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

[AkashiXI]

They need to adjust it to be a majority of the total party number. 2 people should not decide for a group of 4 that they want to remove someone, especially not so then they can just abandon the last person without any penalty. It should be 3 yes votes and at least 5 in a party of 8.

Then it'll be easier grief, just go in with a friend and do whatever you want.

[Draxis_Fallspear]

One of the issues is that the current system encourages players, especially abusers of the feature, to stay silent. There is no way that I know of to access the party list for a duty after it has closed. On top of that, the vote kicked player doesn't know the identity of their kicker, nor the identity of the other voter. So what can happen is that someone gets kicked out without being given any chance to address whatever complaint the other people had and then can't actually do anything about it. At best, they'll simply do nothing and move on; at worst they'll report an innocent bystandard who just happened to type in "Hi!" at the beginning of the duty because that's the only person they can report.

They should implement a history of maybe the last 10 duties that a player entered and include the names and classes of the members of that party. From there, a player should be able to add people to their blacklist. IF a person has been vote kicked, they should also have an option to "claim unfair kick". SE should then gather data over a certain period and start punishing players who are found to be outliers when compared to the player base average (both initiators and whoever voted yes). This would empower the person who was kicked and more specifically target players who abuse the system, as they would most likely be outliers.

[Miste]

They should implement a history of maybe the last 10 duties that a player entered and include the names and classes of the members of that party. From there, a player should be able to add people to their blacklist.

This....already exists. At least if you are going to claim the system needs changes you should know what is already available to you before you do so.

People already have the option to claim an unfair kick also. They report it to GMs and the GMs will look into it and I am pretty sure if SE found out the kick was 100% unfair they would take action. Problem is...that is very hard to prove and if SE cannot prove guilt then they aren't going to punish people for no reason. I mean unless they want the game to die.

Also you cannot punish people who simply vote "yes" to someone elses vote kick as it is possible to click yes without meaning to. I've done it because the window has popped up in my face just as I was pressing buttons on my controller and doing things and I've done that with other menus as well. I've even accidentally withdrew DF cause it popped as I was going through menus quickly. Mouse users same problem, they might just be going to click something then the box pops up and they accidentally click yes. You advocate punishing people for mistakes?

I mean I never see it abused and I have over 7000 DF runs including a few alts and I've only been kicked one time and I admit it was completely my own fault. People getting kicked very often doesn't seem plausible unless they are doing something very very wrong or being rude. I really want to know what people are doing to get kicked so often because in my experience most people avoid kicking people especially since waiting for a new member takes awhile sometimes.

[Draxis_Fallspear]

This....already exists. At least if you are going to claim the system needs changes you should know what is already available to you before you do so.

I'm not sure why your reply is so condescending, but that wasn't necessary.

That being said, working in software dev, it's not the user's fault if your UI doesn't make it clear that options exist. If I don't know how to find it, or worse don't know it exists; that's on the devs, actually.

And if they DO have a system where they can analyze outliers and automatically issue warnings, why is it that the situation seems to have gotten worse? I don't remember seeing this many complaints before they introduced partial party queuing for duties. There are clearly players who have found loopholes in the system and are abusing them. They do not seem to be penalized since the reports of this behaviour are increasing, not decreasing.

I would actually be curious to know what the churn incidence is for someone who was needlessly kicked. I suspect that their amount of play diminishes and there's a percentage that actually does come back anyway and that less engaged players actually just quit.

[Miste]

I'm not sure why your reply is so condescending, but that wasn't necessary.

That being said, working in software dev, it's not the user's fault if your UI doesn't make it clear that options exist. If I don't know how to find it, or worse don't know it exists; that's on the devs, actually.

I wasn't being condescending I was pointing out you should research what you are talking about before you declare changes need to be made. It's just a good idea. So you don't waste your time mentioning something that already exists and if you care about the issue you will find features you want that are already there and so you can make use of said features. I mean it just helps you; that is all.

It's not on the devs. If you cared to know all the features this game offers you would read the patch notes when they update the game. They list everything they add when they add it and what it is used for.

Also if you cared to know things that the game you are playing offers you would actively look through the menus and see what is there. The feature you are looking for is in the same menu as Friendlist and Blacklist. How can they make it easier to find? It's right there in the menu with FC and Linkshell too so probably even more options you use frequently. Also when they add new menu options they highlight it with an icon to point it out to you showing you it is new. So I just don't understand how this isn't clear enough.

I mean it seems like you didn't care to look at what it was when they added it. So you missed it. That isn't the devs fault. You just didn't care to read the patch notes or look at your in-game menus. I mean if there was a feature I wished a game had I actually would go look for it first to make sure I am not missing something or forgetting what is available because you might get delightfully surprised and it has the feature already and you can smile and put it to use.

I never said they have a system for analyzing outliers. I just said the previous duty with other player's names already exists and that people have the option to send a report for a kick they think was unjustified, but in general when someone gets kicked they probably always think it is unjustified even if it might not be. I mean as the person who was kicked you almost always would be pissed off and you might not be able to reconcile that it might have been your own fault at first until some time passes and you have a clear head to realize that you maybe did do something to cause the kick to happen. Not saying that is always the case though.

[SigmaOZ]

A simple solution for this is to punish everyone in the party with the 30 minutes penalty, regardless of whom starts a vote dismiss, whom is kicked from the duty and whom remains in the duty!...

This way everyone shares the pain and that's surely to discourage abuse, the dismissed player would be the first to wait for 30 minutes for the Duty Finder to open, the remaining players would be hit with the penalty upon finishing their current duty!...

[SigmaOZ]

I'm glad we can blacklist players from other worlds now!...

If only that was enough!...

[Snow_Princess]

I do not like the vote system because people have a tendency of "deal with it" I had a tank stressing me out by not holding hate and talking too much damage and I was the one to be blamed because "only one monster" (it was 2, I even used a macro for both of them to get them off me and that was ignored for both) so I was struggling to heal myself and the tank and we had 2 wipes over the run, with me using dissipation twice.

So why are people free to play stress the healer and blame the healer for it because they can't see? maybe just make tanking easier? I don't know.

Today I had a leveling blm in vault with subpar gear (lot of NQ, and NQ gear performance is way below the displayed ilevel) the big though was having a NQ weapon. So my MP was stressed so i asked for manashift. I did not get it and they where lagging behind a bit (not connection, but not running to us, like they where doing something else while playing) So after the first boss I asked, do you know NQ weapons are very bad and that drop weapon or HQ is so much better. Said something of the likes of not caring because it was a leveling df. I said well I care because you are stressing my MP. He said something about relax more so I put up the vote to kick him because I was not going to carry someone with that kind of attitude, and it passed. I guess been too much to ask for a proper aoe rotation too like actually using thunder II and flare, but as said h acted like he was doing something else because "iot is only leveling" I shouldn't have to stress heal because someone is not caring.

[ColeSlawter]

snip

In one post you complain you are unfairly kicked for someone not playing properly, then another post you admit you kick somebody for not playing properly after you harass them for not having the gear you approve of ... sounds like SE should just give you special veto privileges ... maybe you are head of household?

Sounds to me like you attract drama and instead of always being the victim you should take a look at how you are treating other people.

If SE wants to investigate the rumored abuse of vote kick system it would be quite easy to do. Set up counters on each character, one for votes initiated and another for vote kicked. Each week/month/quarter/whatever they can check the percentage of instances run compared to votes initiated and times kicked. Determine an acceptable range for each and then take actions accordingly. They do this without telling anyone and they can collect all the data they would need.

I believe the outcome would be there is not rampant abuse, there is not even "just rare" abuse. There are most likely 100s of thousands of instances completed by the community as a hole without abuse happening. People who keep running into this constantly getting kicked are just being jerks and randoms don't like them for it.

They could increase the vote requirement from 2 to 3 in 4-man content but that usually isn't going to matter.