Japanese to English translation - Discussion Thread

[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.