Missed ONE >>1<< Duty Finder commence, and now I have 30 minutes penalty.

[Fellisin]

If you think someone is going to join a party and then sit around while everyone around them withdraws then yes you are assuming people are stupid.

No I'm not, because that not what I was saying AT all.

[Rysir]

No I'm not, because that not what I was saying AT all.

Then what about that collective pooling crap you were on about that makes singular strikes oh so awful?

[Fellisin]

Then what about that collective pooling crap you were on about that makes singular strikes oh so awful?

What you described is NOT what I said. If you wish to misrepresent what I said. Go ahead. But don't expect me to agree with your misrepresentations.

Ah, yeah. The harsher strike idea was just my way of trying to stop people from "trading strikes". Which I honestly don't care about, but other people seem to be worried about it.

Not really worried. But I would say that the joint strike system is done to discourage "trading strikes".

Fellsin sounds like he's saying it's AWFUL that a single person could be in a group of 3 and that person gets to be in a group that withdraws 6 times with nobody getting a penalty.

They're also sort of ignoring that if that group of three just queued as individuals, they'd all get to withdraw from the queue 6 total times (2 for each of them) and nobody gets a penalty. So the affect upon the queue is not any different whatsoever. But those sort of facts are apparently not all that important.

No not saying it AWFUL. I'm suggesting it why the present system exists.

Yes they could do it individually. Not ignoring that at all. But within a party someone can get someone to take a strike for them thus avoiding a thirdstrike themselves & lock out. But I guess ignoring facts like people do ask friends for favours like take a strike would happen if possible.

As far as i know a locked out person cannot queue in a party. They will be ineligible. So Fellisin, your argument about trolling is flawed.

Considering that's not even my "argument" or even close to what I was saying.

[Giantbane]

No not saying it AWFUL. I'm suggesting it why the present system exists.

Yes they could do it individually. Not ignoring that at all. But within a party someone can get someone to take a strike for them thus avoiding a thirdstrike themselves & lock out. But I guess ignoring facts like people do ask friends for favours like take a strike would happen if possible.

So a person, that has already accumulated 2 strikes, could only choose to do content in partial parties and if that person is AFK or whatever again, one of their friends could transfer their strike such that the original person doesn't get locked out? That's such a niche instance. It's very very rarely going to happen because it only works under a very specific set of circumstances. Even then, there's no extra strikes that happen since somebody else has to willingly give up one of their own strikes in order to make it work. That's a terrible justification to give everyone in the groups a strike.

[Giantbane]

Then what about that collective pooling crap you were on about that makes singular strikes oh so awful?

Fellsin sounds like he's saying it's AWFUL that a single person could be in a group of 3 and that person gets to be in a group that withdraws 6 times with nobody getting a penalty.

They're also sort of ignoring that if that group of three just queued as individuals, they'd all get to withdraw from the queue 6 total times (2 for each of them) and nobody gets a penalty. So the affect upon the queue is not any different whatsoever. But those sort of facts are apparently not all that important.

[SgtPepperUK]

Fellsin sounds like he's saying it's AWFUL that a single person could be in a group of 3 and that person gets to be in a group that withdraws 6 times with nobody getting a penalty.

They're also sort of ignoring that if that group of three just queued as individuals, they'd all get to withdraw from the queue 6 total times (2 for each of them) and nobody gets a penalty. So the affect upon the queue is not any different whatsoever. But those sort of facts are apparently not all that important.

I get what Fellisin is saying, it's about co-ordinated partial parties who queue and go instance fishing. First 2 times it pops party member A withdraws, 3rd time it pops party member B withdraws so A won't get a penalty and so on. So if 3 people make a party and enter DF they get 6 attempts as a group to fish for the progress status they want. A group of 8 looking to enter ST on the last phase would get 16 attempts if the penalty didn't apply to the entire party.

Whilst there is scope for abuse, to me the system is working, since 2.4 my FC and I have queued for CT and ST and gotten in faster without having it constantly repop due to people withdrawing. We've been getting in on the first or second attempt each time, more often the first. As I'm often the one that forms the party and puts us in I also make sure everyone is absolutely ready and the people I party with are aware that we'd all be penalised if they did time out for any reason when the DF popped.

[Roris]

So if 3 people make a party and enter DF they get 6 attempts as a group to fish for the progress status they want.

Preformed parties can't queue in progress.