Return of Reckoning

Just make SC que remove when join WB, same what we have with disabling queing while in WB. At least till fix WB buging.

Cloakedstranger wrote:That is like saying the car engine was running and no one was around so i took it. By the time you are in t3 you know full well what it does to a warband.

I didnt know till reading this thread

calm down, it is christmas time! you should ask for a gift instead of a ban for ppl playing sc's while they are in a warband.

Cloakedstranger wrote:

Zelera wrote:Is this not abuse of a bug because after they join most say kick me and laugh cause they know you cant kick them.

Are you missing this part of the post. Most of them do know that is the issue.

And you know this from their diabolical laughter and mustache twirling before they join the SCs on purpose just to screw up the WB, of course.

bwdaWAR wrote:

Cloakedstranger wrote:

Zelera wrote:Is this not abuse of a bug because after they join most say kick me and laugh cause they know you cant kick them.

Are you missing this part of the post. Most of them do know that is the issue.

And you know this from their diabolical laughter and mustache twirling before they join the SCs on purpose just to screw up the WB, of course.

Well with your smart comments could you not ascertain the fact that (and laugh) means LOL or ROFL.

There was an addon called "autoband", iirc it could auto-kick players from the WB if they join scs (not sure though).

The problem isn't so much the fact that people feel the need to join SCs while in a WB; let's face it we're talking about PUG WBs and people do what they want, it's the unfortunate nature of a PUG. The issue is that when you are in a WB and join an SC it bugs the entire WB and you CANNOT be kicked by the leader, moved to another group, or anything else. And if/when you leave the SC and come back, the WB is still bugged. The entire WB must be reformed and that is very annoying to say the least.

I don't think people should be penalized for joining SCs, no matter how much it pisses off the rest of us. Some people really may be that ignorant of what they are doing, or they just don't give a damn about the rest of us...so be it. I do however, agree that something needs to be implemented so that WBs don't get bugged by those that join or want to join SCs.

For now, perhaps disabling the ability to queue and removing them from a queue when in a WB is the easiest solution, until something better is conceived and implemented. At least those that feel the need to SC can leave the WB and do their own thing, without impacting 23 other players who want to RvR or RvDoor or whatever.

My .02

...just kick them if they don't cut it out. it's not like warbands aren't usually host to a couple people trying to muck it up even without the bug.

grimli wrote:...just kick them if they don't cut it out. it's not like warbands aren't usually host to a couple people trying to muck it up even without the bug.

Warbands bug out when someone joins a scenario. You can't kick people out and you can't move them to another party. Read the entire thread.

Zelera wrote:Well with your smart comments could you not ascertain the fact that (and laugh) means LOL or ROFL.

The OP is talking about those players comments regarding low ranks joining, not joining SCs, at least the wording implies that. Apart from a comment like "just kick me lol" when complaining about joining the wrong WB offering multiple interpretations, I still maintain that the specific information that joining a scenario while in a WB will create perma-occupied ghost spots in the WB is rarely posted. This is something that affects mostly Open RvR PUGs, where hours can go before anyone even notices there are bugged players in there. There is never any communication from these bugged player spots. There may be talk about being unable to move them, or reforming the WB, but a clear post about why this happens is very, very rare. And once again, casual players don't tend to pay too much attention, but they make up a large part, if not most, of the playerbase. Banning people for something they can't reasonably be expected to know - which was the point of the OP - would likely cause more problems than it'd solve.