Would it be feasible to add a Pause Queue feature?

[JWag12787]

I believe this was suggested before, and it comes down to, how do they fairly replace you in the queue? How do they justify someone being #1 being bumped back to #2 when you return?

[Rongway]

I believe this was suggested before, and it comes down to, how do they fairly replace you in the queue? How do they justify someone being #1 being bumped back to #2 when you return?

By not even trying. See my example immediately before your post.

That's not something that should ever happen.

Pausing and unpausing queue should never change the numbers. The only two things that should change your position in queue are

A) The #1 person is served, and everyone advances.
B) Someone in the middle of the queue leaves, and everyone after them advances.

Paused people should advance with everyone else as normal, with the restriction that the paused people start piling up beginning at position #2. That is, nobody who is paused can advance to position #1. This also has the effect that if people ##2,3,4 are paused,
1) A paused #2 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused
2) A paused #3 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused, but also cannot advance to #2 because #2 is #2
3) A paused #4 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused, but also cannot advance to #2 or #3 because #2 and #3.

[JWag12787]

By not even trying. See my example immediately before your post.

That's not something that should ever happen.

Pausing and unpausing queue should never change the numbers. The only two things that should change your position in queue are

A) The #1 person is served, and everyone advances.
B) Someone in the middle of the queue leaves, and everyone after them advances.

Paused people should advance with everyone else as normal, with the restriction that the paused people start piling up beginning at position #2. That is, nobody who is paused can advance to position #1. This also has the effect that if people ##2,3,4 are paused,
1) A paused #2 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused
2) A paused #3 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused, but also cannot advance to #2 because #2 is #2
3) A paused #4 cannot advance to #1 when #1 is served because paused, but also cannot advance to #2 or #3 because #2 and #3.

So basically if I pause in #10, I pause in #10, and everyone advances around me?
Person in #11 jumps to #9 while #10 is paused?

[Rongway]

So basically if I pause in #10, I pause in #10, and everyone advances around me?
Person in #11 jumps to #9 while #10 is paused?

No.

Did you even look at the timeline diagram? Nobody starts skipping around you except to become #1 while you're paused. Everyone advances normally, including the paused people, except that paused people cannot advance to #1.

1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12
I    C    J    K    L    M    N    O    P    Q    R    S
    !!                            !!
    
[I is served.  C is paused, so holds at 2.  J skips ahead.
 O is paused but not on deck, so P does not skip them]
 
1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12
J    C    K    L    M    N    O    P    Q    R    S    T
    !!                       !!
    
[C unpauses queue]

1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12
J    C    K    L    M    N    O    P    Q    R    S    T
                             !!

[J is served]

1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9   10   11   12
C    K    L    M    N    O    P    Q    R    S    T    U
                        !!

From a programming standpoint, it would have to be something like:

2- You are automatically shuffled back in the queue whenever someone with your role is "behind you"

What? Why would you think that is necessary?

The coding concept is simple.

Pseudocode:

q.pop
i = 0
while q[i].ispaused
    ++i
remove q[i] and re-insert them at front of queue

Whenever the first person in the queue is served, skip anyone at the front of the queue who is paused. The first unpaused person becomes the front of the queue.

[Tohe-Spidhire]

What? Why would you think that is necessary?

<snip>

Whenever the first person in the queue is served, skip anyone at the front of the queue who is paused. The first unpaused person becomes the front of the queue.

No, it isn't. Queue position refers to the party that you are in, not individual player.

So if you're DPS with a party in queue position 1, but go afk, that means you get shuffled to other parties further back in the queue because you're giving up your spot to newly arrived DPS.

Did you think you were going to hold back an entire party of players due to your being afk? Nope, you're ejected from the party when someone better comes along, and in short order you are in the furthest-back party, making it equivalent to having dropped from the queue. Therefore, not worth coding.

[Rongway]

No, it isn't. Queue position refers to the party that you are in, not individual player.

This is not a relevant point to the mechanics I've described. #2 player in queue v player in #2 party makes no difference; just don't let anyone who is paused advance to #1.

[Tohe-Spidhire]

This is not a relevant point to the mechanics I've described. #2 player in queue v player in #2 party makes no difference; just don't let anyone who is paused advance to #1.

Long story short, you've oversimplified the party matching that takes place.

If queue-party#1 has everyone except a healer, and queue-party#2 has everyone except a tank, and then a tank shows up, which party do you suppose is going to start *immediately* ?

Regardless, an afk-dps on either of those teams gets shunted onto queue-party#3, which is shorthand for "end of the line." No point having fancy coding when the person should have dropped from the queue.