(Suggestion) Add minimum ilevel for roulettes based on your level

[LeoLupinos]

If they are a minority, then there's no need for any solution at all. Since these minorities can be considered like any other level 50 player forcing the other 23 into the raids. So not really big enough to be considered a problem or have an effect on queue times. If this solution was enough to actually cause changes in queue times, then they really aren't a minority to begin with. And that's where the leaving issue becomes relevant.

Minority does not mean that they are not relevant. I don't understand your comparison, since I've explained why they are a problem.
It all only requires ONE person lowering the ilvl to for 23 players to do Lvl 50 content. How does is that not a problem?

[linay]

It all only requires ONE person lowering the ilvl to for 23 players to do Lvl 50 content. How does is that not a problem?

Yes, but outside of you being bored of the content, you'll still get an appropriate reward for completing that low level roulette. Meanwhile, I've been in too many runs in the past where, after I've queued for a long time, only for a tank to quit right at the beginning and the party not being able to do the mechanics because of it, forcing a vote to abandon or mass people leaving.

Hence, if we want to force item level restriction, which I've agreed to, there has to be something else that goes along with it, either incentives for staying or punishments for leaving, or both. The only reason why I'm not as excited for more incentives is because I think alliance roulette is already worth it regardless of which duty I get, but that's just me.

[RyuDragnier]

Yes, but outside of you being bored of the content, you'll still get an appropriate reward for completing that low level roulette. Meanwhile, I've been in too many runs in the past where, after I've queued for a long time, only for a tank to quit right at the beginning and the party not being able to do the mechanics because of it, forcing a vote to abandon or mass people leaving.

Hence, if we want to force item level restriction, which I've agreed to, there has to be something else that goes along with it, either incentives for staying or punishments for leaving, or both. The only reason why I'm not as excited for more incentives is because I think alliance roulette is already worth it regardless of which duty I get, but that's just me.

They might want to increase the penalty (only for leaving 24-mans mind you) to 1 hour then. That's 1 hour you can't do anything, and most 24-mans can be done in 45 minutes.

[linay]

They might want to increase the penalty (only for leaving 24-mans mind you) to 1 hour then. That's 1 hour you can't do anything, and most 24-mans can be done in 45 minutes.

Unfortunately, if you only penalize people for leaving, you'll get people who will act out to get kicked intentionally or fake a disconnect.

The sad truth is that people's abuse of a system will always necessitate inconveniences for legitimate use of the system.

[ForteNightshade]

Yes, but outside of you being bored of the content, you'll still get an appropriate reward for completing that low level roulette. Meanwhile, I've been in too many runs in the past where, after I've queued for a long time, only for a tank to quit right at the beginning and the party not being able to do the mechanics because of it, forcing a vote to abandon or mass people leaving.

Hence, if we want to force item level restriction, which I've agreed to, there has to be something else that goes along with it, either incentives for staying or punishments for leaving, or both. The only reason why I'm not as excited for more incentives is because I think alliance roulette is already worth it regardless of which duty I get, but that's just me.

I think both would be beneficial. Increase the rewards for the higher level duties; possibly lowering Crystal Tower to better balance things out. But also making it so the leave penalty lingers until two (maybe three) people leave per alliance. One of the biggest problems with that penalty is once a single person bails, it's free sailing for anyone else. If you're already not happy with the result. Why wouldn't you leave?

[Alucard135]

Minority does not mean that they are not relevant. I don't understand your comparison, since I've explained why they are a problem.
It all only requires ONE person lowering the ilvl to for 23 players to do Lvl 50 content. How that does not it not a problem?

It also takes one level 50-59 player to have 23 players do a level 50 content. In fact, I don't even remember one run I did without actually having players between these levels or a bonus, which in SE's mind the system is working as intended. And it actually had me lean more towards that these players are an insignificant number. If we reach a case where you are constantly getting max level players in level 50 dungeon, then we do have a problem and those cheesing the system are not a minority of players. So if they get forced into a roulettes, it only takes one to leave to have the others drop like flies because they won't get penalized.

...

Yes, that is another problem I've seen especially with Orbonne monastery. People keep spamming "vote abandon" after Cid and sometimes it passes after the first wipe. Wasting the entire time spent there for everyone.