Locked out of the Duty Finder.

[Itseotle]

Sitting in queue for ST. 12 withdrawls so far.

13.

Lolol all those scrubs locking themselves out.

[Giantbane]

But anyway, it's clear that it's easier for the system to manage individuals than groups. But part of this configuration difficulty is why this party-based penalty for withdrawing. From a system's point of view, this still seems to me like the most equitable and fair approach, since it reinforces that if you're going to queue as a party, you should be coordinated and ready as a party. And, at the end of the day, it seems to me that the 30-minute penalty on the third strike is not so onerous or burdensome in the grand scheme of things. I suppose we may not agree.

My point was I believe it to be the group who gets hit by this additional complexity more than the individual. 30 minutes is kind of a long time to be forced to sit in time out when you were all ready to do something. Worse when it's someone else's fault. But I can understand if you don't see it that way.

[Noxifer]

From a system's point of view, this still seems to me like the most equitable and fair approach, since it reinforces that if you're going to queue as a party, you should be coordinated and ready as a party.

Well, I'd agree if it awarded each party member a single strike, instead of matching everyone to the person with the highest number of strikes. Say player A, B and C queue up. C has two strikes since before, A has one strike. After fifteen minutes, the queue pops, and B (who has no strikes since before) had just gone to the bathroom and missed the window.
Realistically, this would then mean that A has two strikes, B has one strike and C has three strikes. By kicking C, A and B would be able to queue up again. But instead, if I've understood things right, all three are locked out and kicking C from the team changes nothing. How does that make sense?

[polyphonica]

Realistically, this would then mean that A has two strikes, B has one strike and C has three strikes. By kicking C, A and B would be able to queue up again. But instead, if I've understood things right, all three are locked out and kicking C from the team changes nothing. How does that make sense?

Yeah, if that's what happens in that particular scenario, it would make sense to revisit it because it could lead to party trolling scenario where someone with two strikes joins a party only to cancel out and doom them all to a 30-minute lockout. It's either that or at least you'd need some way to see how many "strikes" someone has (or see how many strikes the "group" has when they queue).

[MeiUshu]

Sitting in queue for ST. 12 withdrawls so far.

13.

Lolol all those scrubs locking themselves out.

as far as you know NONE of them may be locked out.. it may just be 12, 13, 14, 15 different person each for the 1st time...what were you saying again ?
Mei

[Itseotle]

as far as you know NONE of them may be locked out.. it may just be 12, 13, 14, 15 different person each for the 1st time...what were you saying again ?
Mei

that the system is working great or maybe you couldnt see the sarcasm :P

[HaelseMikiro]

so if I'm understanding this correctly, I can create a party for say....Light farming, and then when we get 7 people in the party, I can Q and withdraw 3 times (if the DF has a person of the proper role waiting) in rapid succession and then force a 30 minute lockout on 6 other people? Not that I'd ruin my good name on my server for the sake of being a troll, but it does seem exploitable at least a couple times.

[NyarukoW]

that the system is working great or maybe you couldnt see the sarcasm :P

The penalty is too light and the 3 strikes is too lenient and they are already screwing around and withdrawing without a care.

[Giantbane]

The penalty is too light and the 3 strikes is too lenient and they are already screwing around and withdrawing without a care.

Or maybe it's an inefficient and haphazard way of attempting to fix the problem.

Okay, but you could already kick that person after the first strike to avoid the risk of a recurrence.

Just to revisit this one point, you can't actually tell who withdrew. There's no indicator and nothing telling you who did it. So unless they're just AFK and can ready check quickly to hope to identify who was there, you're just going to have to rely upon the person admitting they did it. Sounds like a recipe for more drama.

yay?

[Souljacker]

The penalty is too light and the 3 strikes is too lenient and they are already screwing around and withdrawing without a care.

No, the underlying issue hasn't been solved. SE will need to revisit this once again - I don't understand the resistance to making random queues actually random. I've never seen this issue before in another mmo - and I've certainly never seen another mmo solve their issues by implementing a penalty for withdrawing from a queue.

This was a lesson SE shouldn't have had to learn. WoW tried showing the amount of bosses once, the same issue happened with people fishing queues, and they quickly went back to just filtering people in randomly (as they should have). We really don't need any more toxicity in the community. We need real design solutions that aren't just blanket penalties.