Level 80s who single target groups of mobs

[MsMisato]

Would 1 job per role make this less of an issue to you? All of this is hypothetical anyways and more than likely will never get in the game, but I can tell you with certainty that some people NEED something like this or they'll be forever stuck in their ways.

It simply won't happen. Best is to let people know. They have stated time and time again the game is designed for the casual player =/

[iVolke]

The real question is why you tolerate people using single-target abilities on packs in a level 80 dungeon. Kick those people. They’re not new.

Because 9/10 time another party member will berate me for using the kick feature, often saying something along the lines of "bUt KiCkiNg iS mEaN"

[SnowVix]

OP states " Explain to DPS that on about 3 targets, it'd be better to do AOEs". This is wrong. It's better to do single target rotations on very small pulls consisting of 3 or less because you can burst down them faster then using some weak AoE skills. Single target rotations of course have higher DMG potency than AoE.

the only class where ST is a gain over AoE in the 3+ range is monk. and even then it's a mixed rotation, as at 3 you want to use Arm of the Destroyer every Opo-opo GCD (unless you have a Leaden up from the last enemy), Four-Point every Raptor GCD, and Demolish each enemy in turn. At 4+ Rockbreaker beats spreading Demolish. And for your example of MCH, Bioblaster is better than Drill at 2, Flamethrower is for 3+, Auto Crossbow is better than Heat Blast at 3, and Spreadshot is better than Heated combo at 3.

[Vahlnir]

So, is this considered kick abuse if I was to kick someone who was vastly underperforming? Is there any sort of precedent where SQ has allowed this? I mean, it's something I can certainly do or try, but I would want to stay in the green.

If they were holding back the group's progress, aka keeping the group stuck in one spot for x amount of time, then there is nothing wrong with it according to the ToS. I've initiated a kick a couple times for that reason in the 8 or so years I've been playing. Otherwise it comes down to a "difference of playstyles" which is a bit of a gray area. I suppose one could make the argument that another person's underperformance was causing someone "emotional distress" (causing emotional distress is a ToS violation) but that's a stretch and a half. I'm sure someone somewhere has tried it though. I can happily say that the amount of times I've initiated a vote to kick for anything could be counted on one hand.

[SturmChurro]

If they were holding back the group's progress, aka keeping the group stuck in one spot for x amount of time, then there is nothing wrong with it according to the ToS. I've initiated a kick a couple times for that reason in the 8 or so years I've been playing. Otherwise it comes down to a "difference of playstyles" which is a bit of a gray area. I suppose one could make the argument that another person's underperformance was causing someone "emotional distress" (causing emotional distress is a ToS violation) but that's a stretch and a half. I'm sure someone somewhere has tried it though. I can happily say that the amount of times I've initiated a vote to kick for anything could be counted on one hand.

For all my big talk on these forums in the past, the only time I've ever actually initiated a kick on someone was when they were DCed. Otherwise I just let it be.

[Awha]

I am all for kicking players that do not gel with the group. Think it is better for everyone if players that do not get along very well for whatever reason do not have to play with one another.

[Driavna]

If they were holding back the group's progress, aka keeping the group stuck in one spot for x amount of time, then there is nothing wrong with it according to the ToS. I've initiated a kick a couple times for that reason in the 8 or so years I've been playing. Otherwise it comes down to a "difference of playstyles" which is a bit of a gray area. I suppose one could make the argument that another person's underperformance was causing someone "emotional distress" (causing emotional distress is a ToS violation) but that's a stretch and a half. I'm sure someone somewhere has tried it though. I can happily say that the amount of times I've initiated a vote to kick for anything could be counted on one hand.

Just by current ToS if three out of four members want to play in a certain way and the other don't adapt could be considered "imposing your playstyle" and is a violation of said ToS. At the same time, if before initiating a vote kick I asked/requested "Use your AoE rotation please." the kicked player can report me for the same violation.

It's the problem with such a vague ToS, at the end is about who bother to report or report first.

Anyway, on topic: after SB changes there is zero reason to not use your AoE rotation, in most cases is even simplier than the single target one.

[van_arn]

So, is this considered kick abuse if I was to kick someone who was vastly underperforming? Is there any sort of precedent where SQ has allowed this? I mean, it's something I can certainly do or try, but I would want to stay in the green.

All long as someone else agrees with you, as long as you didn’t insult the other player, kick away.

If they refuse to listen to advice and the party successfully voted for them to leave, they were the one attempting to impose their playstyle on 3 other people.

If someone gets kicked and their buddy has a cry, the person that agreed with you can silently kick them to resolve the issue before it becomes drama or you can leave without penalty as there is no longer a full group.

[Hycinthus]

Just by current ToS if three out of four members want to play in a certain way and the other don't adapt could be considered "imposing your playstyle" and is a violation of said ToS. At the same time, if before initiating a vote kick I asked/requested "Use your AoE rotation please." the kicked player can report me for the same violation.

It's the problem with such a vague ToS, at the end is about who bother to report or report first.

Anyway, on topic: after SB changes there is zero reason to not use your AoE rotation, in most cases is even simplier than the single target one.

Hmm agree it is vague but let’s take a look at the definition of “impose”

Impose:
1. To force (an unwelcome decision or ruling) on someone.
a. put (a restriction) in place.
b. require (a duty, charge, or penalty) to be undertaken or paid. "a fine may be imposed"
c. exert firm control over.

2. take advantage of someone by demanding their attention or commitment.

I think the keywords here are "an unwelcome decision", "exert firm control", and "take advantage of someone".
Ok so for the scenario if a tank that doesn't pull wall-to-wall. Does he fulfill the keywords above? Is he exerting firm control and taking advantage of someone? Or maybe he's just playing the game?

For the scenario, if we say “use your AoE”, and the person did it, then it’s not imposing. But if he resisted, and documented via chat, “No i dont play that way”, then it’s an unwelcome decision already.

But if he doesn't reply, then can we really conclude anything? Could be the person does not even read chat, or does not know that the blue chat there is directed towards him, could be that he thought you guys were NPC instead of real players (yes, this is a common misunderstanding for new MMO players, young ones especially, they cannot tell who's NPC who's not). Did any part of the game teach him that the blue chat is party chat and it's directed towards him? Things like this comes into play.

I guess every case will be on a case-by-case basis.

[Vahlnir]

It is vague but let’s take a look at the definition of “impose”

Impose:
1. To force (an unwelcome decision or ruling) on someone.

So perhaps, if we say “use your AoE”, and the person did it, then it’s not imposing. But if he resisted, and documented via chat, “No i dont play that way”, then it’s an unwelcome decision already.

And the same could be said in reverse about imposing a playstyle, since the person not wanting to AoE is imposing their playstyle on 3 other people. There's a lot of room open for interpretation, really. Context is everything though.