Is the vote kick system improperly implemented for how it's actually being used?

[-BlueGreen-]

Long story short, despite making steady progress through an entire dungeon with no wipes I found myself kicked just before the final boss for as best can be described as 'different play styles'. There's no point in going into further detail as there's plenty of examples of this happening to other people, and as for myself, I was in there for exp anyway and it's not like all the exp earned from killing the mobs and bosses leading up to that point were stripped from me.

Now, up until last night I was under the impression that such a kick was basically like a form of griefing, since, despite the differences of opinion, the team did make progress. I did some digging after the fact and found some things that really surprised me:

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post2357707
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post2358628

Now I don't want to start a discussion on if I or anyone else feels like differing play styles is a valid reason to kick party members, but rather if the vote kick system as it currently is implemented is even suitable for this purpose if the GMs are going to allow it to be used for such reasons.

Basically, imagine this scenario in a 4 man party: 2 pairs of players join the DF and end up on the same team. One pair wants small pulls while the other pair wants to do large pulls.

Now if this came down to a straight vote of large pulls vs. small pulls, you'd expect the vote to be split perfectly 50/50 with no clear way of how to proceed. On the other hand, anyone who's been on either side of this situation knows that if a vote kick is initiated, then someone will likely get kicked.

With a 50/50 split in ideology, how can this happen? Simple, vote kick as it currently is ignores the wishes of the person targeted by the vote kick. One side basically forces the other to cast a vote of which play style to go with, but has the advantage of removing one vote from the opposition solely because they chose to initiate vote kick first.

Basically, if we're going to allow vote kicks to be used for such situations, wouldn't it be prudent to consider the opinion of the player targeted by the vote kick? Otherwise, we're basically saying that as soon as you suspect you and your buddy are in such a situation that you should immediately initiate a vote kick even if you would otherwise be fine completing the dungeon under the current circumstances so that time isn't wasted finding replacement members. That way you're basically safeguarded from having the same tactic used on you or your buddy. How could this approach be good for the community?

Perhaps what we need for this case is an additional tool, one for setting up arbitrary votes. Basically one player decides to call a vote and types in a short message such as "'Yes' for big pulls, 'No' for small pulls" and then each player, including the one who initiated the vote see the dialog and get to vote. After the vote the party sees the results and should then follow the group's wishes (assuming a majority voted one way or the other). It could then even be set up with a check box that could make this function as a 'vote abandon' in the case the vote is perfectly split 50/50 (of course, if such an option is selected, the voting dialog should alert all players that a 50/50 split will result in the entire team abandoning the duty).

It would be my hope that such a tool could be used to spark a more civil discussion to see if one side or the other is willing to compromise or face a possible full-team dismissal from the duty. Of course, for this to be effective, it would mean that a vote kick for a difference of play styles should only be justified if a such a vote happened with a clear majority and yet those players in the minority continued to act against the wishes of the team. Basically, if you initiate a vote kick for different play styles without first checking how the team as a whole feels then be prepared to face consequences. Also, to help clarify the reason for the vote kick, 'difference in play styles' would need to be an option to select as the reason for the vote kick.

[Aylis]

I get what you're saying and it is a good idea so all players get matched in parties they want. The only thing that might be kinda bad about it is waiting until after the party forms to vote and decide. It would kinda stink to wait for a que to pop only to risk an auto disband chance. I feel it would be better to be able to select the options before the que is entered. Sorta like how PF works. Select the options you want and away you go. That way you'll be most likely to meet players with similar mind sets as you right from the start.

[Lambdafish]

If you think that the kick is harassment then you can file a report around that. Your situation doesn't sound like a difference in playstyle, it sounds like outright harassment. Explain to the GM that there were no issues and nothing was discussed, and it could even be seen (stretching it a bit but entirely possible) as three other people booting you in order to prevent you from getting the loot.

[-BlueGreen-]

I get what you're saying and it is a good idea so all players get matched in parties they want. The only thing that might be kinda bad about it is waiting until after the party forms to vote and decide. It would kinda stink to wait for a que to pop only to risk an auto disband chance. I feel it would be better to be able to select the options before the que is entered. Sorta like how PF works. Select the options you want and away you go. That way you'll be most likely to meet players with similar mind sets as you right from the start.

What you're saying makes sense; however, the main challenge I can think of how do you enumerate all the possible options when queuing solo/incomplete team via the DF? Big pulls vs. Small pulls is only one example. Full clear (for mapping) vs. minimal clear could be another common example. What about for primals where different people have come up with different strategies? What if a new one is invented after the devs have set the available options?

[Aylis]

What you're saying makes sense; however, the main challenge I can think of how do you enumerate all the possible options when queuing solo/incomplete team via the DF? Big pulls vs. Small pulls is only one example. Full clear (for mapping) vs. minimal clear could be another common example. What about for primals where different people have come up with different strategies? What if a new one is invented after the devs have set the available options?

Really "slow and steady" and "fast and furious" should be the only base line choices. The rest can fall into place depending on the choice. That depends on communication with the players. Like selecting slow and steady would mean its safe to assume someone is going to want mapping or a full clear vs fast and furious where its unlikely someone is gonna want either. As for primals, communication communication communication either way. The system wouldn't need to be embellished, all it would need is baseline choices. Otherwise ques would be even worse. No system can replace just asking and talking to the players in the party.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

You are asking far too much from what is intended as a simple system. If enough people don't want to run with one particular person, forcing them through a variety of loopholes will only make for a more aggravating experience all around. Furthermore, allowing the person who is targeted for the Vote Dismissal makes no sense. Say they are with a friend and intentionally griefing. You have no recourse now to remove them, thus one of the two remaining players has to eat a 30 minute penalty.

[Azper]

I think the system is fine in its current state. Let's not needlessly complicate things because of a few hurt feelings over a supposed "unjust" dismissal.

[XiXiQ]

it makes perfect sense that whoever is the subject of the vote should be voting as well. They are part of the group just as much as the others.

[Rokke]

it makes perfect sense that whoever is the subject of the vote should be voting as well. They are part of the group just as much as the others.

Unless a person is asking to be kicked so they don't have the penalty, who on earth is going to willingly vote themselves out?

Allowing all players to vote is beyond stupid. You're essentially forcing a party to stay together.

[DeaconMoore]

It'd make more sense to divide the queue into two, one for big pulls and one for small pulls. And that just seems silly to me.

Only 2 people need to discuss big or small pulls and that's the tank and healer. If one is uncomfortable with big pulls just stick to the smaller ones. It's usually only a couple of minutes difference anyway if that.

Really though, should they just turn this into a single player game? Are people really this incapable to use the vote kick responsibly and work together to finish dungeons? Am I just super lucky and not encountering horrid abuses of vote kick all the time?