Suggestion: Show a chat message for when people place/remove waymarks

[YojimboM]

I just got out of a Nidhogg normal clear on my alt with a group of mostly fresh players, and the first pull was a complete mess. No one was stacking for the stack marker. I told people to stack on the waymark for the Akh Morn, placed a waymark, and then someone removed it.

This continued for the entire pull. Every time I placed the waymark, it would be removed almost immediately. I told people to stop removing it, but it continued.

Obviously someone thought they were being cute or trolling on purpose to try to disrupt the run. I tried watching the party to see if anyone was messing up mechanics when it was being removed to figure out who it was, but so many people were already being hit by stuff at random that I couldn't tell.

Afterwards, when we killed it and I commented on it being disruptive and that I don't know who was doing it, someone said "the idiot placing it probably", trying to take a jab at me for putting a mark down.

This is harassment, to be trying to organize mechanics for new players, and then having one person griefing and intentionally disrupting it. However, there is no way to tell who was doing it to file a report on it, because there are no chat messages or indicators for it.

So, I suggest to simply add a log message indicating who is placing or removing marks, just like with the overheard markers. When someone puts a mark on you, a chat message appears saying "Person marks you Target to Attack 1", etc. A simple chat message of similar effect, "Person places/removes waymarker A" would be useful for these kinds of situations.

[Fhaerron]

With the option to auto add those people on the blacklist.

Also increase the 200 cap on the blacklist already, there's far much more trolls then 200 in this game.

Increasing the slots on the blacklist is actually a feature I would even pay freemium for, make it happen. Please look forward to it?

[Lauront]

I wish blacklisting removed some people from your screen altogether. Not practical, but eh, I can dream.

[Archchancellor]

This this a 1000 times this.

[NephthysVasudan]

It already tells you who is placing waymarks.
Removing them however...I don't see yet.

Check your event logs....for the placement side.

Rest..yes..I agree.

[Issac]

While I agree it's annoying, I wouldn't call this harassment. From the information you provide, I can only assume that no one in the party wanted a "leader" that day. Even if it was going terribly... Obnoxious? Yes, but not harassment.

[InkstainedGwyn]

Not harassment, but if it's considered okay to kick players who aren't performing up to spec, then it should be okay to kick players who are actively trying to sabotage a duty.

[kikix12]

Yes, but not harassment.

Harassment?! No (the "the idiot placing it probably" could be constituted as harassment). Disruption of gameplay?! Most certainly.

Waymarks exist for the sole purpose of giving people the option to coordinate stuff. No one is forced to follow the suggestion obviously, so if the waymarks were there but no one cared anyway there would be nothing wrong. However it seems that no one said that they do not want the waymarks. Quite the opposite. The person that removed them was SPECIFICALLY quiet when asked. Maybe if the waymark was there, the others would follow it?!

As for the case, I suggest making a report with all seven names and bringing up that offensive comment as well. The GM's should be able to check who was removing them, and if it was always one person, could take action. If it would be multiple people...well, that would mean that the party as a whole did not want them.
Though would it be considered?! Dunno.

[Fredco191]

Player Name places a “D” way-mark.
Player Name places an “A” way-mark.
Player Name places a “B” way-mark.
Whoever Thatwas removes all way-marks from the battlefield.

[Issac]

As for the case, I suggest making a report with all seven names and bringing up that offensive comment as well. The GM's should be able to check who was removing them, and if it was always one person, could take action.

I would certainly hope not... The GMs aren't our parents. When people don't get along, for whatever reason, it's not the GM's job to coddle and put people in a time-out. Even being called an "idiot" is mild at worst, and is only really an opinion from another "idiot" that no reasonable person should put any merit in. It's simply easy to forget.

Now, if more serious language were used, and it followed him out after the instance? Yes, that would be harassment. But no, nothing about this is.