Tank entitlement vs group entitlement

[van_arn]

Democratically doesn't mean anything other than was pointed out already. It just shows how the system works. And in the case of a dungeon, you don't even need a 'majority' rule. Two votes i.e. half and that player is gone. The actual emphasis is on harassment and AFK, which are the INTENDED reasons for using the dismiss feature. SE has acknowledged that the feature is not being used as intended, as I pointed out in my last post. You keep boasting like you have the power, and seem to be on some kind of high that you can readily and steadily use this feature to get rid of players you don't like. You have even admitted that a lot of players will see the vote dismiss and just click yes without even paying attention. If SE ever does crack down on this feature, you will be one of the most miserable players in Eorzea. But for now, by all means keep using this feature as YOU intend.

I won't be miserable at all, since they aren't cracking down on it. And you know what? Their inaction for so long means they're perfectly ok with the way it's being used.

Working as intended.

And you know what? Trusts are going to make it even better. It's a game-sanctioned exile for the lowest performers.

[Physic]

What you think has been said in this thread: Tanks need to be using the best food, they need to be popping the best potions on cooldown, they need to switch stances once they get aggro on mass pulls, they need to pull and stay in DPS stance on bosses and they need to know the optimum methods for dealing with every encounter in every dungeon

What was actually said: Tanks should use AoE hate on more than one pack of mobs if the situation permits it


This but without the sarcasm. If a max level DPS is going to only use one combo or no DoTs, they might as well switch to a role that speeds up queues.


It can be used for that. You think you have to stick with a lvl 70 BLM that only uses ice spells?


It's only required when the rest of the party desires it or if you have common decency.


lol


They could only ban them because they're SE and FFXIV is their product. They could not ban them by citing any rules. They issued an open warning to players buying fraudulent codes instead of issuing bans. They aren't going to come out of nowhere and ban players that were operating within the rules.


Can't imagine why you would be paired with them in the first place. Could it be others had the same mindset?


Apparently not if you don't care how long a duty takes.

what is being said is not tanks should pull more mobs if they can.

What is being said is 2 people should decide how the tank should pull, and kick him if they dont like his choice.

note that vote kick is not actually democratic, because 2/4 players make the decision. If half the party wants slow pulls and half want fast pulls, they can kick. IE, if tank and healer want slow, 2 dps can still kick.

[Physic]

I won't be miserable at all, since they aren't cracking down on it. And you know what? Their inaction for so long means they're perfectly ok with the way it's being used.

Working as intended.

And you know what? Trusts are going to make it even better. It's a game-sanctioned exile for the lowest performers.

keep promoting kicking in dungeons, and enjoy when it becomes 1 hour queues.

[Ursa_Vonfiebryd]

Short Version: Yes. Tank sets the pace. While its nice that they 'offered encouragement' if the tank wasn't confident with their own skill level or the party comp or WHATEVER then it was within their right to play to their comfort level or personal max efficiency. As much as I jump on the role in general, its an essential role with a lot of pressure put on it. Much of it from the kind of attitude that particular que group exhibited. Tanks who tank smart get my comm. Tanks who tank according to stereotype do not. The que group was within their right but it was still a dick move and ultimately stupid: they could have turned up the heat on the small packs and did the duty just as efficiently if not moreso.

90% of the time I've seen a healer or group ask for bigger pulls, the pulls have ended with a wipe. So the Tank was well within their right as well to call BS.

[Mavrias]

thing is, you said that was an old response, the new TOS says that even talking about forcing a playstyle maybe actionable, so kicking for playstyle may not be a thing anymore. i'll look for the quotes, sec.






so, expressions that compel a playingstyle are nuisance behavior, which if it is found to be extremely hurtful, or obstructive can lead to action.

here they explain some obstructive behavior, which on its own is actionable.




i think kicking someone from an instance is on par, especially if leaving the party can be seen as obstructive.

seems the gms probably needed more in the TOS to cover them taking action.


also id like to point out, premades in discord kicking some guy to get their discord guy in, is pretty much manipulation of expulsion voting. Which is one reading of the story in the OP.

thing is, i dont see "we dont see eye to eye so lets go our seperate ways" as the same thing as compelling a playstyle. and since square is choosing not to elaborate further with how their new ToS interacts with the differing playstyle retoric, we can only assume that it has not changed.

i dont think that they queued with the intention to kick the pug tank, just that thats where it led and they had another tank in discord that they could call on.

[Physic]

Not to nitpick, but it actually is a majority. If someone moves to vote dismiss someone, it falls on the remaining 2 people to vote. The person putting forth the dismissal is obviously a yes, which means that if at least one other person says yes, you now have a majority of 2/3.

Same goes in 8 mans. 4/7 is a majority, just as 50.<infinite zeros>1% is a majority. The system is designed so that a tie never occurs.

thats not actually a majority.

2/4 players deciding how to play the dungeon is not a majority.

its only a majority if you exclude the person being kicked, which actually doesnt make sense, if the goal is democracy. Its a crappy tool for deciding playstyle since it doesnt solve a situation where half the people are in agreement.

It also means kicking first is the best strategy to make sure you dont get kicked, and get to keep the instance, if you have a deadlock.

party is at 50%? initiate a vote kick before they do, and then you will be 3/4 and the last guy becomes a minority vote.

[Lilseph]

nope that ones from ye olde heavensward times.

I'll keep trying to get an updated response, because this debate is completely endless. This, in order to prevent issues with people removing others from DF that don't align with their playstyle (And that applies for both sides).

[Physic]

thing is, i dont see "we dont see eye to eye so lets go our seperate ways" as the same thing as compelling a playstyle. and since square is choosing not to elaborate further with how their new ToS interacts with the differing playstyle retoric, we can only assume that it has not changed.

i dont think that they queued with the intention to kick the pug tank, just that thats where it led and they had another tank in discord that they could call on.

the latest law is going to be the one you hold people to. They say that compelling a playstyle is bad now. Thats the new rule.

And its not a case of lets go our seperate ways, its a case of you lose your progress and i keep my progress. If they cloned the instance on kick, it would be as you say, no big deal. But this is two players being able to control the dungeon, and punish players, just because they fired off vote kick first.

[Physic]

I'll keep trying to get an updated response, because this debate is completely endless. This, in order to prevent issues with people removing others from DF that don't align with their playstyle (And that applies for both sides).

i agree this should be made way more clear, one way or the other, however i dont think they will answer it, because they want their actions, or non actions to be always justifiable.

They dont want to commit to more oversight that costs money, and they dont want people to be too comfortable kicking, because that is destructive to DF.

[Gemina]

It can be used for that. You think you have to stick with a lvl 70 BLM that only uses ice spells?

I don't. Want to know why? Because they are violating what is required of them according to this:

DPS
Classes: Pugilist, Lancer, Rogue, Archer, Thaumaturge, Arcanist
Jobs: Monk, Dragoon, Ninja, Samurai, Bard, Machinist, Black Mage, Summoner, Red Mage
These classes and jobs utilize various offensive abilities to dispatch enemies as quickly as possible.

It's only required when the rest of the party desires it or if you have common decency.

Help me out here. I reflect the same to you as I have Mavrias, and to provide a source that explicitly states that the requirements of any given player is dictated by their group. Tell you what though, since I lack to confidence for you to do so. I will actually refer to the ToS that requires players to be courteous to each other. Performing to the best of your ability is a courtesy to the party, and all players should be doing it. But how do we determine that a tank is capable of more than the bare minimum? This isn't a sarcastic or rhetorical question.

lol

I love these responses!

They could only ban them because they're SE and FFXIV is their product. They could not ban them by citing any rules. They issued an open warning to players buying fraudulent codes instead of issuing bans. They aren't going to come out of nowhere and ban players that were operating within the rules.

SE's reluctance to take action by no means is indicative that players are operating within the rules. RMT anyone? Profanity in FC/Linkshell/Shout chat? Ice Mages? Like you brought up earlier.

Can't imagine why you would be paired with them in the first place. Could it be others had the same mindset?

Ahh, there it is. The personal attack, and assuming I have the same mindset as those getting kicked. Hmmm. I wonder why I've never been kicked from any group I've been in... in the three years I've been playing this game?

Apparently not if you don't care how long a duty takes.

I do care how long a duty takes. I just don't care if it takes 2-3 minutes longer than a speed run. I have bigger fish to fry, and far greater things to worry about. However, life must be pretty freakin awesome if I can devote my time and energy to griping about trivial matters.