Kicked from my own first run group for not having a title - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Fractals/Dungeons/Strike Missions/Raids

Kicked from my own first run group for not having a title

2>

Comments

  • I have to say, anything to do with raiding or CM in fractals are easily the most toxic areas of the game I've ever encountered, it seems that if you have the audacity to not run a premade and approved build then you "shouldn't" even try, seriously, I ran one CM, never again, I got laughed at because apparently a Chronomancer is dealing more damage then me on Firebrand, even though I told them up front this was my first time running a CM and I'm trying to figure this out and they said they were fine with that, I get its not the entire raiding community but, jeez, I get enough kitten in my real life and I play GW2 to get away from this kind of toxicitiy

  • @Justine.6351 said:
    Pretty much why my fractal lvl is not over 50 and I will accept any player into dungeons and fractals. I don't care if you are a nomad staff camping druid or have zero agony resist. Its why charr fractal is my favorite; if I have to I WILL carry 4 players across the finish line.

    Sadly this is also the reason why I will never get into raids, no noob/story mode. How do you even find enough people to do first run on hardcore content months after release without having to fill in with elitists?

    I have to say that even higher level fractals like T3 and T4 are pretty chill about that sort of thing, but CM is another story entirely, hence why I don't play CM or raiding, I'm one of those crazy people that has the AUDACITY to want to run a homemade build I find fun instead of a preapproved "meta" build

  • MarkoNS.3261MarkoNS.3261 Member ✭✭✭

    @Boogiepop Void.6473 said:
    I was running 100CM last night with a group of first timers. We got up to the final boss. Then, due to RL, people had to leave. So I LFGed for more, clearly marking the group as for first time 100CM players. 4 People joined me, then after one run (failed at 16%) demanded to see my title (all of them changed to theirs) and kicked me out when I reminded them the group was for first run people. Essentially, they just wanted to get the completion and stole my last boss instance.

    This is why I keep saying we need to remove these kinds of titles. Give a group a method to say "you aren't leet enough for us" and they will use it to discriminate.

    titles are pointless anyway i use essences as filter :)

  • Leader should not be kicked, if any not happy are free to form their own group. This is common sense isn't it.

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 16, 2021

    Old thread, but since it was brought up again...

    @Boogiepop Void.6473 said:
    I was running 100CM last night with a group of first timers. We got up to the final boss. Then, due to RL, people had to leave. So I LFGed for more, clearly marking the group as for first time 100CM players. 4 People joined me, then after one run (failed at 16%) demanded to see my title (all of them changed to theirs) and kicked me out when I reminded them the group was for first run people. Essentially, they just wanted to get the completion and stole my last boss instance.

    This is why I keep saying we need to remove these kinds of titles. Give a group a method to say "you aren't leet enough for us" and they will use it to discriminate.

    Actually, just making the person who started a party of five the "squad commander" would easily solve the problem. This mechanic should have been introduced a long time ago.

    Titles are fine.

    P.S. One thing you learn quickly from creating groups in LFG: some people can't read or simply don't care.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ashantara.8731 said:
    Actually, just making the person who started a party of five the "squad commander" would easily solve the problem. This mechanic should have been introduced a long time ago.

    That's how the game used to be until it was changed...
    Fun times when party leaders where demanding payment to keep the instance active. Or kicking whoever they like since they couldn't be touched.

  • As @maddoctor.2738 said, there was a party leader before but some ppl abused it so Anet changed that.

    Carcharoth Lucian/Mini Chibii
    Ruin of Surmia world
    PvE : [CdL] Les Chasseurs De Légendes
    WvW : [MIMs] Mobile Ingénieuse Et Marteau

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Boogiepop Void.6473 said:
    I was running 100CM last night with a group of first timers. We got up to the final boss. Then, due to RL, people had to leave. So I LFGed for more, clearly marking the group as for first time 100CM players. 4 People joined me, then after one run (failed at 16%) demanded to see my title (all of them changed to theirs) and kicked me out when I reminded them the group was for first run people. Essentially, they just wanted to get the completion and stole my last boss instance.

    This is why I keep saying we need to remove these kinds of titles. Give a group a method to say "you aren't leet enough for us" and they will use it to discriminate.

    Removing titles isn't a solution to that problem ... you don't think people will discriminate for other reasons?

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 16, 2021

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Ashantara.8731 said:
    Actually, just making the person who started a party of five the "squad commander" would easily solve the problem. This mechanic should have been introduced a long time ago.

    That's how the game used to be until it was changed...
    Fun times when party leaders where demanding payment to keep the instance active.

    I wasn't talking about instance owners (it's a good thing that was removed!) but party leaders who can manage the group, just like a squad commander.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ashantara.8731 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Ashantara.8731 said:
    Actually, just making the person who started a party of five the "squad commander" would easily solve the problem. This mechanic should have been introduced a long time ago.

    That's how the game used to be until it was changed...
    Fun times when party leaders where demanding payment to keep the instance active.

    I wasn't talking about instance owners (it's a good thing that was removed!) but party leaders who can manage the group, just like a squad commander.

    So like party leader but instance dont close if they leave.

  • Shaogin.2679Shaogin.2679 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ashantara.8731 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Ashantara.8731 said:
    Actually, just making the person who started a party of five the "squad commander" would easily solve the problem. This mechanic should have been introduced a long time ago.

    That's how the game used to be until it was changed...
    Fun times when party leaders where demanding payment to keep the instance active.

    I wasn't talking about instance owners (it's a good thing that was removed!) but party leaders who can manage the group, just like a squad commander.

    How would that be any different that what we previously had? I mean, they could still kick whoever they want just to troll, and they would be immune to being kicked themselves so the only way around it would be to start all over again with a new group.

    Doc Von Doom

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    How would that be any different that what we previously had?

    Huh?!

    Instance owner = instance closes when they leave = totally pointless and stupid mechanic

    Party leader = squad leader = manages who stays and who has to go

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    I mean, they could still kick whoever they want [...], and they would be immune to being kicked themselves

    Exactly. That's what the OP needed in order to keep the intended function of the group they created (namely what was stated in LFG: beginners run) and not be kicked out of their own party.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ashantara.8731 said:

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    How would that be any different that what we previously had?

    Huh?!

    Instance owner = instance closes when they leave = totally pointless and stupid mechanic

    Party leader = squad leader = manages who stays and who has to go

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    I mean, they could still kick whoever they want [...], and they would be immune to being kicked themselves

    Exactly. That's what the OP needed in order to keep the intended function of the group they created (namely what was stated in LFG: beginners run) and not be kicked out of their own party.

    Yes but that could also be abused by party leader forcing people to finish if they dont want to start over from scratch.
    Rather have it like now when you need majorty people to be safe instead of dictatiorship.

  • The LFG tool is already profoundly bloated and requires a re-work
    But it they did, perhaps the solution to OP's problem would be to first create an LFG tab for new/inexperienced and one for experienced so that people joining know what they are getting in to and manage their expectations accordingly.
    "But then no one would join the inexperienced" - that might be the biggest drawback.
    I ran in to a similar issue trying to do the challenge modes for dragon champions. I don't have a guild due to my chaotic work schedule so I couldn't ask guildies. I tried LFG and asking on map chat, no one would join me. I ended up soloing them on my holosmith. (it's possible. It sucked and took me double the time but I did it.)

    That is how the game is now. It's...not what it used to be. It's not fun if you don't have a group of people you know to play with or the time to learn a meta (and get meta gear) The only time you can PUG certain content is just after it's released but give it a week and no one wants to do it.

    The real solution would be to re-introduce elements that don't encourage speed clearing. (Ie: don't make exhausting grinds as an achievement; give difficulty tiers to raid. Yes there will always be meta but for pve content don't make it necessary. )

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obfuscate.6430 said:
    would be to first create an LFG tab for new/inexperienced and one for experienced so that people joining know what they are getting in to and manage their expectations accordingly.

    who distrub write it in existing lfg notes? for example : "cm100 for dwd title hsg qfb cdps"

    The real solution would be to re-introduce elements that don't encourage speed clearing. (Ie: don't make exhausting grinds as an achievement; give difficulty tiers to raid. so you suggest remove engare timer on raids? ok . But on fractal you not have that timer, so welcome.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Hannelore.8153Hannelore.8153 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 19, 2021

    The core problem is that the LFG tool is kind of poorly made. The devs designed it to make the game look big and full, even though almost every category is empty, so you can't actually use it the way you need to half the time.

    Imagine if you could add tags like #experienced for example that didn't take up title space.

    Hannah | Daisuki[SUKI] Founder, Ehmry Bay, NA | 23 charas, 18k hours, 29k AP | ♀♥♀
    Mains Mariyuuna/Auramancer(PvE) & Terakura/Healbreaker(WvW) aka Anvil Rock Silver Raider [SUKI]
    No need to be best, only good and kind.

  • @Obfuscate.6430 said:
    But it they did, perhaps the solution to OP's problem would be to first create an LFG tab for new/inexperienced and one for experienced so that people joining know what they are getting in to and manage their expectations accordingly.

    How would this have helped with the OP's problem? Griefers can just as easily jump into an inexperience group, enter the instance, and then kick the inexperienced players.

  • Shaogin.2679Shaogin.2679 Member ✭✭✭

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Ashantara.8731 said:

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    How would that be any different that what we previously had?

    Huh?!

    Instance owner = instance closes when they leave = totally pointless and stupid mechanic

    Party leader = squad leader = manages who stays and who has to go

    @Shaogin.2679 said:
    I mean, they could still kick whoever they want [...], and they would be immune to being kicked themselves

    Exactly. That's what the OP needed in order to keep the intended function of the group they created (namely what was stated in LFG: beginners run) and not be kicked out of their own party.

    Yes but that could also be abused by party leader forcing people to finish if they dont want to start over from scratch.
    Rather have it like now when you need majorty people to be safe instead of dictatiorship.

    Exactly this. The system may be different in that if that party leader disconnects, everyone isn't booted from the instance, but all the exploits and trolling from back in the day would still be possible with the changes being proposed here.

    Doc Von Doom

  • Shaogin.2679Shaogin.2679 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 17, 2021

    Honestly the grouping tools in this game are the best of any mmo I have played so far. Random group finders may be easier to use, but you have no control whatsoever of the group you get placed with. With the LFG tool, you can go to the category you wish to make or join a group for, and specify exactly what you need for your group or find a group that is exactly what you are looking for. Honestly, PvP would be insanely better if it used the same LFG tool instead of the random group finder. Random group finders are what allow trolls, griefers, toxic, and afk players to do what they do. Sure, they still exist with LFG, and will always exist no matter what system you implement, but with the LFG tool, the players have the power to do something about by simply blocking the player's account and choosing to never group with them again. If it was a random group finder, chances are you would wind up getting grouped with that same player over and over, as we see with the current PvP system.

    Doc Von Doom

  • Dixa.6017Dixa.6017 Member ✭✭
    edited February 18, 2021

    hrm. i was sure i was on the guild wars 2 forums not the wow forums. the overall mmorpg community is in a sad, selfish state.

    edit: stop necro'ng 3 year old threads.