Japanese to English translation - Discussion Thread

[MStowastiqVahlshdeh]

Maybe if:

1. Boss chests open automatically when the boss is defeated (because when would anyone NOT open a boss chest?)
2. People unable to start a vote kick while treasure is in the pool
3. A vote in progress is cancelled when something pops in the loot pool.

Yeah, that means the real d-bags could still kick someone when a boss is at 1%, but they won't always be successful.

What this game needs is more GMs and active GMs.

I agree @Eekiki on more GMS and
@Nukocafe I wonder bout how the devs will prevent the vote kick being abused by people who are presently grieving people that don't speedrun fast enough, are on their first run or want to watch cutscenes their first run. Perhaps the implementation of the fix for trash mobs and MVP vote system will coincide to make votekick better.

[Gilthas]

Yeah, that means the real d-bags could still kick someone when a boss is at 1%, but they won't always be successful.

Just don't allow any votekicking while a combat is in progress would fix that.

Sure, you then would have douchebags going afk during a boss battle, and to get rid of them you'd have to wipe, but its better than being able to kick someone when the boss is about to die.

[Reinheart]

Would be hard but
1) Vote kick is placed on character
2) ACTIVE GM comes and checks log quickly to investigate matter, if the GM agrees with the vote kick request the player is then kicked out of the instance.

But that isn't realistic with the amount of players that is/will be playing this game.

- If you simply add # of mob kills then that player will just kill that amount of mobs and go AFK, so it will need some kind of progress check, but that also isn't easy thing to do so I highly doubt this method.

-If you make it where you can't kick when the chest is opened, people will just kick before it's opened. Same goes for boss fights.

Vote kick is much needed feature imo but it's really hard to control how to make it not abused. I wonder what their plan is.

[Eekiki]

Sure, you then would have douchebags going afk during a boss battle, and to get rid of them you'd have to wipe, but its better than being able to kick someone when the boss is about to die.

Seems like no matter what they do, there will always be a way someone could abuse it. XD

I agree @Eekiki on more GMS and
@Nukocafe I wonder bout how the devs will prevent the vote kick being abused by people who are presently grieving people that don't speedrun fast enough, are on their first run or want to watch cutscenes their first run. Perhaps the implementation of the fix for trash mobs and MVP vote system will coincide to make votekick better.

Hm...maybe say you can't /votekick someone who is in "Viewing Cutscene" mode?

'course, then you'd have people AFK in any non-automatic cutscenes. This will be a tricky puzzle for the devs.

[Airget]

- If you simply add # of mob kills then that player will just kill that amount of mobs and go AFK, so it will need some kind of progress check, but that also isn't easy thing to do so I highly doubt this method.

-If you make it where you can't kick when the chest is opened, people will just kick before it's opened. Same goes for boss fights.

Vote kick is much needed feature imo but it's really hard to control how to make it not abused. I wonder what their plan is.

I posted this on another topic but to the same extent not amount of mobs killed but a dmg treshold, where you have to deal at least this much input in a fight but it caps based on the part you are at.

So before the first boss you could only gain 25%, midway 66% and then 90% before the boss with the last 10% gained from the final fight. If you do not reach 100% you only obtain 50% of the reward but if you gain 100% then you get all of the reward so this would stop people from leeching to an extent because if they don't give at least 50% input they get nothing, if they don't don't give 100% they only get 50% and it would be setup in a way where if a person does play throughout the whole dungeon there will be no issues with them not obtaining 100% of the reward.

[Reinheart]

I posted this on another topic but to the same extent not amount of mobs killed but a dmg treshold, where you have to deal at least this much input in a fight but it caps based on the part you are at.

So before the first boss you could only gain 25%, midway 66% and then 90% before the boss with the last 10% gained from the final fight. If you do not reach 100% you only obtain 50% of the reward but if you gain 100% then you get all of the reward so this would stop people from leeching to an extent because if they don't give at least 50% input they get nothing, if they don't don't give 100% they only get 50% and it would be setup in a way where if a person does play throughout the whole dungeon there will be no issues with them not obtaining 100% of the reward.

That could work, but what if you party up with ilvl70-90 guys vs ilvl50-55 group? I'm guessing ilvl70-90 guys will output more damage and leaving less for lesser ilvl people allowing them to kick new players no matter how hard they tried. I dunno... just throwing out ways to abuse it still lol.

EDIT: Meh now that I think of it, with gear check in place in 2.1 your method could probably work. Was thinking what if that high ilvl player joins lower level dungeon but in that case the gear stats will be lowered to match that lower tier dungeon so should work. We'll see how SE puts this one in.

[Shougun]

My biggest concern for vote kick is cutscene watchers and premade cores. Say 7 of your FC members and then 1 DF person- then the 7 members vote kick the 8th and just run along sharing all earnings between themselves. Then of course most people want to speed run certain dungeons and so someone wanting to watch the cutscenes might get booted (I don't wait for cutscene watchers because.. honestly you dont need everyone for CM- can 4 man CM lol but yeah if someone wants to watch the cutscenes then they should watch em XD). I'd hate to see a cutscene watcher get punished for doing what SE intended.

Some have suggested story mode vs speed run mode, that would cure those kind of kicks. I'm not quite satisfied with that though, as I don't see story mode being a sustainable option- at some point not enough people in the ratio of classes required will sign up and someone will sit in queue for hours. Personally and preferably I think they should maintain a condensed and concise DF options as possible. My suggestion may perhaps be forced cutscenes when new people are there, but with extra reward, after that (no new people) cutscenes can be vote skipped at the beginning of the dungeon and while it wont be considered afking to watch them it also wont be a punishment to leave those people behind.


A little bit out there and I think it would be more of a science experiment but I think you could try a tribune for an MMO. Perhaps done before, just havent heard about it. Give a GM or few head leader position and then set up a section where players can review cases and logs to decide verdicts. Reward to the players could be capped per week and in many forms say max of 100-200 philo stones a week, 100 myth, 200 MVP, resting points, ect ect- each "well decided" case rewards you with one of these (I listed out many but I didnt mean all at once, the point would be that it could be worth doing a lot but also you are not going to get way too much of one particular thing since it would cap out or cycle through). Besides social disputes you could also set up special accounts the tribune could "see through" like the live vanadiel cam, and perhaps send basic chat requests (within reason) to test for bots (catch teleporting bots, spam bots, or respond to player reports of gather/crafting bots by sending a "are you there?").

Players with poor judgement (deemed by the overseer GM and the system through comparing GM approved cases and player decisions) would be prevented from further tribune cases, also players who are related to the case couldn't partake in their own or relating cases.

Now obviously the tribune probably wouldn't keep up in realtime but the idea would be that you could then set particular reasons for vote kicking someone. So if players use "AFK" for the reason why they kicked John, even though he was just watching the cutscene at acceptable rate- then he could dispute it and whatever punishment SE decides of voting abuse would be applied. For each report there can be particular checks too like if you report someone for AFKing - it would do basic checks "did this person stand still for a long time, were they a part of combat and how well?" if it came back as no they didn't hold still and they were active in combat perhaps the report would get priority for being an abusive kicking situation, maybe the kick would be even prevented and a GM called -if- available. Of course the players may just change the reason for kicking, in this case the tribune could see the system and players logs and make an educated decision.


Anyway, its not quite real time nor as perfect as GM on the spot reviewing each case but that is impractical and probably impossible unfortunately.. lol (to have that many GMs) - I think a tribune overseen by a select number of GMs would be more practical.

System should probably be accessible through the web but "i m o" there could be a sort of immersive and interesting experience of having an actual and truly working court facility in game.

[Gilthas]

Looks like the gathering bots are using more "sophisticated" bots now to disguise themselves.

Instead of always teleporting between gathering points, they now once in a while run between them. Or at least two of the bots I came across today were doing that.

[Quesse]

Has there been an official translation of the Server Transfer post by Yoshi yet? Haven't seen it and haven't seen any unofficial translation either. Please let me know if I'm missing something.

[ArkhamNative]

Has there been an official translation of the Server Transfer post by Yoshi yet? Haven't seen it and haven't seen any unofficial translation either. Please let me know if I'm missing something.

Yes, it was posted in an existing thread by Camate (link), rather than being its own sticky like in other languages' forums.

It's just preliminary info and a few cautions. The actual instructions, rules and date announcement will come later.