How can Blizz address these problems? I’m not talking about the times when you’re already over the time limit on a key and everyone agrees to drop it. I’m talking about the guy who rage quits on his first death with 37 minutes left on the timer. Bam, the key you worked so hard to push to that level is ruined because of someone’s tantrum.
The other issue is disconnecting. Happens ALL the time. It’s generally out of anyone’s hands, and waiting one or two minutes for the person to reboot or come back online can make or break the key. What of offering the option to pause the timer once or twice per dungeon for say 2 minutes to allow for these things?
Imagine if there was a list – similar to your friends list – of people you’ve recently had a successful pug with. And it only populates if they’re not in a group and online. So when you’re pugging for your current key you can see that ‘good’ people are online. And you can ban people from appearing on that list if future runs are spoiled.
Disconnect pause disagree with. Having a stable connection is something you should do the best you can to get while if you can live with it. A pause for disconnects means groups abusing be fake dc or otherwise to talk about a pull before making it when not on the clock. It goes adverse to the intent or a timed environment that you need to preplan.
Also as talking leavers and pause at the same time allowing a pause to replace a leaver should also never happen or people will kick someone pre last boss to go to trade and sell the last spot for ksm or otherwise.
The issue of leavers and dcs is fixed by giving enough insentive to do the run. If there is people have a vested interest to finish and will assuming the key is timetable. If the key is not timetable well that is as much on the group esp leader as the one leaving. Make a group with similar interests as you if you want comp. I have yet to have someone leave a comp group that can finish in a reasonable time. If you make a group for a 15 and three are missing ksm expect someone to drop of can’t time as that’s not a complete group.
Offering a limited amount of pauses mitigates this. Basically, calling a time out. I realize some folks will abuse the mechanic, but just building it in as a limiting thing lets a team use the timeout for whatever they want, be it a disconnect or a mid-run strat talk.
I don’t think you should be able to replace people… but people bailing after a minor incident is a thing and it sucks. Not really sure what to do about it though. The common approaches are easily abusable by a community that has demonstrated a propensity to abuse
I’ve often said that the best mitigation for this is to give people some control over their keys. Right now losing a key is punishing because you have no idea when you’ll get it back. With the upcoming valor point system, make it so you can purchase a key for a dungeon at the highest level you’ve owned, but make the cost like 5 M+ *completed *runs worth of VP. Or something, you get the idea.
When someone bails on your run it’ll suck, but at least you have a way to offset RNG and get your key back so you can try again. You can’t do it so often that you can just spam the same key over and over, but you’re also not SOL when someone has a hissy and drops group
I think Blizzard should allow group leaders to choose the people they invite, so they don’t have to worry about anyone being in the group they didn’t put there themselves.
I also think Blizzard should allow people to choose which groups they join so they’ll never have to worry about being in a group they didn’t put themselves in.
Those two things should fix every group issue in M+.
If you have complete control over who you invite to your groups, and you have complete control over which groups you decide to join or not join, then it sounds like you’re not fixing your own issues.
I’m confused. This is the group finder for M+ today.
The problem isn’t an inability to choose people. That’s what listers do today. The problem isn’t an inability to not join a group. That’s what declining an invite or leaving before a run starts is. I really am sorry, but I have no idea what you’re talking about.
What we don’t have is complete knowledge of other players (rio helps with this a little, but meh), nor an ability to predict the future (i.e. Comcast decides to reset at random times during the workday).
Pretty sure at this point that you’re trolling my post, ok: Key holder can say don’t leave til they are blue in the face and yet pugs do whatever they want. It’s not a matter of ‘choosing people who won’t leave’. Saying someone else’s behavior is on you is complete crap, to put it nicely. I wish for a way to penalize or at the very least discourage that behavior if there is still time on the timer.
And also to deal with disconnects (completely out of anyone’s control) without losing a key.
Maybe ordering people around and demanding people conform to your expectations isn’t the way to get what you’re looking for then…
It really is. You don’t have the right to tell someone when they can leave and when they can’t. All you can do is try to select people who will do what you’re expecting.
That’s not what I’m saying at all. Your behavior is to select random strangers to fill your keys, and obviously not very carefully. Change your behavior and you’ll get different results.
And what you wish for is self centered and inappropriate.
People who disagree with you aren’t necessarily trolling. Especially when you’re 100% wrong.
Maybe you’re right, I guess wanting to time a key for more loot is self centered and inappropriate, and discouraging the person who bails on a key when more than enough time to finish is controlling. You can pass that on to Blizz and the multitude of people who enjoy m+.
No, expecting that you have the right to compel people to stay in a group they don’t want to be in anymore, or punish them for leaving, is self centered and inappropriate. Just because you are inconvenienced doesn’t mean a crime has been committed, and that’s what you’re not understanding.
It may be a jerk move, but you already have the tools to minimize those situations happening to you, but it requires more effort on your part, so you’re trying to get Blizzard to manage your social interactions for you. That’s inappropriate.
Just start suspending accounts when players miss mechanics or under perform in keys.
Doing 2k dps in a 10? 1 week suspension.
Hit by the tentacles in Plaguefall? 2 week suspension.
Kill the wrong illusion during the Guessing Game in Mists? 3 week suspension.
Pull a pack and you’re not the tank? Perma ban.
This will fix players leaving keys because no one will be making mistakes which cause the leaving.
I’m definitely getting tired of this argument. It’s a video game. We don’t possess all the freedoms here that we enjoy in real life. The game already controls and restricts our movement and our time. And it already forces you to remain in groups you don’t want to be in or suffer a penalty.
If I join a random BG, and we’re losing, because everyone on my team is an idiot, and I don’t want to waste my time on a losing endeavor, but would rather immediately go sign up for another random BG that might win, I can’t, or I get a deserter penalty. That exists because the game does not want you to immediately bail on and disadvantage your group mates simply because you’re not winning.
Meanwhile, if I join a key, and it’s not going swimmingly, I can immediately leave and immediately sign up for others in hopes that I’ll find a “winning” group. Even though this disadvantages my group.
The game you are describing, where I can carefully vet and get to know players before inviting them to my groups stopped existing when cross realm anonymity came into existence.
We are now playing with far too many random strangers on a daily basis to realistically get to know anyone that will be applying for your groups. The best you have is an IO score to go off of.
Perhaps a fair solution, since idiots that sign up for completion keys can’t read or keep their word, would be to implement some kind of check box when you make the group, like there is for voice, minimum ilvl, etc., that would indicate it’s for completion. Then, anyone leaving such a run would be on notice, and should receive a deserter debuff if they leave before that. Then, folks who want to complete keys regardless of the time spent have a way to do that, and folks who literally will only do keys for time have a clear way to avoid completion groups the same way folks who can’t talk have a clear way to avoid groups using voice.
It also exists because you were using a Blizzard system with no autonomy of who you invited to the BG. That’s why they enable a penalty. It’s the same for any other Blizzard matchmaking system and typically any other game’s match making system. M+ is different. You choose the groups and you accept the responsibility of that group.
That’s not the point. The group finder is a convenience with an inherent risk. You can either spend the time to vet players or you can form a quick group based on minimal information. One comes at a greater risk. Most people choose the quicker option. If you spend a few extra minutes, you reduce that risk. That’s not a Blizzard problem, it’s a player problem.
This exists just not widely out in the open. You can require voice, ilvl, and whatever kind of contingency you’d like to your group now. You can post that the group is for completion too. That is taking the time to vet the players and state the expectation for your groups.
Good point. I did not consider that the random bg example is indeed random matchmaking comparee to choosing your M+ group.
I still think the game is too anonymous to expect players to do any vetting beyond someone’s IO, so I feel like telling folks to vet players to determine if they’ll stay for completion is unfair. At best, they can indicate completion in the title and ask the applicants. The problem is, not everyone keeps their word. The few times I have agreed to a completion key, I have completed it, because I said I would. I have no problem penalizing folks that agree to something and then break their word.
I agree that there is a lot of anonymity and IO isn’t the indicator of if a player is going to perform well. If completing a key is truly a concern, spending a few extra minutes to reduce the risk is worth the time invested.
I prefer to just take my chances and I haven’t been let down very much. Not nearly as much as the forums talk about this “issue”. I don’t use RIO to determine someone’s value. I go off of ilvl and what classes I think would be beneficial for the group.
I agree with the sentiment. I try to keep my word as much as I can when pugging. However, I don’t think it’s fair to penalize someone just because I act in a different way. Players should be the ones to determine what is worth their time and what is not. Especially in a group that is player made. Penalties, in my opinion, aren’t an actual solution to reduce the amount of leavers either. People who want to leave will leave and forcing someone to stay in a group could lead to more negative consequences than positive ones (e.g. squatters or more toxicity in group chats). The only reason people are asking for them is for vindication on people that they have felt wronged them. It’s not a solution, but rather a consolation prize for a failed run.
The issue I’m having with your and the warlock’s position is that I feel like you’re both suggesting that the group leaders here are to blame for not taking the time to properly vet applicants, as if there’s anything more they can realistically do given the anonymity and information available.
If you want to complete your key, at most, you can indicate that in the group description and ask the applicants if they will stay to complete. Assuming they say “yes” and have an appropriate IO score to complete the key, what more can the group leader possibly do here? Ask them twice about completion?
If cross realm didn’t exist, this was easy. If someone had a reputation for leaving or bailing or otherwise screwing groups, word got around. You’d be able to avoid people you’d had bad experiences with or heard bad things about.
The problem here isn’t group leaders not doing appropriate vetting. The problem is that applicants will say they will stay for completion, then don’t, and don’t care because they have no skin in the game. It’s not their key, and they probably won’t see the other players again. There’s also absolutely no consequence.
How, exactly, are group leaders supposed to vet to prevent this?
