Booting

[asommers]

Here's what I'm planning on implementing (this can all be server-side, and can be in a content update next week):

1) If you're the host, you're always allowed to boot.
2) If you're in a game with a valid host, only the host can boot
3) If you're in a game with no host, the boot button will initiate a 10 second vote. If at least half of the number of players that are in the game also vote to boot the player, the player will be ousted.

Thoughts?

-ALS

PS. 1.7 adds an optional minimum level requirement for the dungeon, so as the host, you can specify that an AO3 game is guaranteed that only 45-50 can join.

[Lesrider]

How is 1 & 2 different than what is currently in place?

For 3, when/how would this 10 second option be initiated?

[Firepants]

I am so for this. I am guessing that everyone has to vote together in a 10 second time frame right? Meaning hmm let's boot asommers.... Ok then everyone has to boot within 10 sec of each other right?

[Lesrider]

Well right now only the host ever has a "boot" button. So this will change when the host is gone?

[asommers]

I am so for this. I am guessing that everyone has to vote together in a 10 second time frame right? Meaning hmm let's boot asommers.... Ok then everyone has to boot within 10 sec of each other right?

Yes, 10 seconds from when the first boot request was initiated.

-ALS

[DontHateAppreciate]

Yes, 10 seconds from when the first boot request was initiated.

-ALS

wait... i couldn't vote... i was lagging for more than 10 seconds :)

[Tree Dude]

How about if the host leaves the next person who joined after him/her is then host? Seems simpler than a vote. I have played a few games with voting systems for booting players and I find most of the time people just don't vote and the player stays. Then people just start dropping.

[Lesrider]

I agree, perhaps the hosting privileges could be passed on instead? My concern with needing several people to boot, is that it distracts more people than is necessary. Unless there are other concerns you have with this? Like could it cause some other type of unfairness?

[Kujen]

Love love love the minimum level option. I think I made a post in suggestions about that once.

For the boot thing, it's something that is really needed. I just hope people don't abuse it, or spam the boot request every 10 seconds.
I guess it depends...is this vote a hidden feature or is there a big pop up on the screen? Maybe just a message in the chat box?

[superglut2]

I love u devs!!!! I cant wait!!

[relayer]

I was just thinking the other day when a level 17 joined our caves game a vote to boot option would be nice!
Min level will also be very nice!

Also wish you could setup a game class template.. example..setup a game with 2 bears, 2 mages and a bird.

Sounds great!

[Kujen]

Along the lines of minimum level, I've also posted some ideas about private games. Right now friends and friends of friends can join them. How about some hosting options when setting up your private game, like "password required", "friends", "extended network of friends". Because often you get people joining when you don't want them to, and they don't even have to know the password.

[ECHUSER]

thanks for listening to us once again. i would prefer designating 1 person w the responsibility of booting after the host leaves b/c i dont think the entire team should be distracted from the game.

[CowboyJim]

Definitely a step in the right direction and is better than what we have now.....could you get it added today? j/k
Would have loved to have had this option last night......this, together with minimum level settings will help a lot. BTW 1.7 being sent to Apple anytime soon?

[MoarPewPew]

Here's what I'm planning on implementing (this can all be server-side, and can be in a content update next week):

1) If you're the host, you're always allowed to boot.
2) If you're in a game with a valid host, only the host can boot
3) If you're in a game with no host, the boot button will initiate a 10 second vote. If at least half of the number of players that are in the game also vote to boot the player, the player will be ousted.

Thoughts?

-ALS

PS. 1.7 adds an optional minimum level requirement for the dungeon, so as the host, you can specify that an AO3 game is guaranteed that only 45-50 can join.

Finallly!!!!! Thank you asommers!!! My idea is similar to #3

http://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?11045-Group-Boot-Vote

[Axavier]

Sounds great to me!!

[[Lt] Shiny]

Yes! Love how the Devs listen to the communities ideas and put it together in the game. Way to go! This will make the games more fair when people don't want to leave... We make 'em. XD

[Kalielle]

This sounds like a great idea! In addition, I had the same thought as Les - it would be great if host privileges could be passed on. Right now there's a lot of pressure on the host to stay through the end of all the cave levels so that the group is not left without a responsible host. This would solve that, and it makes sense that the current host should be able to choose his successor. It would also allow the host to switch alts without worries, so long as there's one other trusted person in his group.

One issue right now is that if the host leaves in a game or has to switch alts, the person who happens to click next is made host for the next game. I was in a group last night and we fought our way through several of the caves, at which point someone had to leave and we had a fifth random join mid-game. Meanwhile the host had to switch alts because we were lacking a mage. Then at the end of the game it so happened that the random we didn't know clicked next first and was host for the new game. Luckily he was cool, but he could have booted us all and invited his own friends even though we were the ones who had cleared VL and fought through the first few levels. The ability to pass on host power would prevent situations like this. A voting system helps only for the level where the host left, not for the next level that's created with a new host.

[MAGICAL POCKET LEGEND]

BOOOT FIGHT yay

[CanonicalKoi]

That would be outstanding. I hate booting and only use it as a last resort, but for abusive people and obvious XP leeches it would be nice to have.

[Lesrider]

Kalielle, those are exactly my thoughts -- I just didn't type it all out ;)

I think those of us who have really come to value a good group of friends to play with, are the most concerned about these issues. I barely play any pugs anymore because I like knowing I can trust my team not to backstab me. The more precautions set in place to prevent people from screwing others over, the better.


This sounds like a great idea! In addition, I had the same thought as Les - it would be great if host privileges could be passed on. Right now there's a lot of pressure on the host to stay through the end of all the cave levels so that the group is not left without a responsible host. This would solve that, and it makes sense that the current host should be able to choose his successor. It would also allow the host to switch alts without worries, so long as there's one other trusted person in his group.

One issue right now is that if the host leaves in a game or has to switch alts, the person who happens to click next is made host for the next game. I was in a group last night and we fought our way through several of the caves, at which point someone had to leave and we had a fifth random join mid-game. Meanwhile the host had to switch alts because we were lacking a mage. Then at the end of the game it so happened that the random we didn't know clicked next first and was host for the new game. Luckily he was cool, but he could have booted us all and invited his own friends even though we were the ones who had cleared VL and fought through the first few levels. The ability to pass on host power would prevent situations like this. A voting system helps only for the level where the host left, not for the next level that's created with a new host.

[sharken]

When the host leaves, let the new host be the player who has been in the group longest.

That seems the most fair solution.

[Riccits]

in caves that happen to me...
i joined a existend party, cleared map to next level, and after a while i saw that i could boot ppl...? how happened?
could it be so: hoster leaved, i was the fist one who pressed "go to next map" and i got hoster of game..?

[Ursanblessing]

so voting, with max 5 users in game. Vote about 1 user. Friends vs no-friend will be a 2 on 2 vote? :)

[Elyseon]

Good idea, often host leaves for a while and cant come back because party full, or a low lvl joins and you cant get rid of them

[Echelong]

about time this was implemented... Thanks a lot...

[FluffNStuff]

3) If you're in a game with no host, the boot button will initiate a 10 second vote. If at least half of the number of players that are in the game also vote to boot the player, the player will be ousted.

Thoughts?

-ALS

PS. 1.7 adds an optional minimum level requirement for the dungeon, so as the host, you can specify that an AO3 game is guaranteed that only 45-50 can join.

Couple things, one, I don't like three AT ALL, but if you are going to implement this, I am asking for a couple 'protections'.
1) Boot privilege is NOT implemented in public maps (any map that did not start with a host in the first place).
2) You can NOT vote to boot someone that joined a map BEFORE you.
3) A player can NOT be booted from the game after they have been there a minimum (say, 5 minutes) time period.

As for the specify the level for a game, I REALLY like that idea as long as the ~lowest~ minimum is the minimum for the area. Games locked to level 50's only in the swamps is just a bad idea.

[Arterra]

this is the end for leechers

[romgar1]

Fluffnstuff has a good point. Say you and a friend join an open map and 3 new people join and decide to boot you out. On the other hand, we can just host a game and invite people. I am all for more hosting options as mentions in a previous post on this thread. Devs again you have won me over by actually listening to us and talking to us even in game. Special thanks to asommers, cinco, justg, and cassric for the personal touch you all give this game.

[Otukura]

this is the end for leechers

Not when the host is the friend of them... was playing in AO2, not AEO ;), but there was a lvl 11 and lvl 13.... didn't want to leave because we were doing so well.. amazingly... just 3 people.

[Snakespeare]

Min level FTW!!! thanks, devs.

I know all that other fancy stuff like a drop-down for Character Wanted (select one of 9 possible), and another for Type of Game (farming, grinding, clearing) probably would never fit into the window for a phone, and is probably not really necessary.

[Barbamitsos]

here's what i'm planning on implementing (this can all be server-side, and can be in a content update next week):

1) if you're the host, you're always allowed to boot.
2) if you're in a game with a valid host, only the host can boot
3) if you're in a game with no host, the boot button will initiate a 10 second vote. If at least half of the number of players that are in the game also vote to boot the player, the player will be ousted.

Thoughts?

-als

ps. 1.7 adds an optional minimum level requirement for the dungeon, so as the host, you can specify that an ao3 game is guaranteed that only 45-50 can join.

chop chog huray to the awsome assomer

[Dizzy]

Along the lines of minimum level, I've also posted some ideas about private games. Right now friends and friends of friends can join them. How about some hosting options when setting up your private game, like "password required", "friends", "extended network of friends". Because often you get people joining when you don't want them to, and they don't even have to know the password.

+1

I love soloing. The folks on my friends list are awesome, but sometimes I just want the map to myself, just to hit one boss and exit, or practice skills and combos, or figure out damage with a new weapon. Locked games should be invite-only.

[Gaabob]

chop chog huray to the awsome assomer

Asommer* >_<

[Arterra]

chop chog huray to the awsome assomer

caught. at least i catch it and edit it when i write that... which is always...

[last350]

Dizzy, i CANT agree with you more. i've actually had to remove people from my friends list simply because they kept jumping into my soloing games, passworded or not. I would love the lockout to be implemented in full, friend or not, if it's passworded, you should need the password to join.

one guy in particular wouldn't stop hounding me, i'd get messages like "WELL...?" when i didn't open a new dungeon because he wanted to just ride along behind me, collecting the cash, potions, and drops and to make matters worse, his friends would get invited by him or join the dungeon with him because he was there.

asommers, as for the idea about the 10 second vote. it's a great idea, but it'll take up some space on the phone and would have to be placed strategically and succinctly like

BOOT at the bottom with a small yes / no box but no more text that that because if you're engaged in battle with a pile of mobs, you dont want your healer stuck reading lines of text and trying to hit a button when they should be focussed on keeping everyone alive.

also, i agree with a comment mentioned before, if someone's lagging they might only catch the last 2 or 3 seconds of the text.

here's my opinion on it.

-allow a boot vote, keep it simple
-10 seconds might be good for some but bad for others
-the groups are small but 3 votes to knock them out should win it
-if the person was invited by the leader, that should override a boot vote always. last thing i want is to invite a newbie friend to help them and have some schmo vote them out eventhough i'm the leader


and the minimum level requirements is a GREAT idea.

thanks for asking for our feedback, that's what makes this game so much fun, you guys as devs are hands on with the community.


reinstitute the droid! lol j/k but i do want black antennae and it stinks that i can't find them for sale because they're no-trade items. but that's also
what adds the fun to it. if you want it you have to earn it, just is kinda bleh because i didn't learn about it until a few days ago

[bladesword]

Last350, if your a ao3 gen(?) we see you farmed and leeched on lv50s when you were low lv..

[BURGUERANCH]

regarding the topic, i agree. sometimes it sucks when host leaves and no one has any control.

another thing u might add regarding hosting games, is how a passworded game is available to friends or not, cause when i create a passworded game sometimes i really want to solo and friends can still join without password!

[recklessfa]

Requirements are a great addition. Thx.
I never boot since asking, although longer, always does the job. Who wants to play with ppl who tell you you are not wanted.
I was about to ask for another requirement ( reason have to be at least five char. "sorry" being the default ) but since the vote will be clear enough a message that at least someone wants you out, I guess most will leave before the 10 seconds) so thats great.
Thank you again devs for this great game.

[Zerious]

I can see the Boot button being used as a fight staller. Someone's losing, lets distract everyone and stall the game by requesting a boot. Just saying....

[mycroftxxx]

On the “half,” are you rounding up or down? This makes a bit of a difference, since it includes the bootee.

Can you be more specific about the minimum level? Limiting AO3 games to 45-50 doesn't actually solve the problem for me. What annoys me most is when a game is filled with 47-49 power levelers who all leave before the boss. I feel like I just wasted my time doing the map at all. If I'm after the boss, I only want to do these runs with level 50s.

Yes, this is really annoying to lower level players trying to open maps. Sorry, but there's a social problem in this game that needs to be solved better. One way might be to introduce serious incentives to get people to finish maps. A suggestion I had a while back was to make certain things (kills? prizes?) only accrue to the players when the map is finished.

For the lower level dungeons, I would also really like a maximum level option.

[mycroftxxx]

Let me elaborate on this a bit. Take AO3.2 as an example. Broadly speaking, you have 5 goal-oriented reasons people play this map:

* they want to kill Mynas for prizes
* they want to kill the Keeper for prizes
* they need to find the cyber ghost
* they want to just kill easy stuff in hallways to level
* they want to clear the map to open AO3.3

The problem is, because players are often selfish, these things are very incompatible. Various things happen (respective to above items):

* players refuse to go into the Mynas tomb
* players leave before the Keeper
* players refuse to go into the Mynas tomb
* players kill easy stuff and leave
* all of the above

All of these things are highly frustrating as a player. Yes, I can ask people before a map starts, but then you have people who never answer, who lie, or who just leave because it's taking too long to get started.

I feel pretty strongly that the only solution for this is to make it so people actively want to clear maps.

[recklessfa]

Yes.
Wont say much since I did it a few time myself before i got bored after a few runs. Some aliens along with the mummies could solve this, as long as it is considered a problem. But Ppl will just look for another place to xp.

Changed my Mind about the booting requirement: I guess it would be nice to have a 'friendly' default reason when ppl boot others
'.' is as friendly a reason as the whole concept of booting. So a reason of at least, say, 5 characters could help, just for the sake of 'friendliness'.

If it's easy enough to implement of course.
But maybe it'll just result in '.....' reasons instead of the 'sorry', 'sry full' I'm thinking of.

[Snakespeare]

Mycroft, your points support my suggestion, that some sort of tagging system exist on games so that people know what sort of game the person who created the instance wants to play. That would eliminate 90% of the booting right there, since most of the boot-abusers are using it to create a group of players who are going for the same goal.

[mycroftxxx]

Tagging won't do it. Selfish people will just lie to get more action.

[Gamelova]

Good job devs, you are one stop close to bring me back to the world of Pocket Legends. How many more too go you ask?
Well let's just say I'll come visit when it comes to Mac. :)

[evelo2]

Ok,

First off, I do support a form of booting, but only where game prerquisites cannot solve the problem.

i.e.
If you don't want lowbies tagging along, set the min level.
If you want a game with friends, lets have a 'friends list' or 'invite' only option

You get my drift.

My issue with the game initiator being able to boot is simple, getting kicked out of a level as you approach the boss because their friend is ready now really 'annoys'

If a level is open to join ( you meet the stats ) and there is a spot free, then I feel it is
valid to allow a person to join and stay joined if they are not abusive.

This is an open MMO, the whole essence of an MMO is meeting people and playing together in a world, plans don't always work out because an unexpected person turns up etc.

If you give even the slightest hint of a feature that an idiot can abuse to annoy people, they will do so. ( I am on my 5th MMO here )

Before you flame me :
I am not saying you should not be able to create a nice custom instance, perhaps even allowing you to set class based spots.

[Kujen]

Just wondering what happened to this? Along with a lot of others, I've been joining sewers games thru the quest menu, so there's no host. I've been seeing leeches, as low as lvl 9. I typically just leave but the group vote would have come in handy.

[EpuYue]

First and foremost, I am totally for the minimum level option, and that locked games should be limited to purely invite only, no friends joining uninvited.

IMHO, I think there is really no need for a voting system as it only distracts players, and with the minimum level option, there won't be any leeches around to boot anyway. It'll mainly be used for abusive players, and whoever the host wants to boot, which he should have the right to since he hosted the game, be it for whatever reason. (Anyway, I wouldn't care to remain in a game where the leader boots people for no reason.) But I agree that hosting role be transferred automatically to the next player who was with the group longest, if the original host leaves,dc.

I agree with mycroftxxx on the part where people leave before completing the map level. It's frustrating when you're there to kill certain bosses but then finds that the group either skips them or leaves before killing them. Perhaps further rewards can be given for completing each level? For eg, doubling/tripling the gold received by each player in that level after completion? To accrue money and items after completion is not really feasible as some players leave due to dc, and it's not fair in that case for them to end up with nothing. Another solution is to have a time interval (maybe a few mins?) between hosting/joining of games to encourage people to finish the map instead of spending those mins waiting - this suggestion is only for those who leave before completion. Not sure if it's workable, and I'm sure some players will not like it.

Also, instead of tagging the game, perhaps you can allow hosts to type a short title stating their goal for the game or something. I've seen that in other games.

Just my two cents worth. :)

[superglut2]

When will voting be released?

[MoarPewPew]

Reguarding the ao3.2 post.

I agree alot of people don't finish the level. If I join a random game I ask we do bosses. You can normally tell that most people will just want exp if the instantly pot up.

Also if u want to do bosses host your own game. Lower level people want to do the entire map.

[Junside]

Okay I think we need this now. I was in Balefort Sewers with 50+ party members except one level 23 who refused to leave, and died by fire trap and laid there dead. We spent way longer fighting Bandit King and Queen without another party member to help. Wasn't even reviving on the way there, just stood back and let everyone else do all the hard work. I was the only archer in the party and I was trying to compensate by buying some elixirs, but ran out of hp pots mid-battle.

This was on a no-host game, which many people are doing. Please bring this vote booting to light. Or restrict people from entering dungeons where it is not their minimum survival level.

[Kujen]

Yeah I was fighting king and queen the other day, and there was a lvl 48, also a lvl 28 Mage. 48 I can maybe accept, but 28 I said "28 is too low". Couldn't boot them so we tried to go ahead anyway. Only the queen was left when the 28 joined. When i said they were too low, they replied "but I'm a good healer". I said "we need dps". We had two mages already, and I knew with this setup we would never do enough damage to her, without pots. So the 28, I'll give some credit for not just lying there dead..but they did die over and over and over everytime I rezzed. There was nothing they could do to contribute because they couldnt even survive. We didn't put a dent in the queens Hp bar until the 28 gave up and left, and was replaced by an appropriate lvl bear.

[Dogmao]

i have an other idea: if a new player comes in he has to wait 10 secs til he can take a pot. if he has taken it he cant be booted for 3 mins... cuz some players boot even if weaker r o pots and that cost gold and u dont get it back. the 10 freeze of the pots is for assuring u r not on pot when u r booted at the beginning

would be nice if u could take care of that

ty


Dog

[davidis57]

What they need to do is not allow players to purchase lvls until they have met the min requirement. Perhaps a message that says you are not allowed to.purchase this map until min requirement is met. That would solve many low level.problems.

[superglut2]

We need A feature that remebers to turn on minimum lvl. I hate presssing that button everytiem when i host a map

[evelo2]

Minimum level should be default.

The pot problem is a good one, it is unfair to boot people who have potted up, not sure how that can be answered : devs?

Also, could we have a 'description' So when we create a map, we can put a description, like 'Farming mobs'. 'Boss run'
Could we also have a clear indicator of how much of the map is cleared. To stop the constant drop-ins

Whilst I can see how cool it would be to penalise people for abandoning maps, I have conversely been stuck with people who don't play a team game, and it ends in a shambles.
Is it right to punish for somebody bailing then?

[Ayrilana]

i have an other idea: if a new player comes in he has to wait 10 secs til he can take a pot. if he has taken it he cant be booted for 3 mins... cuz some players boot even if weaker r o pots and that cost gold and u dont get it back. the 10 freeze of the pots is for assuring u r not on pot when u r booted at the beginning

would be nice if u could take care of that

ty


Dog

No. Sometimes you're in the middle of something and can't go and boot someone right away. This will just open up the possibility for low levels to stay in the game and leech.

Getting booted while having a pot happens less often than you think. If you don't want to get booted, create your own game. People who host games have the right to boot whomever they wish because it is their game. Maybe they're holding the spot for a friend or want a particular class to fill the spot.

[KaotiicxDream]

I leave a lot before bosses due to noobs who just want fast xp.. so tired of it

[sharken]

IMO the first two proposals are fine but this one is the one causing problems :


3) If you're in a game with no host, the boot button will initiate a 10 second vote. If at least half of the number of players that are in the game also vote to boot the player, the player will be ousted.

Instead pass on the Host-role to the player who has been in the game the longest. Also put some kind of marker next to the host, so if a low-level is the host on a high-level map, high-levels have the option of quitting the map.

[azulflame]

sorry about the no screenshots, but I am on galaxy S.

a level 5 joins our balefort castle/fathom crypts (i forgot which) game, and just leeches. I ask who the host is\was, and he had left after xaxis died. then a level 5 main joins the party, and we are unable to boot him. extremely annoying, and don't want to restart the level. kindly ask him to leave, wanted to invite an archer in. (3 mages, 1 bear, and the leaching bear) He claims that he wants xp, and has about 10k. I ask him to buy a waters of wisdom (3x exp), and he refuses. hten he starts to use some language that is a little more colerful than what I am used to hearing, and asks me to be booted. he is lucky that the host left too, or he would have been booted. (the host was a friend of mine, goes to my school). I wish that I could have booted him myself, or at least cast a boot vote.

[LADYHADASSA]

I love the minimum lvl requirment aspect, however allowing for a vote will be very frusturating, many players are afraid to boot due to flack from other players. An example: a booted player can add your name to their requests and then message a player before their request is accepted leading to being cussed at on a regular basis.

In many cases people farm leave a boss and the remaining person invites others for a boss kill here is where problems begin, a level 7-43 enters the map... The boot feature is not avaiable to the higher level... The 4 very low levels are not going to vote one another out... So the lvl 50-56 who used pots, elixers etc is out a chance to get a boss drop.

i would opt to vote for admin rights to be passed to the 1st, 2nd,3rd and so on joiner of a game.

Just an opinion :)

[shanmarie33]

Great idea for public games. What about a hosted game in which the host leaves? Would that game default to a public game, remain in control of the absent host, or default to a different player?

[LADYHADASSA]

Sounds good with the already in place announcment of why a person is being booted to the team is a great addition. I believe with the new inability to join a game unless you are within two lvls will decrease booting and exp high jackers :)

[Colborne]

Will it give a timer or a message that tells u that they are being booted? And also if the host of the game is say my bear can I still hold host position if switche to other character such as bird? Just wondering that's all. If this isn't the case is there a way to make that happen?

[Apostar]

I love this idea alot and would love to have it implemented. I also like that you asked us first before implementing this change. I think a beta-test group on some of changes needs to be looked into. This gives us the players a chance to test these changes out first and give the developers some much needed feedback before implementing changes that cause such global dissension; no pun intended :)

[Colborne]

What if a person hosts a game and invites a friend and the remaining spaces are taken up randomly and all of a sudden the host has bad connection and disconnects. The remaining spot if filled by someone else and not everybody may want to boot that person. So foodfor thought.... But maybe u could pass booting over to hosts friend and that way the host after establishing connection can rejoin his hosted game. An if no friends are present to then continue onto the ten second voting. It's just an idea but from exp I've had to leave games cause friend who hosted couldn't come back:(

[itzyou]

boot vote needs to happen from the leechers in bs and ussually people make games based on the 'go to' quests:/ at least make 1/2 the party vote


P.S. i know how to count but assuming the leecher will not vote for himselft it will be 4 players:)

[Colborne]

Food for thought.... What about adding a reserve button so that when ur changing to alt u or friends can reserve spot:)

[Swimmingstar]

I believe that u shouldn't be able to boot yourself from the game

[Kalielle]

I believe that u shouldn't be able to boot yourself from the game

Why, do you often do that by accident? :confused:

I know my finger just slips all the time and I suddenly find myself typing "/boot Kalielle Noob" for no reason. :rolleyes:

[Swimmingstar]

Why, do you often do that by accident? :confused:

I know my finger just slips all the time and I suddenly find myself typing "/boot Kalielle Noob" for no reason. :rolleyes:

LOL HAHAHAHAHA no I tried it once as a test /boot swimmingstar testing to see if u can boot yourself or noob and I was booted I kicked myself out HAHAHA

[Colborne]

I believe that u shouldn't be able to boot yourself from the game

I don't know. That Colborne guy can be mean. Let's boot him!!!!!!! Oh wait!!!!!!

[Kalielle]

LOL HAHAHAHAHA no I tried it once as a test /boot swimmingstar testing to see if u can boot yourself or noob and I was booted I kicked myself out HAHAHA

Yeah there's never any space in my games for me, and since I won't leave willingly, I have to resort to typing "/boot Kalielle full". I keep begging myself to make room for me but there are just never any spots left. I think my farming teams are just too hardcore for me.

[Swimmingstar]

I don't know. That Colborne guy can be mean. Let's boot him!!!!!!! Oh wait!!!!!!
LOL!!! I'm sigging this...

[Swimmingstar]

Yeah there's never any space in my games for me, and since I won't leave willingly, I have to resort to typing "/boot Kalielle full". I keep begging myself to make room for me but there are just never any spots left. I think my farming teams are just too hardcore for me.
lol funniest thing ever

[Dyclonious]

I think its a good idea. Could you implement this as well?

- Boots can be done to any player regardless of team

Right now if a host wants to boot a player on the opposite team, they must leave/rejoin said team to accomplish this. Tedious.

[tonygmoney]

i think it should just be the handed down to the next person cause it will take forever to vote specially if theres lag..

[jaminn]

Personally ithink it should be majority...what if there is only two players who aren't hosting and one decides to group boot...then only one...(the booter) would have to vote no...if he didn't start the game then I just think it is unfair that he basically has boot rights

[Colborne]

I said it before. I'll say it again. If the host leaves. Booting goesto his friend or the person who joined after host. And also there should be a reserve button that allows you to reserve a spot for a friend so that you don't have to boot some nice person who is just trying to help:) my two cents

[superglut2]

what ever happend to votebsn i was lookimg forward to it

[ChrisFI]

No number 3 personally i dont agree with. The boot system is just fine. Adding a boot to "open" dungeon games wouldnt go so well. Players who want to battle with others will get less of a chance because those other players might vote him or her out maybe bacuase "they are not good enough".

It really wouldnt bring anything better if anything it would make things only worst.

[bronislav84]

There should be absolutely nooooooo booting in public games! That's the entire point of public versus hosted. Also 10 seconds is not enough time to vote (in hosted games where host left) to account for lag. Make it 30 seconds please. Also I don't see how 1 and 2 are different from now, either.

[Kalielle]

These proposals are all from back when the Shadow Caves were first introduced. Back then you couldn't host those maps and the only way to get to them was through a portal that was a rare spawn, and then you had to clear them in order. So you'd sometimes have issues with someone leaving and some level 18 taking his spot in map 5, and no one could do anything about it after having spent an hour clearing their way to get there.

That's what prompted the idea to add a vote boot to public dungeons. Now of course it's not really a concern anymore, unless they come up again with some dungeons that take an hour to clear.

[csb]

There should be absolutely nooooooo booting in public games! That's the entire point of public versus hosted. Also 10 seconds is not enough time to vote (in hosted games where host left) to account for lag. Make it 30 seconds please. Also I don't see how 1 and 2 are different from now, either.

I was in a public group, and one of the members was using foul language. I guess he figured out which words were not getting filtered and decided to use them freely. He got booted, which is what should happen.

[RioMage]

I have a complaint about the booting reasons because people just use stupid reasons a lot which bleep people off and cause pm wars between each other. I think you should add a list of reasons or you can monitor them because this is making me and im positive its enraging other innocent players. For example:

In pvp I am playing, wooping some butt when all of a sudden my game freezes for a second and then I end up in balefort with big yellow words on my screen saying gf ( good fight) or cya noob for no particular reason.

[OrFeAsGr]

I have a complaint about the booting reasons because people just use stupid reasons a lot which bleep people off and cause pm wars between each other. I think you should add a list of reasons or you can monitor them because this is making me and im positive its enraging other innocent players. For example:

In pvp I am playing, wooping some butt when all of a sudden my game freezes for a second and then I end up in balefort with big yellow words on my screen saying gf ( good fight) or cya noob for no particular reason.
yea youre right and when pm wars happens the next time you join the game of the guy that booted you once he boots again and again!!!this sould be corrected someway for sure

[brian_spence_ni]

I think it'd be great if there were an automatic list of selectable reasons for booting. There are valid reasons for booting, and I think the minimum is that the host can boot. When remaking, players can choose to join the remake or not join and are essentially endorsing or disagreeing with issues such as how hosts manage groups.

[Gladeye]

I hate booting! Other mmorpgs work just fine without that feature. Booting only creates bad feelings. I'm never rude to anyone I play with, but I've been booted for superficial reasons or the usual explanation of "sry". If I player is out of line, there should be an easier way to report them than emailing. How about a report button that includes a record of the party's conversation so the function can't be abused?

[Matutd]

When I'm lvl 21 farming I need to boot, if somebody joins who is higher than lvl 21 then I have to boot them

[RioMage]

When I'm lvl 21 farming I need to boot, if somebody joins who is higher than lvl 21 then I have to boot them Its called recruiting teams and then making private games bro. Making public games is for the "public". Private is for selective people.

[Hawkthewicked]

When I'm lvl 21 farming I need to boot, if somebody joins who is higher than lvl 21 then I have to boot themThese are the ones that make me lol. If you want a lvl 21 or lvl 52 farming team, then create a password protected game!! It doesn't change the drop rates if you have a higher level character in there anyway! If anything it helps because the level is cleared faster!

[csb]

These are the ones that make me lol. If you want a lvl 21 or lvl 52 farming team, then create a password protected game!! It doesn't change the drop rates if you have a higher level character in there anyway! If anything it helps because the level is cleared faster!

Sure, it doesn't change the drop rate, but it changes the item level. A level 51 item may be worth 50K gold, and the same level 55 item may only be worth 200 gold. If the game host lets a 55 join, he ruins everyones chance to get valuable drops. It is the hosts responsibility to protect the other players by booting the 55.

When I used to farm 51 drops, i saved a message that said "sorry, this is a 51 farm group", which gave people the chance to leave instead of getting booted. I have had people say something like, "you didn't lock it, so i'm staying". So, you guess what happens next.

Oh, and the reason it's not password protected... sometimes late at night, there just aren't enough friends online.

[Elyseon]

well said!!
I have a farmer for both areas low scaled items and booting is necesary sometimes. Whats dumb is when u get booted because u killed another guy in pvp too much, or even worse something like 's' or 'q' or '.', but even then, they are the host and have the right to boot. If u want to not get booted or be in charge, host your own game. Then u wont be complaining about getting booted.

[RioMage]

Sure, it doesn't change the drop rate, but it changes the item level. A level 51 item may be worth 50K gold, and the same level 55 item may only be worth 200 gold. If the game host lets a 55 join, he ruins everyones chance to get valuable drops. It is the hosts responsibility to protect the other players by booting the 55.

When I used to farm 51 drops, i saved a message that said "sorry, this is a 51 farm group", which gave people the chance to leave instead of getting booted. I have had people say something like, "you didn't lock it, so i'm staying". So, you guess what happens next.

Oh, and the reason it's not password protected... sometimes late at night, there just aren't enough friends online. This isnt just late at night..lol. Its mostly in the day.

[thefirehawk]

I have a complaint about the booting reasons because people just use stupid reasons a lot which bleep people off and cause pm wars between each other. I think you should add a list of reasons or you can monitor them because this is making me and im positive its enraging other innocent players. For example:

In pvp I am playing, wooping some butt when all of a sudden my game freezes for a second and then I end up in balefort with big yellow words on my screen saying gf ( good fight) or cya noob for no particular reason.

riomage why are you saying this you have booted me and my friends for no reasoneven if the is a selective game just type sellected game instead of nothing im just trying to understand your logic

[RioMage]

riomage why are you saying this you have booted me and my friends for no reasoneven if the is a selective game just type sellected game instead of nothing im just trying to understand your logic

I only boot when you are being a nuisance or if you are constantly interfering with others battles. If your in ctf and you are spawn killing (which exactly happened to me yesterday by three people for about 10mins straight), you will be booted from my game. If I continue to see patterns of any of this, you will get banned from my games.

Im pretty sure you fall under one of these categories. Have a nice day

[thefirehawk]

I only boot when you are being a nuisance or if you are constantly interfering with others battles. If your in ctf and you are spawn killing (which exactly happened to me yesterday by three people for about 10mins straight), you will be booted from my game. If I continue to see patterns of any of this, you will get banned from my games.

Im pretty sure you fall under one of these categories. Have a nice day

how would i fall under these catigories i never die in sand caves and when i did it was when i was low level no im level 52 which means you hold a gruagde a long time

[LelouchX]

I think that option 3 is good in theory but i agree with chrisFI that open games should be just that, open. If I am in an open PUG and i don't like someone for whatever reason I leave. I think that when hosting a game you should be able to set boot options, such as host boot only, or host can boot or others can initiate a vote. I think the more options the better, but one should be able to set the rules when hosting.

[Pakax]

maybe pass on the boot option to the most exp person in the game. that'd be easy and solve most probe

[Zeolanctus]

I don't agree with number 3. If there was 1 player who wanted to get rid of someone, the player could pm and tell the other players to boot person X for some gold.

[Pakax]

Perfect

[ooommmggg]

good idea

[Phoenixking]

This is so old and i swear that when no host cause he left and someone joins the next map first becomes host cause that has happened to me...mostly in pvp amd bs games