Those who just want to be carried or grief would have too much work just to catch up that hopefully will find it pointless and stop behaving that way... or just be kicked.

[Mythrella]

Just don't reward them for failure to participate. In 1.0, when doing caravan quests, your reward was based on how much you participated. If you were a leech and just tagged along without doing much, if anything, you got little or no reward. Let's do the same here. Not participating is not participating, and you shouldn't get a reward for it. As other people have noted, simply kicking them for sitting idle won't work when they can just hit a button.

Also, for those running afk to go to the store or make food, I'm sorry, but you really should have thought about taking care of that before going into queue. It's selfish and inconvenient to the rest of the party, and could have either waited for the next run or been taken care of before you went in.

For emergency situations, since emergencies are just that, there's no timer as to when you'll be back. Exit the instance and make room for someone else. If you're a parent with a crying baby, I'm sorry about that, too, but that's a priority, not making people wait for you in a dungeon.

Like Like Like ♥

I fully sipport VTK options, but if we're not getting it there needs to be a measuring tool for participation.

[AlmaMalma]

A simpler option would be to remove a person from a party if they don't appear in the same zone as the rest after a few minutes, so say if you haven't gone through the CM Disposal Chute, or into the area Livia spawns in when she's up, you're removed. It would also, lets say, encourage folks not to sit gazing at the cutscenes for too long.

[SIXTYONESIX]

How about people use the bathroom, go get snacks, go to the store, etc. BEFORE they queue up for a dungeon that they know is going to take 30-60 minutes, and has a finite amount of time to complete?

How about you give me 3k for the food I just used that is sitting there ticking down while I wait, because you didn't have the foresight to go to the bathroom before you started? 3k to replace the food I used because you decided to waste my time and go powder your nose in the middle of a dungeon run.

As far as I'm concerned, if you have any emergency that will take longer than 2 minutes TOPS, you should just say you have things you need to attend to and that you need to leave. Going AFK for any extended period of time for legit emergencies, or just because you want to leech, are equally as bad.

[Heather]

I don't know if there is anything that could keep this kind of behavior down accept for reporting the individual, there will always be a loop hole that they will find to stay in the instance to keep from being booted.

[Recycler]

Greetings,

The development team is aware of the issue where players go AFK during dungeons without participating at all, and they will be making it so if a character does not move for a certain period of time they will be automatically kicked from the instance. This will be implemented along with the MVP voting system in patch 2.1.

I'd really like what's the rationale here. People who knowingly AFK in dungeons to leech will just take it one step further and enable auto-run against a wall, or move a yalm every 10 minutes or something along the lines of that. I just can't imagine that this will have any noticeable positive effect.

I'd think that a system which measures amount of participation, and in case there is no / very little participation, you won't get any reward, is a better solution.