Locked out of the Duty Finder.

[Giantbane]

In any case have I had queue pop in the middle of a loading screen. Of course. Have I ever missed one because of that? 0 misses to date, ever. Also what are the odds that you are in loading screen and queue pops? Really really low, like 1 in a 1000. What are the odds that is right at the start of the loading screen and not at the end of the loading screen? Even lower than 1 in a 1000. In any case if you assume loading time is 45 seconds, really unrealistically long but for arguments sake I will even grant you that, the average loading time that you will hit a queue pop should be 1/2 of 45 seconds so 22.5 sceonds. So 999/1000 times there is more than enough time to click commence, for that 1/1000 odd chance, you get 3 strikes to cover you. So since 1/2 the time the loading screen is more than half-way done, you are really falling back on the 3 strikes for 1/2000 odds.

You'd think that, right? Maybe I'm just really unlucky. I've just observed it being more prone to popping when loading, and when it hits while loading I'm pretty sure it's been right at the beginning. Maybe there's something with the networking code in how it sends things back and forth that it's more like to think it's ready around the time you start to zone or it's just confirmation bias. It's really annoying when it happens though, especially if that load decides it needs to take some extra time for whatever reason that happens.

You're sitting there tapping your fingers thinking "hurry up, I want to make my queue thank you very much. You couldn't have popped right before or after the load?"

[Fynlar]

It is your decision to queue up with people that are for whatever reason not able to commence.

You think people choose to do something like that?

The game doesn't even tell you right now which person in your party failed to confirm. How are you supposed to root out a potential troublemaker?

[Tupsi]

You think people choose to do something like that?

The game doesn't even tell you right now which person in your party failed to confirm. How are you supposed to root out a potential troublemaker?

Ready Check. If the person shows an x and they haven't said anything for awhile, chances are they're the one who didn't hit commence (thus withdrawin everyone.) If you hit commence and someone withdraws immediately, you have a point. Otherwise..as even the rep said, use Ready Check.

[rainichan]

As a suggestion for leaving a Duty to not get penalized once you're in and you leave after a set amount of time: have options as to why you're leaving beyond a vote abandon. I was in a party not too terribly long ago with someone who was harassing and verbally abusing the party, and I left to get out of that. Got penalized once I was out from joining any other duty with friends to cool off. As it was someone from a different server, kind of hard to report and I shouldn't be penalized after 30 minutes of verbal abuse for leaving. :/

[polyphonica]

Your pattern would lead to an exploit where a DPS would pair with a tank or healer just to get their near-instant queue, even though the tank/healer had no intention of running the dungeon and could just withdraw, leaving the DPS in an open (but only partially filled) instance. The open instance would give that DPS priority for getting the next tank/healer to come in, while meanwhile making the other players he/she was paired with have to wait it out with him in the instance rather than continuing what they'd been doing until a group was ready.

The tank/healer would take the penalty for that withdrawal, though. So sure, they probably could do that, but they can't just keep on doing it indefinitely without being penalized. And I'd still tend to think that, most of the time, they'd be better off just running the instance, since they often get role bonuses too (tanks in particular). The tanks/healers in question could do more or less the same thing you just described as it stands by simply exiting the instance after it pops, which then requires another tank/healer to queue with "in progress". At least this way you could open it up to anyone, regardless of the in-progress setting. That said, I agree that it's not a perfect solution either.

It's better for the DF to continue until it puts together a complete ready group, just like it does now, but have the player who withdrew be the only one withdrawn, rather than forcing the "withdraw" on whoever else he was grouped with as well. That means if someone Withdraws while his teammates Commence, the one withdrawing would be knocked out of the party, and the ones entering would be partied with whoever else the DF finds as a replacement.

I don't mind this in concept, but if it keeps the party at the front of the queue even after that one person cancels, it still opens the door to the same issue as above. The only alleviated issue, and probably your point, is that at least this happens when they're in the queue and not actually in the instance. However, if it does keep their "place in line" when doing this, then so long as one person withdraws when it pops, anyone else can withdraw immediately thereafter before it pops again penalty-free, unless they don't get any further choice. Right now, the penalty only applies if you withdraw when the queue pops, but not if you withdraw while waiting, so if a party member withdrawal takes you right back to waiting state, it's another way around it for the second+ person. A workaround there could be that you enter some sort of "Commence Imminent" state where withdrawing is no longer possible, or is treated the same way as a withdrawal when popped (i.e. penalty applies). This is sort of why I preferred the people actually travel to the instance, but it has its own drawback as you mentioned.

If you do any of this, the key would be to give some good options to the party leader to make decisions about what to do in various scenarios, as you could have a case where the whole party doesn't want to play if a given person is kicked out, which would just result in a different kind of failure (the party arrives to the instance, but instantly quits because their buddy got kicked upon entry; the party would have preferred to requeue with their friend than to keep their place in line). So if you have options like this, then perhaps it makes sense why the party leader could end up with some penalties themselves as well.

Anyway, trying to this in a way that's fair and also doesn't open the door to loopholes or workarounds is tricky. But it does seem doable, and in the end, having tools for a party leader to better manage and take responsibility for their party when enqueued could be its own benefit too.

[MeiUshu]

it will only be a prolem nothing else. Leader may ABUSE of such power..please dont give more tools to people to abuse of th system and make miserable the life of other players...

My goodness...remove the dam kick option, remove all those blocks...and put one block...if you register for a dungeon you are deemed to do it, if you withdraw from it, you can only register to another dungeon once you have done the one you have withdrawn.

that way no problem anymore.

Kindergarten is the word for all these posts.

Mei

[Fynlar]

Ready Check. If the person shows an x and they haven't said anything for awhile, chances are they're the one who didn't hit commence (thus withdrawin everyone.) If you hit commence and someone withdraws immediately, you have a point. Otherwise..as even the rep said, use Ready Check.

And if someone is hitting yes on the ready check but isn't hitting yes to confirm duty? Then what?

Keep in mind, we are talking about potential trolls in outlandish situations here (the whole reason why the group penalty is apparently being defended by some). Again, why do I deserve to be punished for someone else being a dipstick?

[Taliph]

Again, why do I deserve to be punished for someone else being a dipstick?

Simple, because your party is punishing someone else who was queued and shouldn't have to deal with your party's issues.

[Fynlar]

Simple, because your party is punishing someone else who was queued and shouldn't have to deal with your party's issues.

Sorry, but that's crap, just as much crap as it was in school with teachers who would punish an entire class because one kid is acting up.

[Taliph]

Sorry, but that's crap, just as much crap as it was in school with teachers who would punish an entire class because one kid is acting up.

While it is just like that, I don't agree that it is crap... Teachers (usually) only use such methods when it cannot be determined which kid was the one acting up.... Much like when you cannot determine which person in your party hit withdraw.

That said, out of the dozens of partial party queues and more solo queues (all as dps) the only time I have been locked out of a dungeon is when I was testing the system.