Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

Follow important game updates on Twitter @Wizard101 and @KI_Alerts, and Facebook!

For all account questions and concerns, contact Customer Support.

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

End the afk/leavers in dungeons

AuthorMessage
Survivor
Nov 30, 2008
15
I've been playing since 2008, every release of a ridiculously long dungeon with the new best gear in the game comes with the same problem. People constantly leave because they "gotta eat" or whatever other reasons. Most of the time they don't even say anything, they just go afk or leave. 80% of the time you don't even complete the dungeon.

I think there should be some kind of punishment so that people actually make sure that nothing is going to come up such as dinner any-time soon. Of course, things happen in life especially when the dungeons are as ridiculously long as they are so I think that a system similar to LoL's "leaver buster" should be implemented. So every time you leave a dungeon your "leaver buster" status is lowered, and when you complete one it's raised...If it goes too low then you get a warning and eventually a short suspension which increases if it recurs.

There's a few problems of course, what if the team you have isn't very good and the dungeon is taking forever? What if you're just getting mana or some treasure cards? I'm working on a few ideas.

There should be sort of "check points" in every dungeon, maybe after every boss. If that "check point" isn't reached by a certain time, then people have the freedom of leaving without affecting their "status"(or continue if they want). Similar to LoL, there should also be a surrender vote, if the majority of players vote to surrender then everybody can leave without their status being affected.

Now, some people need to refuel and get treasure cards or whatever, and sometimes they disconnect for a minute. This is where I'm a little unsure about, but everybody could get some sort of refuel time at each check point. Everybody gets say 4 minutes after each checkpoint and while they're away the timer for the next check point in the dungeon is paused. If a player uses up this time then the others in the dungeon have a vote to "excuse" him and extend the time or leave without punishment. If the player does not return to the dungeon(not excused), then they get a notice warning them not to do it again and they're unable to join another dungeon until the previous dungeon is either completed or fails to reach the checkpoint whether the other players left or not(They still have the option of going back).

I'm just throwing out some ideas, I get really frustrated sometimes when people keep leaving in the middle of a dungeon. If you have any ideas to put an end to afk/leavers then I'd love to hear them. Maybe you think things are fine the way they are now.

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.

Geographer
Dec 14, 2009
916
Falconry1 on Nov 4, 2015 wrote:
I've been playing since 2008, every release of a ridiculously long dungeon with the new best gear in the game comes with the same problem. People constantly leave because they "gotta eat" or whatever other reasons. Most of the time they don't even say anything, they just go afk or leave. 80% of the time you don't even complete the dungeon.

I think there should be some kind of punishment so that people actually make sure that nothing is going to come up such as dinner any-time soon. Of course, things happen in life especially when the dungeons are as ridiculously long as they are so I think that a system similar to LoL's "leaver buster" should be implemented. So every time you leave a dungeon your "leaver buster" status is lowered, and when you complete one it's raised...If it goes too low then you get a warning and eventually a short suspension which increases if it recurs.

There's a few problems of course, what if the team you have isn't very good and the dungeon is taking forever? What if you're just getting mana or some treasure cards? I'm working on a few ideas.

There should be sort of "check points" in every dungeon, maybe after every boss. If that "check point" isn't reached by a certain time, then people have the freedom of leaving without affecting their "status"(or continue if they want). Similar to LoL, there should also be a surrender vote, if the majority of players vote to surrender then everybody can leave without their status being affected.

Now, some people need to refuel and get treasure cards or whatever, and sometimes they disconnect for a minute. This is where I'm a little unsure about, but everybody could get some sort of refuel time at each check point. Everybody gets say 4 minutes after each checkpoint and while they're away the timer for the next check point in the dungeon is paused. If a player uses up this time then the others in the dungeon have a vote to "excuse" him and extend the time or leave without punishment. If the player does not return to the dungeon(not excused), then they get a notice warning them not to do it again and they're unable to join another dungeon until the previous dungeon is either completed or fails to reach the checkpoint whether the other players left or not(They still have the option of going back).

I'm just throwing out some ideas, I get really frustrated sometimes when people keep leaving in the middle of a dungeon. If you have any ideas to put an end to afk/leavers then I'd love to hear them. Maybe you think things are fine the way they are now.

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.
A good post, and a valid point. Sadly, there is no "perfect" solution, but "Magic the Gathering" online uses the best I have seen for this problem. If you are stuck with a habitual afk'er, or someone who causes problems, abusive, etc. then all that is required is for everyone else to vote to eject the offender, and they are removed from that particular instance. While it's certainly not a perfect solution, it solves far more problems than it causes.

Historian
Jun 19, 2010
657
Actually, there's a perfect way to appease everyone...

...in fact, there's no need to punish anyone; but...

...let's just reward AFK'ers; and everyone else appropriately.

So, when someone AFK returns to battle and drops occur; here's the message they should receive:

"Thank you for your participation in this battle, dungeon, etc...

...your time away from you team, battle/s and multiple portions of this dungeon have affected your reward; and all you receive is this pop up message. Thank you and have a nice day!"

Just my two cents!

Archon
Feb 07, 2011
3175
Falconry1 on Nov 4, 2015 wrote:
I've been playing since 2008, every release of a ridiculously long dungeon with the new best gear in the game comes with the same problem. People constantly leave because they "gotta eat" or whatever other reasons. Most of the time they don't even say anything, they just go afk or leave. 80% of the time you don't even complete the dungeon.

I think there should be some kind of punishment so that people actually make sure that nothing is going to come up such as dinner any-time soon. Of course, things happen in life especially when the dungeons are as ridiculously long as they are so I think that a system similar to LoL's "leaver buster" should be implemented. So every time you leave a dungeon your "leaver buster" status is lowered, and when you complete one it's raised...If it goes too low then you get a warning and eventually a short suspension which increases if it recurs.

There's a few problems of course, what if the team you have isn't very good and the dungeon is taking forever? What if you're just getting mana or some treasure cards? I'm working on a few ideas.

There should be sort of "check points" in every dungeon, maybe after every boss. If that "check point" isn't reached by a certain time, then people have the freedom of leaving without affecting their "status"(or continue if they want). Similar to LoL, there should also be a surrender vote, if the majority of players vote to surrender then everybody can leave without their status being affected.

Now, some people need to refuel and get treasure cards or whatever, and sometimes they disconnect for a minute. This is where I'm a little unsure about, but everybody could get some sort of refuel time at each check point. Everybody gets say 4 minutes after each checkpoint and while they're away the timer for the next check point in the dungeon is paused. If a player uses up this time then the others in the dungeon have a vote to "excuse" him and extend the time or leave without punishment. If the player does not return to the dungeon(not excused), then they get a notice warning them not to do it again and they're unable to join another dungeon until the previous dungeon is either completed or fails to reach the checkpoint whether the other players left or not(They still have the option of going back).

I'm just throwing out some ideas, I get really frustrated sometimes when people keep leaving in the middle of a dungeon. If you have any ideas to put an end to afk/leavers then I'd love to hear them. Maybe you think things are fine the way they are now.

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.
i agree~ people who consistently abandon teams in dungeons or otherwise abuse the system should be punished accordingly. the trouble is, how to do it without penalizing the wrong people (faulty connection, windows updates, power outages, etc.), though i am sure that ki can identify patterns.

i used to play neopets as a teen, and they had a game called keyquest~ a virtual board game for 2-4 players that allowed you to win prizes. unfortunately, people found ways to abuse the system (for example, skipping turns to avoid negative effects and quitting so as not to lose)~ both of the aforementioned exploits were reportable offenses, and cheaters were dealt with accordingly. but that wasn't the best part.

keyquest had 4 ranks~

top notch
(90-100% of games completed),
solid (80-90%)
not bad
(70-80%)
shaky
(less than 69% of games completed).

these ranks were visible in the lobby, so that anyone looking to join a game could see your username and rank. that way, people could avoid quitters and cheaters... but the system had one major flaw.

in a 2-player keyquest game, if player x quit to avoid losing (leaving player y with no opponent and forcing him out of the game), both players would be punished for quitting. therefore, it was possible for a player who never quit a game of her own volition to end up as shaky.

if ki tweaked this system, so that only the cheaters were punished, it would work well at preventing people from abusing team up.

-von

Delver
Oct 27, 2009
272
Yes, it is frustrating in these long tough dungeons to loose a team member, for whatever reason. Many times, I have seen connection issues drop someone out, and even when they returned as quick as possible, they were not able to get back in, as the loss of connection broke the dungeon recall, considering them logged out. If it happened to you, would you want to be punished by your team? If someone joins by team up and backs out voluntarily before it's over, they can't just run into another team up, they have to wait for a countdown clock. Additionally, this game was intended with children in mind. Their playing time is not always their decision. When told they have to stop, they have to, and it can be for reasons they could not predict before entering the dungeon. The parent who plays, also, can suddenly have to leave, because someone else at home is bleeding or vomiting. Life happens.
The issue is the length of dungeons and time invested, if they can't be completed. I am very much in favor of very long dungeons having some kind of check points, so at least you don't have to start from scratch. Pirate101 has a good example in the "Trojan War" area. First time entry is through one sigil, and takes you to the zone in the walls. If however, you already did the first half, you can enter through a different sigil, walk through the courtyard to the palace and find a sigil there for the second half. It gives you the choice to run it all in one go or return later to finish. I also notice some of the newer dungeons are in more pieces. Upper and Lower Zigzag could have been one dungeon. Barkingham Palace might have been done as another huge dungeon. Dungeon recall was added, making it possible to return to dungeons that were tough to get back into like Helephant. I'm glad they are listening. For the ones that remain, still best to run them with friends you know.

Geographer
Dec 14, 2009
916
Tylerwildpants on Nov 4, 2015 wrote:
Actually, there's a perfect way to appease everyone...

...in fact, there's no need to punish anyone; but...

...let's just reward AFK'ers; and everyone else appropriately.

So, when someone AFK returns to battle and drops occur; here's the message they should receive:

"Thank you for your participation in this battle, dungeon, etc...

...your time away from you team, battle/s and multiple portions of this dungeon have affected your reward; and all you receive is this pop up message. Thank you and have a nice day!"

Just my two cents!
I really enjoy your solution. LOL

Astrologist
Dec 26, 2013
1124
Dr Von on Nov 5, 2015 wrote:
i agree~ people who consistently abandon teams in dungeons or otherwise abuse the system should be punished accordingly. the trouble is, how to do it without penalizing the wrong people (faulty connection, windows updates, power outages, etc.), though i am sure that ki can identify patterns.

i used to play neopets as a teen, and they had a game called keyquest~ a virtual board game for 2-4 players that allowed you to win prizes. unfortunately, people found ways to abuse the system (for example, skipping turns to avoid negative effects and quitting so as not to lose)~ both of the aforementioned exploits were reportable offenses, and cheaters were dealt with accordingly. but that wasn't the best part.

keyquest had 4 ranks~

top notch
(90-100% of games completed),
solid (80-90%)
not bad
(70-80%)
shaky
(less than 69% of games completed).

these ranks were visible in the lobby, so that anyone looking to join a game could see your username and rank. that way, people could avoid quitters and cheaters... but the system had one major flaw.

in a 2-player keyquest game, if player x quit to avoid losing (leaving player y with no opponent and forcing him out of the game), both players would be punished for quitting. therefore, it was possible for a player who never quit a game of her own volition to end up as shaky.

if ki tweaked this system, so that only the cheaters were punished, it would work well at preventing people from abusing team up.

-von
I think this has the basic components of a great solution. Allowing others to see your "team-up consistency" would be a huge benefit. If KI could add a pop-up of your ranking, visible while in the Team-up queue, you would be able to judge whether you want to take a chance with a serial quitter. And maybe KI could fine-tune the system so it recognizes some of the other reasons you indicated... connection problems, power outages etc... and negates any ranking penalty if something like that occurs. There would still be some factors that might not be covered... fleeing an instance after everyone else in your team has fled and you know there's little to no chance you're going to make it through alive. I suppose in circumstances like that a little patience would work... just repeatedly pass and allow yourself be defeated and it wouldn't count as a flee.

There's another rare occurance which should be addressed as well. There are certain instances that have a sigil to enter but don't actually involve a battle but only require talking to an NPC. The person initiating the Team-up queue might have no idea that they only have to go inside and talk with someone to complete the instance. If you join the team-up and enter the instance but don't actually have that quest active, you'll get stuck with a "no completion" penalty.

Survivor
Mar 25, 2010
8
I agree totally, but there is one flaw.

My computer shut down at random, and it always happens at the worst times. Once, I was about to beat Malistare and my computer restarted. If the function was implemented, I could pretty much not play at all because of the suspension. Thanks for the great idea though!

Historian
Nov 28, 2010
614
As much as I want to see people face consequences for this sort of thing, I just don't know how you do it. A couple of examples where an automatic system fails.

Example 1:

A few years ago, a buddy and I went into a dungeon to help someone out. Turned out the player was a 14 year old kid. He didn't know how long the dungeon was when we started, and we didn't know he had to go to his grandma's house in an hour. He had to leave before we finished the dungeon. I wasn't mad, I felt disappointed for him because he missed out. I wouldn't want him penalized. Because we were running the dungeon for him, my friend and I quit. I wouldn't want us to be penalized neither. It was a mutual abandonment.

Example 2:

I went into Waterworks with a couple of guys with Menu Chat. One of their friends had Text Chat and he assured me that these guys knew the cheats. After we suffered some miserable failures at Luska, I knew these guys obviously didn't know the cheats (except for the guy with Text Chat). One of the Menu Chatters fell against Luska and never bothered to come back. The Text Chatter had enough after that battle, so he left. I tried to continue on, but the only guy left wasn't joining duels. Eventually I followed suit with the Text guy and left because I didn't want to hang around with the last guy who was leaving me to do the rest of the dungeon alone. With an automated system, who gets penalized?

Put it in the hands of voting it becomes a matter of perception. Say for the first example, depending on how a voting system is set up, we could have voted favourably for the kid, or we could have been vindictive because we felt he wasted our time. I would hate for that kid to suddenly be ostracised because others saw what he did differently than I did. I also don't want the measure of my integrity left in the hands of people I have walked away from because they abandoned me.

Historian
Jun 19, 2010
657
Dr Von on Nov 5, 2015 wrote:
i agree~ people who consistently abandon teams in dungeons or otherwise abuse the system should be punished accordingly. the trouble is, how to do it without penalizing the wrong people (faulty connection, windows updates, power outages, etc.), though i am sure that ki can identify patterns.

i used to play neopets as a teen, and they had a game called keyquest~ a virtual board game for 2-4 players that allowed you to win prizes. unfortunately, people found ways to abuse the system (for example, skipping turns to avoid negative effects and quitting so as not to lose)~ both of the aforementioned exploits were reportable offenses, and cheaters were dealt with accordingly. but that wasn't the best part.

keyquest had 4 ranks~

top notch
(90-100% of games completed),
solid (80-90%)
not bad
(70-80%)
shaky
(less than 69% of games completed).

these ranks were visible in the lobby, so that anyone looking to join a game could see your username and rank. that way, people could avoid quitters and cheaters... but the system had one major flaw.

in a 2-player keyquest game, if player x quit to avoid losing (leaving player y with no opponent and forcing him out of the game), both players would be punished for quitting. therefore, it was possible for a player who never quit a game of her own volition to end up as shaky.

if ki tweaked this system, so that only the cheaters were punished, it would work well at preventing people from abusing team up.

-von
Props to Dr Von...

...for suggesting a visible playing Flee or AFK ranking system!

It would be amazing. Imagine if you could filter who you team with; simply based on their flee and AFK ratings:
Flees or goes AFK 100%
Flees or goes AFK 90-99%
Flees or goes AFK 80-89%
Flees or goes AFK 70-79%
Flees or goes AFK 60-69%
Flees or goes AFK 50-59%
Flees or goes AFK 40-49%
Flees or goes AFK 30-39%
Flees or goes AFK 20-29%
Flees or goes AFK 10-19%
Flees or goes AFK 0-9%
Never Flees or Goes AFK

Survivor
Nov 30, 2008
15
flameer57 on Nov 6, 2015 wrote:
I agree totally, but there is one flaw.

My computer shut down at random, and it always happens at the worst times. Once, I was about to beat Malistare and my computer restarted. If the function was implemented, I could pretty much not play at all because of the suspension. Thanks for the great idea though!
As unfortunate as that is, you are still causing problems for other players. If you were to tell league of legends(the game I mentioned) that you were having connection issues or your power went out they would say it doesn't matter. Whatever the problem is, it keeps happening repeatedly and you're causing problems for other players whether it is your fault or not. If this continues happening, you could join the dungeon with friends who can then "excuse" you like I mentioned resulting in no punishment. Also, with this system you wouldn't get suspended after 1-2 quits, you would have to quit continuously(like 5+ times in a row) before getting suspended. The only punishment you'd receive before then would be a warning, and you would be unable to join another dungeon until either A: the dungeon you were previously in fails to reach a checkpoint or B: the dungeon you were previously in was finished.

Survivor
Nov 30, 2008
15
High Five Ghost on Nov 7, 2015 wrote:
As much as I want to see people face consequences for this sort of thing, I just don't know how you do it. A couple of examples where an automatic system fails.

Example 1:

A few years ago, a buddy and I went into a dungeon to help someone out. Turned out the player was a 14 year old kid. He didn't know how long the dungeon was when we started, and we didn't know he had to go to his grandma's house in an hour. He had to leave before we finished the dungeon. I wasn't mad, I felt disappointed for him because he missed out. I wouldn't want him penalized. Because we were running the dungeon for him, my friend and I quit. I wouldn't want us to be penalized neither. It was a mutual abandonment.

Example 2:

I went into Waterworks with a couple of guys with Menu Chat. One of their friends had Text Chat and he assured me that these guys knew the cheats. After we suffered some miserable failures at Luska, I knew these guys obviously didn't know the cheats (except for the guy with Text Chat). One of the Menu Chatters fell against Luska and never bothered to come back. The Text Chatter had enough after that battle, so he left. I tried to continue on, but the only guy left wasn't joining duels. Eventually I followed suit with the Text guy and left because I didn't want to hang around with the last guy who was leaving me to do the rest of the dungeon alone. With an automated system, who gets penalized?

Put it in the hands of voting it becomes a matter of perception. Say for the first example, depending on how a voting system is set up, we could have voted favourably for the kid, or we could have been vindictive because we felt he wasted our time. I would hate for that kid to suddenly be ostracised because others saw what he did differently than I did. I also don't want the measure of my integrity left in the hands of people I have walked away from because they abandoned me.
Example 1: "Didn't know how long the dungeon was" With my idea, say there are 3 checkpoints that you have 15 minutes to reach for each of them. That would make the dungeon take a maximum of 45 minutes to complete before you can leave without punishment and if the team fails to reach the first checkpoint you could leave after 15 minutes. So, a warning message will pop up before you join the dungeon "This dungeon can take up to 45 minutes, leaving early can result etc." Upon seeing this message, 14 year old "timmy" can go to his parents and say "I'm going to be doing something that takes 45 minutes, will I have to go to grandma's, have dinner or do chores in that time?"

If you read my post carefully, you will see that there is an option to "excuse" the player. That way, timmy would not be punished or penalized. Also, if not "excused" the only punishment timmy would receive is the inability to join another dungeon for a short time(read my post for more details). Things happen unexpectedly for everyone in life, and this system would account for that. The only time someone would receive a suspension is if they do it repeatedly, say 5+ times in a row. It's statistically unlikely for something unexpected to happen 5 dungeons in a row, but if by chance it does then the suspension would only be 24 hours, I think you can live without wizard101 for that long.

Also, if someone disconnects they have that "refuel" time that I mentioned to reconnect, not to mention the option for the team to excuse that player. If the player disconnects from dungeons repeatedly, whether it's their fault or not they're causing problems for other players and they should get the issue resolved before continuing to play dungeons.

Example 2: I have already addressed this issue as well, from what I'm gathering here is "What if your team isn't good, slow or unable to complete the dungeon?" however, I am running out of characters so I will reply again.

Survivor
Nov 30, 2008
15
High Five Ghost on Nov 7, 2015 wrote:
As much as I want to see people face consequences for this sort of thing, I just don't know how you do it. A couple of examples where an automatic system fails.

Example 1:

A few years ago, a buddy and I went into a dungeon to help someone out. Turned out the player was a 14 year old kid. He didn't know how long the dungeon was when we started, and we didn't know he had to go to his grandma's house in an hour. He had to leave before we finished the dungeon. I wasn't mad, I felt disappointed for him because he missed out. I wouldn't want him penalized. Because we were running the dungeon for him, my friend and I quit. I wouldn't want us to be penalized neither. It was a mutual abandonment.

Example 2:

I went into Waterworks with a couple of guys with Menu Chat. One of their friends had Text Chat and he assured me that these guys knew the cheats. After we suffered some miserable failures at Luska, I knew these guys obviously didn't know the cheats (except for the guy with Text Chat). One of the Menu Chatters fell against Luska and never bothered to come back. The Text Chatter had enough after that battle, so he left. I tried to continue on, but the only guy left wasn't joining duels. Eventually I followed suit with the Text guy and left because I didn't want to hang around with the last guy who was leaving me to do the rest of the dungeon alone. With an automated system, who gets penalized?

Put it in the hands of voting it becomes a matter of perception. Say for the first example, depending on how a voting system is set up, we could have voted favourably for the kid, or we could have been vindictive because we felt he wasted our time. I would hate for that kid to suddenly be ostracised because others saw what he did differently than I did. I also don't want the measure of my integrity left in the hands of people I have walked away from because they abandoned me.
Ok, again the same example with checkpoints and let's say it's waterworks. There are 3 checkpoints, all have a 15 minute timer making the total dungeon 45 minutes. Obviously 45 minutes is extremely low for waterworks but I am just using easy numbers.

Let's say the first checkpoint is just after you defeat luska. Again, I am not actually suggesting these timers or this checkpoint for waterworks I am just using this for the example.

As soon as you join the dungeon, a 15 minute timer counts down. If the team fails to defeat luska and activate the next checkpoint in that 15 minutes then ANYBODY can leave the dungeon without punishment. So this means, if your team is slow/unable to reach a checkpoint then you can leave without being punished at all. ALSO, if somebody else has already left, then everybody can leave without punishment. Finally, there's one more option to stop a dungeon and that is to forfeit. So let's say there are 4 people in a dungeon and it's just not going anywhere, if 3 people vote to end the dungeon early then everyone can leave without punishment, there is no need to wait until the checkpoint timer to go down.

So far it seems the biggest problem with my idea is that it's too complicated and nobody understands it based on these replies. Either that or I'm just explaining it poorly.

Another problem is the potential to abuse this system. Say somebody has to go, or they don't like their team. That player can purposely play poorly so that the team does not reach the next checkpoint.

Community Leader
Many other MMOs have systems that allow players to join an instanced dungeon mid-run if someone leaves, effectively allowing players to sub in for anybody that went AFK. I think this could work well in Wizard101.

DuelCircle Organizer. The Slowpoke Sloth is the best.
Survivor
Jul 11, 2015
6
I think there should be a vote kick option that anyone can use whilst inside a dungeon.

If someone is, for example, afk, the rest of the people in the dungeon can then vote to kick the afk out and they would then be unable to return .
I also think that once that problem is established there could be an option to have a henchman to help with the rest of the battles in the dungeon, and not one of those annoying henchman that destroy all your traps, we all hate them.

Illuminator
Oct 22, 2011
1304
man0fbass on Nov 9, 2015 wrote:
Many other MMOs have systems that allow players to join an instanced dungeon mid-run if someone leaves, effectively allowing players to sub in for anybody that went AFK. I think this could work well in Wizard101.
Yup, other MMOs I play allow players to fill in spots if someone leaves, goes afk, or gets kicked out (by vote).

It works without any adverse affects.

I don't want to punish players, but at the same time, there are too many who do their own thing, then they're gone. As of yet, none of my 4 level 100 characters have been through Darkmoor, because of people leaving, or going afk. It's frustrating.

Survivor
May 26, 2013
43
Tylerwildpants on Nov 4, 2015 wrote:
Actually, there's a perfect way to appease everyone...

...in fact, there's no need to punish anyone; but...

...let's just reward AFK'ers; and everyone else appropriately.

So, when someone AFK returns to battle and drops occur; here's the message they should receive:

"Thank you for your participation in this battle, dungeon, etc...

...your time away from you team, battle/s and multiple portions of this dungeon have affected your reward; and all you receive is this pop up message. Thank you and have a nice day!"

Just my two cents!
That'd be great

Survivor
Jul 24, 2015
4
High Five Ghost on Nov 7, 2015 wrote:
As much as I want to see people face consequences for this sort of thing, I just don't know how you do it. A couple of examples where an automatic system fails.

Example 1:

A few years ago, a buddy and I went into a dungeon to help someone out. Turned out the player was a 14 year old kid. He didn't know how long the dungeon was when we started, and we didn't know he had to go to his grandma's house in an hour. He had to leave before we finished the dungeon. I wasn't mad, I felt disappointed for him because he missed out. I wouldn't want him penalized. Because we were running the dungeon for him, my friend and I quit. I wouldn't want us to be penalized neither. It was a mutual abandonment.

Example 2:

I went into Waterworks with a couple of guys with Menu Chat. One of their friends had Text Chat and he assured me that these guys knew the cheats. After we suffered some miserable failures at Luska, I knew these guys obviously didn't know the cheats (except for the guy with Text Chat). One of the Menu Chatters fell against Luska and never bothered to come back. The Text Chatter had enough after that battle, so he left. I tried to continue on, but the only guy left wasn't joining duels. Eventually I followed suit with the Text guy and left because I didn't want to hang around with the last guy who was leaving me to do the rest of the dungeon alone. With an automated system, who gets penalized?

Put it in the hands of voting it becomes a matter of perception. Say for the first example, depending on how a voting system is set up, we could have voted favourably for the kid, or we could have been vindictive because we felt he wasted our time. I would hate for that kid to suddenly be ostracised because others saw what he did differently than I did. I also don't want the measure of my integrity left in the hands of people I have walked away from because they abandoned me.
I agree with everything you said but the most important thing to remember is the fact that this game is really geared towards kids, its not like WOW and hopefully never will be. I don't like when people leave either so I am always ready to bring a Minion in or even a Henchmen if I have the crowns. The bottom line is "If it's your quest/dungeon be prepared to fight alone if necessary".

Explorer
Jun 27, 2014
82
It is very much annoying for those who cannot complete dungeons with people leaving.Although I understand your point of view I woudl take a different approach. At the moment if someone leaves they have the option to recall, sometimes though if your internet kicked out or some other random disconnect you get back online and unable to get back into the same dungeon (i have had this too many times). They did try to address the afk issue somewhat by making them pass after 2 rounds of play.
My ideas would be something like-

If a person leaves and doesnt return in 15 minutes they are removed from the dungeon and a space will be made for another player being able to join by porting in.While recall is active you cannot enter any dungeon other than the one the recall is for.The one issue that annoys me more than anything else is when someone decides to just leave and not return is the dungeon will read as full and nobody can port in to help. real life happens not everyone who leaves is being vindictive. If we could allow others to join in after someone leaves then there would be less frustration.

if a person remains inactive after 12 rounds of play they receive no reward. This might sound harsh but in most instances that is ample time for a minor emergency or random disconnect. If someone goes afk all battle I really dont see how they should be rewarded.