Solution for M+ leavers....

[ellieg]

Or, get this... you don't need to a surrender a fucking dungeon. Just leave.

I just dont get why ppl want to force someone who doesn't want to be there, to stay in group with them. That's never gonna go well. Sucks their key drops a level and an hour wasted, but I don't think the key is gonna magically complete because a leaver now can't leave

[Relapses]

I just dont get why ppl want to force someone who doesn't want to be there, to stay in group with them. That's never gonna go well. Sucks their key drops a level and an hour wasted, but I don't think the key is gonna magically complete because a leaver now can't leave

People don't want to admit that they might be part of the reason the group failed (or is failing) and would rather not only blame everybody else but also force them to stay even if they're playing like shit.

[AtomR]

Just either complete the dungeon or cancel the attempt with a 100% agreement. The first person that leaves a m+ without one or the other gets a debuff that is higher the more often you leave an m+. I don't think this is unreasonable.

- - - Updated - - -

I just dont get why ppl want to force someone who doesn't want to be there, to stay in group with them. That's never gonna go well. Sucks their key drops a level and an hour wasted, but I don't think the key is gonna magically complete because a leaver now can't leave

It's just to prevent people from joining unless they are 100% into it. That in itself should probably detract a majority of leavers from even joining.

[Shadowlog]

The easiest solution is to friend pugs you know with realid's or join a community that is for M+ key running. Lastly and this is a big one, make sure your comp for running the key makes sense. Example, on a sanguine week you probably want more ranged than melee as the Sanguine on the ground can be difficult to see for melee. Another example is this last week with the orbs, not having a ranged tab targeter like a shadow priest, Hunter, Boomkin can really defeat a key and thus you should plan for the affixes.

[Relapses]

Just either complete the dungeon or cancel the attempt with a 100% agreement. The first person that leaves a m+ without one or the other gets a debuff that is higher the more often you leave an m+. I don't think this is unreasonable.

- - - Updated - - -



It's just to prevent people from joining unless they are 100% into it. That in itself should probably detract a majority of leavers from even joining.

Hello? Are you new to the internet? People will hold your group hostage. Unless you think asking people to pinky promise not to leave before the key starts is an effective way to get people to be honest.

[ellieg]

Just either complete the dungeon or cancel the attempt with a 100% agreement. The first person that leaves a m+ without one or the other gets a debuff that is higher the more often you leave an m+. I don't think this is unreasonable.

- - - Updated - - -



It's just to prevent people from joining unless they are 100% into it. That in itself should probably detract a majority of leavers from even joining.

And if I stay afk in the instance? Maybe pulling extra mobs to avoid any afk check. Some salty fuckin leavers 100% would abuse this system to the point that its punishing the ppl its intended to protect. Tired of dealing with me, the guy who's asking but refusing to drop group, so you leave first and now you have the debuff

[Nite92]

You can easy use WCL in m+, not for ranking, but for combat analysis.

Yes exactly, what I said one comment earlier.

[Alroxas]

Just either complete the dungeon or cancel the attempt with a 100% agreement. The first person that leaves a m+ without one or the other gets a debuff that is higher the more often you leave an m+. I don't think this is unreasonable.

That's a tough sell. For instance, the group might be fine taking over 1 hour to complete the dungeon but 1 player may not want to spend that amount of time and it wasn't agreed upon before the start of the run. So now that 1 player has to held hostage for 1 hour to complete the dungeon? Or take the debuff to leave first?

Or does that cause the 1 player to adopt a "leave but not really leave" attitude? Like purposely screw up so much that the rest of the group then shifts to agreement to cancel the run? Because damned if the 1 player has to take the debuff hit instead of the their perception that someone else in the group should take the debuff.

[Nite92]

what the fuck was it i posted in the start? i am not changing any goalposts... i pointed out that people are taking excessive amounts of damage and you started going on about how hps doesn't matter in wcl... it fucking matters in a run, stop taking so much avoidable damage if you want to progress in m+... a healer having to do 6k hps is doing pretty much zero dps... that's time they could spend dpsing instead...

And again, max 3k hps is just a random number. It depends on the pull size. This is simply true, doesn't matter how many dots you type.

[Freedom]

This is just a random idea, but what if there were trash mobs before the pedestal where you put the M+ key that had some modest mechanics to them? Basically if in combat you see that the group is going to fail because people aren't interrupting, standing in fire, doing low DPS, letting someone die etc, you can just leave before you actually use anyone's key.

It wouldn't fix leavers, but at least then the leavers could see that the group is bad before wasting anyone's key, and they could, well, leave.

IDK about the tuning etc or fight length - how do you have this "group tester" be good for a +2 or a +15 without making the mobs overtuned for the people wanting to do a +2 or undertuned for those wanting to do a +15? Maybe there could be three different routes depending on key level - one that tests for a +2 to a +7 at a +4 level roughly, one that tests for a +7 to a +10 (includes a preview of the seasonal affix) at a +8 level roughly and one that tests for a +10 to +15 at a +13 level roughly. Maybe intended to last 3 minutes at most.

[ifrah]

Just either complete the dungeon or cancel the attempt with a 100% agreement. The first person that leaves a m+ without one or the other gets a debuff that is higher the more often you leave an m+. I don't think this is unreasonable.

- - - Updated - - -



It's just to prevent people from joining unless they are 100% into it. That in itself should probably detract a majority of leavers from even joining.

This would open up juicy opportunities for toxic people to just ruin people's time even more. Vote-cancel? Nah, I'll vote no and start just pissing about until someone from the group quits first. Which frankly I'd rather do and take some deserter debuff for myself, log out and do something else, than wait for the asshat to finish his idiocy.

Does ignoring block the visibility in the group finder? If yes, that's likely the best solution. Unless there's an addon to blacklist people.

[Tinary]

Take 3rd SD boss for example: you eat balls but damage is huge anyways. You then start healing but after few seconds you have to start dodging bad stuff on ground and cannot heal. Then you continue healing but before you can full ppl another balls eating phase begins. People take even more damage because they are not full, you start healing again but you have again to start dodging ground stuff... after the third balls cycle either the boss is dead or it’s a wipe. This is stupid design imho.

How many balls you eat? Usually if the tank aint stupid, he/she wont pick any orb and everyone else can pick 4 and the damage is low. Depends which class you are, you can always use small def cd every 2nd aoe. What we usually like to do is that I as a tank never pick up orbs, and the first aoe is healer and 1 ranged self cd, 2nd is other 2 dps self cd and just rotate til the end. So far, 3rd boss has not been an issue for us during tyr. You do understand that you can write out/speak out the def cd rota and how you want them right? Even in pugs, you can just type out "3rd boss first aoe you and you use cd, 2nd me and him, repeat." Healing 2 targets is easier than healing 4 all the time imo.
This is just a personal experience and not meant as a flame, just trying to give helpful tip.

[AtomR]

This would open up juicy opportunities for toxic people to just ruin people's time even more. Vote-cancel? Nah, I'll vote no and start just pissing about until someone from the group quits first. Which frankly I'd rather do and take some deserter debuff for myself, log out and do something else, than wait for the asshat to finish his idiocy.

Does ignoring block the visibility in the group finder? If yes, that's likely the best solution. Unless there's an addon to blacklist people.

Ah yes. I forgot to add that you could also get kicked from the party for being shit, with 4 votes. That would mark the dungeon as finished and mark you as desertor. But yeah, 4 friends would vote on the Pugged guy whenever they got bored or wanted to end it coz of time etc. Indeed it gets messy soon, trying to find solutions XD

[Relapses]

Ah yes. I forgot to add that you could also get kicked from the party for being shit, with 4 votes. That would mark the dungeon as finished and mark you as desertor. But yeah, 4 friends would vote on the Pugged guy whenever they got bored or wanted to end it coz of time etc. Indeed it gets messy soon, trying to find solutions XD

There aren't solutions. Why bother trying to create solutions to a problem that isn't a problem? You're just asking Blizzard to intervene where they shouldn't because you feel entitled to an experience that is no way guaranteed by the game itself. If M+ had a legitimate MMR system and you were actively punished by failing a key, I'd fully support the systems required to keep players in a group. But right now we only have R.IO and that isn't even a rating system so much as it a numerical representation of information already readily available on your character's Armory page; until Blizzard gets more "serious" about the nature of M+ I don't see them fixing this particular issue.

[ifrah]

Ah yes. I forgot to add that you could also get kicked from the party for being shit, with 4 votes. That would mark the dungeon as finished and mark you as desertor. But yeah, 4 friends would vote on the Pugged guy whenever they got bored or wanted to end it coz of time etc. Indeed it gets messy soon, trying to find solutions XD

Yep, the flaw of the majority voting system got listed there. It's infinitely times better to have a risk of an idiot in the group, possibly leading to premature disbanding, than having even the smallest risk of getting griefed by 3-4ppl votekick groups.
I still think the issue is way smaller than many people here (not pointed to you) make it. It does exist, but what do people expect when doing anything with random strangers?

[Relapses]

...what do people expect when doing anything with random strangers?

The people who seem most entitled to not having their key depleted are the ones who are most likely to deplete their keys. Funny how that works... :-/

[Relapses]

Which is exactly why I specified a time limit, of, at least 15 minutes if people agree the dungeon is at a loss and at most timer + 15 minutes.

The system isn't forcing you to stay regardless. You can still quit, r.io will just log that you disconnected/quit/etc. No different than any other multiplayer game that keeps track of leavers.

The only purpose of the surrender vote is that it signifies that the group agreed to quit the key versus you individually leaving.

Dungeons can't "win." The entire idea of surrendering a dungeon is ridiculous. This isn't League of Legends, knock it off.

[kamuimac]

If dungeons can't win, why do people fail keys?

I'm not trying to turn it into League. I'm trying to give r.io a way to track people that quit. People can still quit, but at least you'll see how many times someone leaves a dungeon to determine if you don't want to invite them.

That's all. Nothing to prevent you from leaving. Just a formalized process for M+ to give up as a group.

wouldnt work - because people would just fake dc and then log in to another alt. forcing other to also fake dc or to leave and recive penalty

thats why that wasnt implemented in first place i guess

[Tziva]

How many games with a "surrender" type option have you seen people who have determined they are going to lose just stop participating and demand everyone use it? Even in WoW BGs where there is literally no penalty for failure and you still get a small reward for a loss, half the team will just demand people "lose quick" and stop playing so they can get out and get into the next game. It sucks for people who are there to play rather than just grind honour. It's incredibly naive to think it won't happen in keys when they aren't going well. People will hold the group hostage with inactivity or griefing until the others confirm the surrender. I'm not sure how that is an improvement on the current situation where people just leave and those there for completion still are stuck starting over from scratch.

I get that people don't like their time wasted by leavers killing a key but most of these proposed fixes wouldn't improving things and in some cases would make everything work.

[Tziva]

In WoW BGs, specifically, since you're rewarded for a small loss, if you have a history of not winning the most efficient strategy will always be do the bare minimum then let the other team win. That's how you maximize your rewards/hour.

I know that, but for the people who are there to actually play the content and not to "maximise rewards per hour" it's not particularly enjoyable to just throw games and especially encounter people every single match demanding you do so and refusing to participate to speed up the process. In any case, the point is that people in this game already have a propensity for demanding other people give up when things aren't going how they want, and AFKing or griefing to persuade those players to do so already happens without a system that encourages it. If you add a surrender option to M+, it's just going to happen there as well and probably with even greater frequency.

But it already happens in keys. Key isn't going well? Just leave, there's no consequence to leaving. The only thing you've lost is your time finding another group.

The only difference between someone leaving and forcing you to surrender vote is that at least you have a say in them trying to force the surrender vote.

Personally, I feel like it's better to have some kind of consequence than no consequence because no consequence means, oh, this isn't going how I planned? Time to DC/leave which isn't much of a difference in the result.

Except you don't really have a say in a surrender vote if the other players have decided they are going to stop participating if everyone doesn't also vote that way. Just like what we see happen in other contexts.

At least now when people decide they are done with a key, they leave, the key is instantly dead, all you've lost is some time and you can move on right away. You start complicating that system by punishing people for leaving then you start to cause workaround behaviour so they can achieve the same results without the consequences, like faking DCing, refusing to participate, or griefing groups so that other people leave first.

Ultimately in the end you have the same result (a disbanded party and some wasted time) except a lot more convoluted path to get there. Personally I'd rather deal with someone dropping from the group after we wipe than waste extra time with a fight because people are arguing over whether to surrender, or a disbanded group that took even more time to fall apart because everyone continued to kill trash and move through the dungeon in case the disconnect was legit and that person come back.

Ultimately none of these solutions actually prevent the problem from happening, and in many situations make the problem worse or introduce punitive measures that could inadvertently punish innocent people who left groups because some other asshole made it impossible to finish them.