Change The Rules For Leaving Dungeons (aka Why People Insta-Quit Castrum Meridianum)

[Goji1639]

It's not a punishment it's a cooldown.

It's preventing you from queuing for a certain time because you did something they didn't want you to do. Like a temporary suspension prevents you from accessing your account because you did something they didn't want you to; but I guess you could call a suspension a cooldown to, lol.

[Ultimatecalibur]

The problem is the rewards for both dungeons are too different and should be a bit closer together to avoid people leaving for that reason.

They can't really do anything like that. If they increase Castrum rewards, people start dropping out of Prae because they want the far shorter Castrum. If Prae is rewarded enough to compensate for its length, people start dropping out of Castrum. The only real way to fix the problem is to rework both dungeons so that they take roughly the same amount of time.

[Tsalmaveth]

You don't like it, so you want to say it's 'not allowed'... but it is. If YoshiP and the other developers did not want to 'allow' players to leave instances, they would not have the option something you can choose. The only way to leave then would be to be kicked or to DC. It is expected people will want to, or need to, leave an instance. In order to not deal with people jumping in and out repeatedly (it happened back in ARR, esp when they didn't let people group up for the CT raids) they put a cool-down in. Some call it a 'punishment' but to others it's just a timer to find something else to do in-game or IRL.

Harassing people verbally is clearly outlined in the TOS. It can be reported for a reason. I would like to see you report a person for leaving an instance and see where that gets you with the GMs. That should tell you everything you need to know about 'not allowed' or just 'it annoys me, so I'm going to hype it up as ILLEGAL on the forums'.

[Goji1639]

You don't like it, so you want to say it's 'not allowed'... but it is. If YoshiP and the other developers did not want to 'allow' players to leave instances, they would not have the option something you can choose. The only way to leave then would be to be kicked or to DC. It is expected people will want to, or need to, leave an instance. In order to not deal with people jumping in and out repeatedly (it happened back in ARR, esp when they didn't let people group up for the CT raids) they put a cool-down in. Some call it a 'punishment' but to others it's just a timer to find something else to do in-game or IRL.

Harassing people verbally is clearly outlined in the TOS. It can be reported for a reason. I would like to see you report a person for leaving an instance and see where that gets you with the GMs. That should tell you everything you need to know about 'not allowed' or just 'it annoys me, so I'm going to hype it up as ILLEGAL on the forums'.

I don't need to report people for leaving instances; the punishment is automated, so of course GMs won't do anything. Things like griefing are also outlined in the ToS, but they're obviously not going to explain every possible instance of what could constitute griefing in the ToS.

It's not illegal because it annoys me, it's illegal because they punish people for doing it. That's how the logistics of allowing/not allowing things and enforcing rules works. The "it's allowed, they just punish you for doing it" rationalization is funny, but it's irrational. It's not allowed, but the punishment is light because they can't really prove the person who disconnected was at fault. If they could somehow prove you left intentionally the punishment would likely be more severe.

[Tsalmaveth]

"We put this option in, but if you use it... YOU HAVE BROKEN THE RULES!"

Your logic is FLAWLESS.

[Goji1639]

"We put this option in, but if you use it... YOU HAVE BROKEN THE RULES!"

Your logic is FLAWLESS.

They put the option for me to harass and insult people in the game to. Must not be against the rules.

[MariaArvana]

They can't really do anything like that. If they increase Castrum rewards, people start dropping out of Prae because they want the far shorter Castrum. If Prae is rewarded enough to compensate for its length, people start dropping out of Castrum. The only real way to fix the problem is to rework both dungeons so that they take roughly the same amount of time.

Why would people drop outta Prae though if the rewards were equal or much closer together?

A penalty is 30mins. Prae is roughly 40-45 mins. Castrum is roughly 20-25. It'd actually take longer for someone to drop outta Prae, wait for their cooldown, re-queue, then finish Castrum before the Prae run would have finished. That also assumes instant queues, which may not be the case, and is basically impossible outside of a lucky situation for dps. Also assuming you get Castrum, when it's still 50/50 and you can just get Prae again.

For it to be worth it, someone else would have to leave first before you could leave to avoid the 30mins, then you'd have to have an instant queue, THEN you'd have to hope you get the 50/50% on getting castrum. Anyone that wants to be time-efficient would have very little reason to leave Prae if they wanted exp, as without perfect conditions, they'll end up wasting more time in the long run.

There's basically little loss to making the rewards equal. You might get an occasional person that wants to be time-inefficient for some reason, and yes, Prae wouldn't be the ideal choice to be getting, but it'd still be optimal over attempting to fish a castrum through leaving and suffering penalties and then suffering a 50/50% shot, which if failed, starts the whole process over and can double, triple or quadruple the time you'd have spent trying to do MSQ roulette in the first place.

[Tsalmaveth]

They put the option for me to harass and insult people in the game to. Must not be against the rules.

Check the TOS on that one. Leaving instances is not in the TOS. It IS, however, an option the Devs deliberately set up and included in the menu when in any instance.

We can go around in circles all you want, but your logic doesn't pan out. Misusing the chat functions is not the same as using an option in the menu FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE. 'Leave instance' which, if you are first, warns you there is a timer for doing. You accept the timer and you are free to use the menu option they put in for that exact purpose. End of story.

[Goji1639]

Check the TOS on that one. Leaving instances is not in the TOS. It IS, however, an option the Devs deliberately set up and included in the menu when in any instance.

We can go around in circles all you want, but your logic doesn't pan out. Misusing the chat functions is not the same as using an option in the menu FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE. 'Leave instance' which, if you are first, warns you there is a timer for doing. You accept the timer and you are free to use the menu option they put in for that exact purpose. End of story.

Things like griefing are outlined in the ToS to, and that concept covers a multitude of actions that they obviously can't explain every single possibility in the ToS. Hence the warning and punishment if you bail on a group. There would be no need for a punishment if they wanted you to leave groups intentionally, but they don't and you're penalized for doing so. Them including a warning that you're about to incur a penalty doesn't mean you're not being punished.

SE is clearly trying to deter that behavior. If the existing penalty isn't enough of a deterrent then more penalties are necessary. That's just how this kind of thing works.

[Warghoul570]

It’s impossible for them to increase the rewards just by the very design of the dungeons Pre needs to be higher because it’s a longer fight with more bosses. I don’t like running Castrum any more than anyone else does but I suck it up and run it when it comes up. I only leave if half the party bails which as happened to me before