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

[Zojha]

Since logically the accuser/initiator will always be a 'yes' (since why else would you start it?), and the accused is assumed to be against it, then neither should be counted. This way it requires a majority rather than half.

That still doesn't work, because of the two votes left, if one votes for and the other against, it's still essentially a 2:2 tie (broken down to a 1:1 tie).

In any even numbered group, there can be ties that can not be fairly resolved because there is an equal number of people on both sides. The only way to break that tie in a fair way is to get yourself an additional, independent vote to tip the scales in either direction or convince someone to switch sides.

It's just what it is.

[Risvertasashi]

I'm pretty critical of the system but it's been this way for years now, and the only new GM commentary is weird edge cases.

But the long story short, you can kick for nearly any reason that isn't specifically a "grief tactic" or harassment (not even limited to "differing playstyles"). And it's really difficult to prove a violation of the latter as they have to pretty much self incriminate.

But, yes. If you're worried someone else might initiate a kick, you're encouraged to initiate first. As removing someone's voting ability guarantees you success if you have a friend with you, but the same applies to them if they start the vote first.

(In general, voting right before last boss is pretty scummy/griefy, but so it goes).

[SigmaOZ]

The current "Vote" system is flawed and is far from being fair!...

Do you know what happens when two members of the same FC or two friends of a same world join a light party together!?... They immediately have the voting majority and become a real threat to the remaining party members if they decide to take the course of the duty in a given way!...

For instance, I was kicked from a duty some nights ago because tank and healer were playing together and I dared to tell them they were doing a poor job after several wipes throughout the dungeon and many more in front of the final boss, the healer even excused himself by saying all of his gear was broken, I initiated a vote dismiss against the tank but it was rejected and then I was dismissed in revenge and all because they had the voting majority, that proves a single character is defenseless when two or three scheme jointly!...

My solution to prevent abusing of the vote system is to force players to write a short report explaining the reasons on which they decide to dismiss someone, said report should then be seen by all party members, including the one to be dismissed, after that the voting would take place and if the majority agrees one player should be dismissed!...

Another way would be to have the ability to invoke a GM inside the duty before the voting could take place so the authorities would decide what is fair and whom should be dismissed!...

I would seriously doubt of anyone opposing to such measures in order to prevent abuses, for obvious reasons!...

[Rokke]

My solution to prevent abusing of the vote system is to force players to write a short report explaining the reasons on which they decide to dismiss someone, said report should then be seen by all party members, including the one to be dismissed, after that the voting would take place and if the majority agrees one player should be dismissed!...

You know people are still going to click yes/no to get the chat window out of the way, right? The same way people click yes in a ready check even when they're not ready.

In addition, unless they give the auto-translate tool a major overhaul, certain data centers are going to have even more cases of not being able to read other language's complaints. If I'm on my EU alt and a pop up in french happens, both me and the person getting voted on are SOL lol

[Bourne_Endeavor]

My solution to prevent abusing of the vote system is to force players to write a short report explaining the reasons on which they decide to dismiss someone, said report should then be seen by all party members, including the one to be dismissed, after that the voting would take place and if the majority agrees one player should be dismissed!...

Another way would be to have the ability to invoke a GM inside the duty before the voting could take place so the authorities would decide what is fair and whom should be dismissed!...

What would a short message change? They still have the vote majority, thus you'll still be kicked. Allowing the person targeted by the dismissal to vote accomplishes nothing. You couldn't kick the tank since he won't vote against himself nor will the healer since they're friends. It's simply a reverse of the same problem you're complaining about. As for GM intervention. That requires having GMs constantly available on the off chance abuse happens. It's essentially paying someone to do very little most of the time since these types of incidents aren't common. Forcing people to play together when there is a clear disagreement just doesn't work. Even in the event a GM refused to allow them kicking you. Okay, great. Do you think the tank and healer are going to accommodate you? Now they're pissed and may intentionally perform even worse out of spite. And you can't claim abuse since GMs aren't able to moderate play style.

It sucks, however the best recourse to being kicked is simply shrugging it off.

[SigmaOZ]

You know there's a language setting that prevents that from happening entirely!...

If set to a single language under Duty Finder, you shouldn't get a player from other region and such barriers could no longer be an excuse!...

I know there are brain dead players in Eorzea whom just click whatever and don't care at all about what they do but I'm sure they would wonder why they found themselves in the prison in Limsa Lominsa all of a sudden, which should be the punishment for those vote kicking unfairly, so the GMs can explain to them why they are being banned from the game temporarily or permanently!...

[Miste]

If set to a single language under Duty Finder, you shouldn't get a player from other region and such barriers could no longer be an excuse!...

Um...no that actually won't work. That isn't how the DF language system works.

Yes, when you queue for DF you can choose a language, but even if you just choose "E" for example for English it doesn't mean you won't get matched with other languages.

Here is why:

Example, I queue for DF and only pick "E" so the game will match me with other people who pick "E".

Problem is anyone can pick "E" even if they aren't English.

So I've had it happen where I got matched with a full party of 3 other players who were French even though I only picked "E", and it is because THEY picked "E" as well. Whether they actually knew English as well I don't know, they spoke to each other in French the whole time, but being Canadian I understand them somewhat anyway, but it was just Tam Tara normal so not like it was something that needed communication usually.

But yeah basically nothing stops people from picking languages that they don't actually understand, and I understand at that point it is their own fault for doing so, but people do that all the time... pick all languages just to try to speed up queue times.

Also to note Leveling Roulette ignores language settings.

Taken from patch notes for 4.05: "To further improve matching speeds for Duty Roulette: Leveling, Duty Finder language settings will now be ignored."
source: http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...ac3297a0083b69

[Caitlinzulu]

You know there's a language setting that prevents that from happening entirely!...

If set to a single language under Duty Finder, you shouldn't get a player from other region and such barriers could no longer be an excuse!...

I know there are brain dead players in Eorzea whom just click whatever and don't care at all about what they do but I'm sure they would wonder why they found themselves in the prison in Limsa Lominsa all of a sudden, which should be the punishment for those vote kicking unfairly, so the GMs can explain to them why they are being banned from the game temporarily or permanently!...

You do know that option to set languages doesnt work. Its obvious you never played on a multilingual server, because even as a japanese player you can select the english language qeue to sign up and get matched with english player.I get regular french players in my groups although i never ever select to qeue up french language

[JunseiKei]

You know there's a language setting that prevents that from happening entirely!...

If set to a single language under Duty Finder, you shouldn't get a player from other region and such barriers could no longer be an excuse!...

You can click on this snippit to go directly to the patch notes and see for yourself.


Granted, that's still only leveling roulette, but it is still something to keep in mind.

[Niwashi]

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).

If people want to vote abandon when they're split on how to handle the run, they can do that already. A vote on something like whether you like big or small pulls should definitely NOT end with an abandon automatically, since not many people would leave just because it's big pulls when they like small ones or vice versa. There's a pretty big difference in asking how you want a run to go versus how you'd be willing to do it.

Taking your big/small pulls example again, if that vote goes 50/50 it means do medium sized pulls, picking up two or maybe three groups of mobs at a time rather than individually, but not pulling wall to wall through the whole dungeon either. Most such disagreements have a middle ground like that. There's no need for automatically eliminate the entire run just because people have different preferences. You'd never get any run done that way, as in a random group there will nearly always be different preferences about something.