Hi! Thanks for joining. You're my hostage!

[Snarky]

Soooo....  This is getting to be a regular occurrence.  Answer a recruitment ad for a PUG.  Like the Kahn I just joined.  Wait for 8 to fill and go.  As we go the leader says casually "I'm going to set at +3, maybe +4"  

 

...

 

Me and another person.  "Maybe not a good idea, there are lots of AVs in last mission"  "seen this fail a few times at last mission"  crickets.

 

We grind through it.  Tough team, the last room only went 10-15 minutes....

 

F THIS with a cricket bat....

 

If you are running a F-ing +4 Kahn, advertise it as a +4 Kahn.  Thats all.  Do not make me your F-ing hostage.  If I leave I ruin it for the other 6 who just showed up.  If i stay I take 2-3 times as long to get the merits / badge I wanted.  Did I mention F this with a cricket bat?

 

I never put notes on a player.  I put a note.  +4 Kahn.  I do not run +4 Kahns.  If I see this guy on a team lead I will immediately drop, long before they finish recruiting.  

 

[DougGraves]

Those who kahn do, those who kahn't give up.

[Xenosone]

Thats right. Always do tfs at -1 so that its boring as heck. 

So heres the deal. Leadership breaks the game. You know what pool people that people need to do tfs at -1 never take? Exactly. Build your toon better. 

[Greycat]

1 hour ago, Xenosone said:

Thats right. Always do tfs at -1 so that its boring as heck. 

So heres the deal. Leadership breaks the game. You know what pool people that people need to do tfs at -1 never take? Exactly. Build your toon better. 

 

You're aware that there are *other* levels between -1 and +4, right?

 

And that nobody has to build characters to your liking, or that doing so or not has any impact on how well the character's built? Or, for that matter, *how* anyone wants to play at any particular time?

 

[MTeague]

2 hours ago, Xenosone said:

Thats right. Always do tfs at -1 so that its boring as heck. 

So heres the deal. Leadership breaks the game. You know what pool people that people need to do tfs at -1 never take? Exactly. Build your toon better. 

 

Snarky never said "nobody should ever run this at +4".  or that people who run it at +4 are morally bad people. 

He said: 

 

3 hours ago, Snarky said:

If you are running a F-ing +4 Kahn, advertise it as a +4 Kahn.  Thats all. 

 

 Which is always a good idea. I don't care if person setting up the group wants an easy-peasy speed run, or a World-On-Molasses Kill All Max Difficulty run with challenge settings that disable enhancements.  It's always a good idea to be as specific as you can be when recruiting.  What is the team for?  What difficulty settings will be in place?  Challenge Settings / Badge Goals if any (Master Of, or the like).  It avoids so many headaches, both for the recruitees, and for the recruiter.  Anyone who's not up for it, just doesn't respond. People who DO join, knowing fully sure what they're up against, are vastly less likely to quit out halfway through. 

 

Edited June 4, 2021 by MTeague

[nihilii]

6 hours ago, Snarky said:

If I leave I ruin it for the other 6 who just showed up.

I think this is the misconception that ruins your experience.

There is nothing magical about having 8 players rather than 5-6 that makes or breaks a +4 TF. On the curve of easier to harder, it becomes harder, sure.

 

But the change from +0 to +4 is a hell of a lot harder than going from 8 players to 6 players.

 

So, once the leader unilaterally announces to run it at +4... You can feel safe in leaving, if you don't like it. He cranked up it three notches, you added one extra.

More importantly, the extra difficulty you introduce by leaving is optional. The leader can change reputation at any point between missions. Or, even if the difficulty only shows up in the last mission (as can be the case in a Kahn), have everyone log out and log back in. It's doable.

 

Nobody is held hostage here. Nor should they feel like they are.

I could sympathise with a different complaint. Namely that, once you're psychologically involved into joining a team, waiting for everyone to gather, then suddenly it turns out to +4... It can feel like the rug has been pulled over you. So you're frustrated, but you stay. Whether because you hope to change the leader's mind, or because of inertia.

 

Still, this is also a self-inflicted problem. If you're worried about +rep TFs, it's not too hard to be proactive and say "so what rep are we running that?" "this is a +0 TF, right?" beforehand.

 

Communication goes both ways. Too many players have this image of their favored playstyle as the baseline, and assume everyone ought to play by their rules. The leader who slams a +4 and the teammate who laments the fact afterwards likely have a lot of common on that precise point.

 

Bottomline... We're all responsible for our play experience. A team leader takes on the drudgery of recruiting and other social aspects, and gets some administration privileges in return. Normal team members can freeload on those social aspects, but may pay the price in having their leader select settings they're not comfortable with. The game is thankfully accomodating. You should never waste your own time doing something you don't like. If you want to leave, leave right away, and don't think you're ruining anyone else's experience.

Edited June 4, 2021 by nihilii

[Sovera]

6 hours ago, Snarky said:

Soooo....  This is getting to be a regular occurrence.  Answer a recruitment ad for a PUG.  Like the Kahn I just joined.  Wait for 8 to fill and go.  As we go the leader says casually "I'm going to set at +3, maybe +4"  

 

...

 

Me and another person.  "Maybe not a good idea, there are lots of AVs in last mission"  "seen this fail a few times at last mission"  crickets.

 

We grind through it.  Tough team, the last room only went 10-15 minutes....

 

F THIS with a cricket bat....

 

If you are running a F-ing +4 Kahn, advertise it as a +4 Kahn.  Thats all.  Do not make me your F-ing hostage.  If I leave I ruin it for the other 6 who just showed up.  If i stay I take 2-3 times as long to get the merits / badge I wanted.  Did I mention F this with a cricket bat?

 

I never put notes on a player.  I put a note.  +4 Kahn.  I do not run +4 Kahns.  If I see this guy on a team lead I will immediately drop, long before they finish recruiting.  

 

 

But Snarky, the guy said he was going to run it at +3 or +4. If you say 'If you run this at +3 or +4 I'm not doing it' and they insist then you leave. He stated his terms, you state yours.

[Luminara]

8 hours ago, Snarky said:

If I leave I ruin it for the other 6 who just showed up.  If i stay I take 2-3 times as long to get the merits / badge I wanted.

 

This is a video game, not a job.  It's what you do when you're not doing a job.  When any team or content makes it feel like a job, walk away.

[tidge]

Heh. I recently saw folks quit a TF because the PUG-leader was asking for everyone to turn down their difficulty to -1; I'm not exactly sure why this request was made. The PUG-leader was trying to make a case that this was necessary to finish Synapse, which was made all the weirder because the PUG-leader was a full-kit level 50 build that wanted to 'show off' soloing against the Clockwork King.

[Snarky]

3 hours ago, nihilii said:

I think this is the misconception that ruins your experience.

There is nothing magical about having 8 players rather than 5-6 that makes or breaks a +4 TF. On the curve of easier to harder, it becomes harder, sure.

 

But the change from +0 to +4 is a hell of a lot harder than going from 8 players to 6 players.

 

So, once the leader unilaterally announces to run it at +4... You can feel safe in leaving, if you don't like it. He cranked up it three notches, you added one extra.

More importantly, the extra difficulty you introduce by leaving is optional. The leader can change reputation at any point between missions. Or, even if the difficulty only shows up in the last mission (as can be the case in a Kahn), have everyone log out and log back in. It's doable.

 

Nobody is held hostage here. Nor should they feel like they are.

I could sympathise with a different complaint. Namely that, once you're psychologically involved into joining a team, waiting for everyone to gather, then suddenly it turns out to +4... It can feel like the rug has been pulled over you. So you're frustrated, but you stay. Whether because you hope to change the leader's mind, or because of inertia.

 

Still, this is also a self-inflicted problem. If you're worried about +rep TFs, it's not too hard to be proactive and say "so what rep are we running that?" "this is a +0 TF, right?" beforehand.

 

Communication goes both ways. Too many players have this image of their favored playstyle as the baseline, and assume everyone ought to play by their rules. The leader who slams a +4 and the teammate who laments the fact afterwards likely have a lot of common on that precise point.

 

Bottomline... We're all responsible for our play experience. A team leader takes on the drudgery of recruiting and other social aspects, and gets some administration privileges in return. Normal team members can freeload on those social aspects, but may pay the price in having their leader select settings they're not comfortable with. The game is thankfully accomodating. You should never waste your own time doing something you don't like. If you want to leave, leave right away, and don't think you're ruining anyone else's experience.

Wise advice.  Thank you.  I will NOT stay in the future. 

 

I find it amusing that a few of the responders think I do not have good builds or that I do not run hard content.  Maybe I am not a great builder.  So I ask for great builds from the boards lol.  Maybe i am not a leader of hard content.  But I am a great follower.  I take part in a Really Hard Way Magisterium every weekend.  I just do what I'm told, but I take part.  We get the Master Badge every weekend I been doing it as well.  

 

I will run some content at +4.  It makes sense to me to run ITF at +4 kill alls.  People need regular experience, incarnate exp, it is group farming, it is fun.  There is a team that runs +4 ITF Master run, no temps no deaths.  To me this is alien.  Why?  But, they state what they are doing clearly.  I avoid like the plague. Do we say like the Covid now?

 

I see no reason to run a Kahn at +4.  there are no significant extra rewards and the time commitment goes way up.  I do squats three times a week.  They are hard.  There are benefits.  Doing the squats while standing barefoot on sharp gravel would net the same gains.  But why do it?  Because I can? Because it proves something?  I'm mystified.  

 

Thank you everyone for your responses.  (Even the wild ones!) Especially big thanks to those who wisely pointed out I just need to clearly state "You did not advertise this as a plus run, can you run it at +0?  I do not do + runs on this TF"  and then calmly stay or leave depending on how the situation evolves.

 

[Techwright]

14 hours ago, Sovera said:

 

But Snarky, the guy said he was going to run it at +3 or +4. If you say 'If you run this at +3 or +4 I'm not doing it' and they insist then you leave. He stated his terms, you state yours.

True, but in context of Snarky's statement, the lead waited until go to make the declaration. Why is that?  If he was planning it, why not declare it up front in recruitment stage?  Regardless of how Snarky reacts, the lead didn't have the best interests of his team at heart.  It sounds like he was more concerned about a longer recruitment period.   As a player, I appreciate notification of more challenging levels before I join.  It has nothing to do with survival and everything to do with how much time I have budgeted.  

Edited June 4, 2021 by Techwright

[Bill Z Bubba]

4 hours ago, tidge said:

I recently saw folks quit a TF because the PUG-leader was asking for everyone to turn down their difficulty to -1; I'm not exactly sure why this request was made.

 

I suspect it was due to how sometimes the game will frell up the chosen difficulty setting if the team lead isn't in zone before someone hops into the mission. Although, the game drops to +0 when that happens. Some folks do like -1 for speed runs but if that wasn't also part of the deal, I don't know what the leader was thinking.

 

For me, it seems like most problems can usually be avoided if the team lead is fully up front during recruitment. If I'm feeling up to running a PUG ITF, I'll always broadcast Max Diff ITF Kill Most lookin for more. It's when folks start whining halfway through first mission that it's too hard that I get annoyed. Max Diff means +4/x8! If ya can't handle the faceplants, ya should have brought a better build.

[Shred Monkey]

It'd be great if everyone included the difficulty and "speed" vs "kill most" when they advertised their TF.  But I think it's also up to the people joining to make sure they know what they're joining if there's an option that they are 100% opposed to trying.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2021 by Shred Monkey

[tidge]

46 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

I suspect it was due to how sometimes the game will frell up the chosen difficulty setting if the team lead isn't in zone before someone hops into the mission. Although, the game drops to +0 when that happens. Some folks do like -1 for speed runs but if that wasn't also part of the deal, I don't know what the leader was thinking.

 

The more experience players tried to ask what the PUG leader's reasoning was, and he got very snippy... which is why folks dropped. He also had a deep misunderstanding of individual players' settings of spawn sizes would have on the missions. Most of us are aware of the tedious natures of the defeat all missions, but IMO there is no real difference in 0 and -1 as far as getting through those early missions.

 

Synapse is one of the arcs that can be REALLY tedious if run at higher difficulty (because of exemplar effects, including on enhancement bonuses) but there is no real reason to run it at -1 for a team... especially if you want to 'show off' against the King. I've had some pretty wimpy (non-DPS) characters solo the Clockwork King, so it isn't as if that is a particularly noticeable achievement.

[Mr. Vee]

I've seen a bit more lately of things advertised as speed getting a +1 or 2 added after everyone's joined. I'll stick for that, though it'd be nice if they'd been up front about it, but there's just no way on +4 kahn, reichs is enough of a bag of hp as it is. 

A bit off topic but I was under the impression 0 is the base setting of TFs even if you're set -1, yet enough folks have mentioned -1 here that now I'm wondering if it was changed at some point. -1 synapse sounds almost as bad as +4 kahn to me with kd going to kb on the already kb weak bots 😄

[Apparition]

-1 on a TF/SF is impossible.  You can set it, but the game will put it at +0 anyhoo.  FWIW, I run speed runs of level 50 TFs at +2 because I dislike seeing blue and white con mobs.

[siolfir]

6 hours ago, Mr. Vee said:

I've seen a bit more lately of things advertised as speed getting a +1 or 2 added after everyone's joined.

I'm not stating that this is your experience, but I will do this occasionally and my reasoning is that for any 45+ content, I assume for most that +1 is effectively +0 due to the alpha level shift, it's less boring, and if there are objectives involving clearing out crowds I didn't slot my SS Brute with KB->KD and don't really feel like chasing mobs every time I hit them.

 

I "speedrun" Heather's arc in DA at +3 for the same reason - the incarnate shifts actually slow me down with lower level mobs because I have to chase between attacks.

[Mr. Vee]

Yeah it's not any harder really, just unexpected. It's not like a surprise +4 or a surprise kill-all. 

And yeah 4/8 heather objectives only is my go-to nothing's going on and i want half an inc level in 15 minutes kinda thing. Good stuff.

[Ghost]

10 hours ago, Apparition said:

-1 on a TF/SF is impossible.  You can set it, but the game will put it at +0 anyhoo.  FWIW, I run speed runs of level 50 TFs at +2 because I dislike seeing blue and white con mobs.

Fascinating.

I always assumed speed runs were set to +0

[Ironblade]

Once I get past Synapse, I run everything at +1 because the low level content is pretty easy and most people will be level-shifted for the high level content.  The only exception is the Katie Hannon TF because that one cranks up the AV already.

[Apparition]

36 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Fascinating.

I always assumed speed runs were set to +0

 

Most are, but after getting to level 50 and IOed out… seeing blue and white con mobs is just disappointing.  It feels cheap.  So I do speed runs at +2.

[Ukase]

23 hours ago, nihilii said:

I think this is the misconception that ruins your experience.

There is nothing magical about having 8 players rather than 5-6 that makes or breaks a +4 TF. On the curve of easier to harder, it becomes harder, sure.

There are three things that put a player on my naughty list. Deliberately profane character names (No offense, but your name offends me. If that's your cup of tea, probably for the best we don't team up) Political nonsense over chat/discord (if it's politics, it's nonsense) and leaving a tf before it's over. 

That last one. It's a hold over from live, before IOs, back when you looked for specific ATs with specific skill sets. Nowadays, someone leaves, it really doesn't matter as much. But, I still maintain that if you start something, you finish it. And if it's untenable, the team just doesn't have the stuff, you can discuss it openly and see what the team thinks. But you don't quit without that discussion. 

"I don't like a movie, I get up and leave!" kind of mentality goes nowhere with me. How would an MSR look with people taking out the pylons, setting the bombs and killing the GM and then...just leaving? No, that's not proper. 

While I get that if there's a huge misunderstanding, you may want to bail, young Snarky did what was right, even though it was a pain in the crickets? Something like that. 
I don't have a real clear picture of when the team lead said he would bump it to +3, but if it was after the tf started, the fault does lie primarily with the team lead. 

But, this is where we need to remind Snarky that he can always lead a TF himself and control these things. It's quite simple. A headache at times, but sometimes a real hoot. 

[Scarlet Shocker]

Fair comment.

 

Kahn is one of my favourite TFs in game so I will usually try it and hey, what's the worst that can happen? If you fail, then you lost some time playing a game you love anyhow so I try not to worry too much about that.

 

Typically if I'm forming a TF I will consult with the team once we've mostly formed (7 or 8 ) and ask what levels they want. It will usually be higher than lower (I've never been asked to make it -1) but common courtesy (yes, it's still a thing) suggests that you could get your team on board because the clue is in TEAM. 

[Snarky]

4 hours ago, Ukase said:

There are three things that put a player on my naughty list. Deliberately profane character names (No offense, but your name offends me. If that's your cup of tea, probably for the best we don't team up) Political nonsense over chat/discord (if it's politics, it's nonsense) and leaving a tf before it's over. 

That last one. It's a hold over from live, before IOs, back when you looked for specific ATs with specific skill sets. Nowadays, someone leaves, it really doesn't matter as much. But, I still maintain that if you start something, you finish it. And if it's untenable, the team just doesn't have the stuff, you can discuss it openly and see what the team thinks. But you don't quit without that discussion. 

"I don't like a movie, I get up and leave!" kind of mentality goes nowhere with me. How would an MSR look with people taking out the pylons, setting the bombs and killing the GM and then...just leaving? No, that's not proper. 

While I get that if there's a huge misunderstanding, you may want to bail, young Snarky did what was right, even though it was a pain in the crickets? Something like that. 
I don't have a real clear picture of when the team lead said he would bump it to +3, but if it was after the tf started, the fault does lie primarily with the team lead. 

But, this is where we need to remind Snarky that he can always lead a TF himself and control these things. It's quite simple. A headache at times, but sometimes a real hoot. 

Yeah.  I played a long time on live.  This is "our culture"  I still hold resentments from a disintegrated old Positron from years ago...

 

The Team Lead did not mention a dam word about +anything until he was setting the first mission.  Hence the title of this thread.

 

Yes, I know I said I would leave a TF if this happened again.  I will need to train up to that.  I really seriously freaking hate leaving TFs.

 

I try to screen my team choices based on the ads.  When PUGing there is still a large element of rolling the dice if you want to keep hitting objectives.  

i did put a note on this global.  +4 Kahn, succeeded.  I will never knowingly join a TF this person leads again.  In the future I might put a date after the note.  6 months later I might see if they are not being a dick anymore.  I have to learn to start checking and using notes.  I will look on the bright side.  Homecoming is so popular we have a lot of new idiots trying to do something.  Rather than on the downside.  Lot of these people have no idea how to maximize my F-ing enjoyable playtime.  

 

But yes, it will be difficult to quit a TF.  Part of this is sheer branding.  All of my toons are Snark something and this was my main Snarky.  While I am Snarky (trademark, pat. pend.) it is not my intention to grief players.  While I am not a 'great player' (I know great players, they are seriously two to three orders of magnitude better than me) I am a competent player who runs solid characters.  I do not want to "lose face" over a petty incident.  For me being the 1st person to quit a TF is a serious No-no.  Heck I started on Redside Liberty for over 6 months.  Getting ANY team there was rare and a Task Force was a special occasion.  You did not quit unless the house caught fire.  Even then just use an extinguisher and get back before the next mission.  I tried to politely engage the leader and request a lower difficulty, and I specifically only asked for the end mission to be lowered.  There was no response.  If the had become hostile I would have felt there was an easy out. But passive aggressive is a hard wall to play against.  They were going to do what they wanted and screw how any of their team felt about it.  So this person earned a note.  The first I have put on a global and the start of what could be a new way for me to screen the wildness.  Live and learn.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Snarky

[Neiska]

Personally I don't run TFs anymore unless its with friends or people I know. But random ones? Really lost interest for a few reasons.

 

1. Difficulty argument - it might be some want to show off, or get the most drops/money, or have challenging gameplay. But too often people disagree on the difficulty, to the point where its just not worth my time that I could be spending elsewhere. That and I am not here to bare witness to your flexing pixels, sorry.

 

2. The "gogogogo" mentality - some players seem to be in a great big hurry. I have done TFs that I still don't understand the story or mechanics, simply because each and every time it was diving headfirst into everything as fast as possible, without anyone even explaining anything or even having time to read what's going on.  

 

I bare no ill will against anyone personally who plays the above ways, its just not my cup of tea. And its just the common feeling that pug groups often have now. So instead of getting bent out of shape over things outside my control, I simply join TFs on my own terms - namely doing it only with guildmates or friends, if not a full group then at least enough of them that we are the majority. I can't count how many times one person ran off by themselves and went splat, only to rant in group chat, when our thoughts are "well if he ran off, he must know what he's doing and knows he can handle himself."

 

Lastly, an observation from a TF novice - the difficulty slider seems to affect the bosses much more than the trash spawns? I mean, the only difference I notice from +0 to +3 or 4 is time required to clear them, but for the bosses themselves that can mean quite a bit? So is that possibly the point of contention? Some want fast spawns/easy bosses vs harder spawns/harder bosses? 

 

TLDR - I don't do random TFs anymore, often the group interactions make it too unpleasant to be fun.