Locked out of the Duty Finder.

[Ryndael]

One.

You're still missing the point. Removing shown progress would keep the same results. -without being morally transgressive- to legitimate players who aren't fishing.

And it's not 'much easier', because like I -already- said, they'd have to know beforehand and have a chance to get locked out with the current system.

Also I'd go on about how 'white-knighting' is simply a synonym of 'defending', but it's irrelevant and you probably wouldn't understand that either.

[Raist]

And aliance C is has lost both tanks. Good luck making progress in CT. Better yet it is a 4-man and you and the other dps are the lonely pair in dungeon. The tank and healer just fishing and trolling the DF just wasted your queue time. Woo Hoo. This will work out great!

Well... they can seek replacements before taking on the boss. IDK how many times we've lost (or even kicked) a player in a dungeon and trudged forward through the trash mobs to the next boss area while seeking replacements. Heck... I've even sat there and duoed mobs in some 4-man's waiting for replacements. Seen groups finish bosses in both 4 and 8-man runs while a couple people short because of deaths or accidental lockouts (my BLM and a PLD finished SV HM just the other night because healer went down and DRG died). Although, progress will be slower... but when you are still completing the run in around half the allotted time, is it really that much of an inconvenience? Progress is still progress... just maybe not speed run progress, but if you are still able to finish and get your shiny item or tomes, are you really suffering much? Think about it... a run that reserves 60-90 minutes that you complete in 30 or less with a decent group winds up taking you 35 or maybe 40 because you slowed down a bit while seeking a replacement or two? Good Grief...

[Rath]

So do I, but sometimes these things cause you to miss your queue. And you shouldn't be penalized for that, especially when there's a more efficient way to fix it.

I feel like a broken record.

If these things are causing you to miss your queue 3 times within a day, then maybe, you should use that 30 minutes to:
Finish your important crafts
Do the quests you want done that you do not want to skip CS on
Do the things you should be doing in real life, instead of playing a game
Take a good long number 2 break!

As you obviously would need to afk in the dungeon anyways, and likely just get kicked for it. I like this system, I have not seen more then 2 withdrawn party members in a row since this was implemented. I saw upwards of 10 almost every single time my party did not include the tanks and healers needed before we queued.

[Ryndael]

And -yet again- missing the point. With a different system we can have the same effect but without the completely ludicrous timeout.

[polyphonica]

And -yet again- missing the point. With a different system we can have the same effect but without the completely ludicrous timeout.

I don't think many people would find a 30-minute penalty after withdrawing/timing-out three times over the course of a 24-hour period to be "ludicrous".

If you're in a party and someone else withdrew, penalizing you, that's maybe a separate issue that needs adjusting. But if an individual player is consistently reaching that limit, then they are precisely the sort of problematic player that this system is designed to help flush out. It's designed to discourage queue failures. Withdrawing should be a last resort, not something that happens as a matter of course, since every withdrawal hurts other players in the queue.

[Ryndael]

Queue failures still happen. Less often, sure, but again there are much less obstructive ways of doing it so fishers can't constantly be popping.

It's ludicrous because it's completely unnecessary.

[polyphonica]

Queue failures still happen. Less often, sure, but again there are much less obstructive ways of doing it so fishers can't constantly be popping.

It's ludicrous because it's completely unnecessary.

The issue isn't only with fishers. The issue is also with inconsiderate people. For example, people who are in a queue and then decide "oh, I guess I'll start doing some high-level crafts that I can't afford to exit out of while I wait" because they think that withdrawing from the queue has no consequence anyway -- that their crafting is more important than the other people waiting. This penalty is designed to make every withdrawal have a sort of cost, so that people think of it as more of a big deal. It's a way of encouraging good behaviour by punishing behaviour that's counter-productive to the smooth-running of the queue system.

If there are additional ways they can solve the fishing problem, might as well do that too. But this is also trying to encourage people to stop being self-centered when other people are waiting on them so they too can start the duty.

[Ryndael]

If they hadn't queued then it wouldn't have popped anyway. So no loss.

Besides that, 45 seconds and 30minutes is a big difference. So what you're saying is SE should lower the countdown timer.

[NyarukoW]

If they hadn't queued then it wouldn't have popped anyway. So no loss.

Really? Who is they? If you didn't queue there will plenty of other players who would have queued. If the fishers and trolls didn't queue there will still be plenty of normal players that queue. No loss to whom? This kind of statement is totally self-centered. When you are on the DF or PF you are asking/begging for others players to join you to play, not the other way around. You should have the common sense and common courtesy to be ready to go.

Besides that, 45 seconds and 30minutes is a big difference.

It is a big difference. The 45 second transaction time for getting matched players to go is a cost imposed on the whole system. If player can click go in 20 seconds or less it would be better for everyone. The 30 minutes penalty can not increase the transaction cost, if it gets people to be on the ball and not withdraw it will only improve and reduce the transaction time to be less than 45 seconds.

So what you're saying is SE should lower the countdown timer.

You obviously have no understanding for queuing theory or how a system can be efficient in processing transactions. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M/G/k_queue

And it is well know this kind of stuff are are hard problems. But this much should be obvious. Setting the countdown time to infinity will guarantee successful queue every time, but the queue will never move, and setting countdown timer to 0 will get you really fast transaction times of nothing but failed queues. The optimal count down time is at tip of saddle point in between 0 and infinity, but I seriously doubt SE is going to set it to be some 41.0053632 secs based on some seriously complex statistical model, but they probably did pick 45 seconds after careful deliberation. They know full well you can't just increase transaction time to 60 seconds without incurring more system penalty, nor do you just lower it and create more queue timeout/withdraw failures.

[Tiggy]

Nyaraku. We know what you think. The other posters know what you think. Square knows what you think. There's over 20 pages of your opinion here. Everyone's got it. Walk away and let it go. The horse is dead. You aren't adding anything worth while to this thread anymore by saying it over and over and over and over again.

Just let it go. You've said enough.