Lack of confirmation on group teleport

[Mion da Peon]

Got ported out of Clockwork's yesterday before the loot I won could be assigned.  Raid leader looted it and we both petitioned. No luck thus far. Please, put in a confirmation screen on group teleport.  At the very least when exiting raid zones.

[Nakaru-Nitepaw]

Makes sense but how would it be done? Would everyone have to accept a dialog? If 1 person declines then the spell don't cast?

[steelbadger]

Would be quite simple... Cast spell: Everyone gets an option to port, they can accept or decline. No need for EVERYONE to accept to get the port, and messages like that tend to stay up for a minute, so you could simply delay the port. Also: Tinkered Res items don't have a confirmation window either.

[Bakual]

<p>A confirmationbox for a groupteleport could be exploitet in many ways.</p><p>I think a group teleport is supposed to port the whole group (that is close enough) and not only a few that are willing. That's why it's group only and no area. It's supposed that your groupmember doesn't want to griefe you <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>A petition will not yield you anything because it's clearly a problem of communication between the groupmembers and not a technical problem of the game <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Windowlicker]

<p>There's no confirmation on Evac either.</p><p>That being said, I don't think the group ports need a confirmation box.  </p>

[Valdaglerion]

<p>Evacs are meant to happen instantly. I can seem them being exploited where, the moment a fight begins evac occurs and then everyone keeps fighting unless the going gets bad and then they accept the evac to leave before they die, run back to rejoin the fight. </p><p>Sounds like somene in your group got happy fingers when they didnt win the roll for the loot. Nothing to be done about it really. Its not a technical issue so doubt SOE will do anything about it.</p><p>Similar thing happened to me the other night - we got evaced by accident during a ring event. You live, you learn, you laugh and you hope it was an accident. /shrug</p>

[DragonMaster2385]

I don't think evacs should have a confirmation, but wizard ports should.  Also, don't give up hope yet on the petition.  Someone in my guild sold an item on accident (which is clearly not a technical issue) and they fixed it for him.

[sfarugger]

<p>Confirmation on Evac would get more flames that the exploit for group teleport.  </p><p>Templar get a spell that uses an odyssey stone that gates a group member back to their bind point.  This uses a confirmation window.  I'd like to see a group teleport spell have this exact same window.</p><p>However, a window for evac would be bad.  Evac, when used in the proper scenerio is used for a quick escape, not because you are at the end of the zone and too lazy to run back.</p>

[redde]

Zahne@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><p>There's no confirmation on Evac either.</p><p>That being said, I don't think the group ports need a confirmation box.  </p></blockquote> Evac is completely different. You don't want to be fumbling around to click the accept button for that - and it doesn't teleport you out of the zone in most cases either. Single target teleports have a confirm button, why can't a group one? Perhaps I'm not seeing the potential for an exploit here, but I see no problem in having a 10 sec timer for you to confirm teleport, after which it automatically declines for you.

[tass]

lol thats 1 raid person who probably wont get a raid any time soon.

[Windowlicker]

<cite>redders wrote:</cite><blockquote>Evac is completely different. You don't want to be fumbling around to click the accept button for that - and it doesn't teleport you out of the zone in most cases either. </blockquote> Right, but there are a number of things in this game that can be done to a character without a confirmation box.  How about SK's and company being able to Feign people? I can't count how many times that's pulled me off my mount, or screwed up a vital pull in a raid.  Maybe we should add a confirmation box to that too? Heck, lets add confirmation boxes to everything! I'm sorry, but the second you add a confirmation box to group ports .. you'll have just as many people complaining in the forums every time they click "No" by accident and get left behind when the group ports out. Bad idea all around, sorry.

[redde]

Zahne@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><cite>redders wrote:</cite><blockquote>Evac is completely different. You don't want to be fumbling around to click the accept button for that - and it doesn't teleport you out of the zone in most cases either. </blockquote> Right, but there are a number of things in this game that can be done to a character without a confirmation box.  How about SK's and company being able to Feign people? I can't count how many times that's pulled me off my mount, or screwed up a vital pull in a raid.  Maybe we should add a confirmation box to that too? Heck, lets add confirmation boxes to everything! I'm sorry, but the second you add a confirmation box to group ports .. you'll have just as many people complaining in the forums every time they click "No" by accident and get left behind when the group ports out. Bad idea all around, sorry. </blockquote>The FD is very similar to the evac. If you had to click accept , you would lose time and it would remove half the point of the FD itself.  All those in-combat things are similar - timing matters. It would be dumb to add confirm boxes to those. If people click "no" accidentally when they are being ported, they missed it. There is a confirmation box on the no-trade loot. People just get used to it. When you're presented with a yes/no option you either know its coming so you know what to click, or you read it and then decide. Complaining in the forum that you clicked the wrong button when your group ported out would take a hell of a lot longer than it would to run to wherever you were trying to get to. And that's all it is - transportation. I really don't understand your opposition to this Zhane.. Just because I have to confirm a port doesn't mean I want to confirm anything else..

[Windowlicker]

<cite>redders wrote:</cite><blockquote>Zahne@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><cite>redders wrote:</cite><blockquote>Evac is completely different. You don't want to be fumbling around to click the accept button for that - and it doesn't teleport you out of the zone in most cases either. </blockquote> Right, but there are a number of things in this game that can be done to a character without a confirmation box.  How about SK's and company being able to Feign people? I can't count how many times that's pulled me off my mount, or screwed up a vital pull in a raid.  Maybe we should add a confirmation box to that too? Heck, lets add confirmation boxes to everything! I'm sorry, but the second you add a confirmation box to group ports .. you'll have just as many people complaining in the forums every time they click "No" by accident and get left behind when the group ports out. Bad idea all around, sorry. </blockquote>The FD is very similar to the evac. If you had to click accept , you would lose time and it would remove half the point of the FD itself.  All those in-combat things are similar - timing matters. It would be dumb to add confirm boxes to those. If people click "no" accidentally when they are being ported, they missed it. There is a confirmation box on the no-trade loot. People just get used to it. When you're presented with a yes/no option you either know its coming so you know what to click, or you read it and then decide. Complaining in the forum that you clicked the wrong button when your group ported out would take a hell of a lot longer than it would to run to wherever you were trying to get to. And that's all it is - transportation. I really don't understand your opposition to this Zhane.. Just because I have to confirm a port doesn't mean I want to confirm anything else.. </blockquote> Well, they added a confirmation box when you loot no-trade items and people *still* do it.  I'm sorry but I don't think this has any value as an addition to the game. Personally I need it like this almost every single time I use my ports to ensure everyone is moved.  When you port a full group, you can almost always be sure at least one person is afk. To put it bluntly, there are far more concerning things the developers need to address right now.

[zixtent]

If someone does not want to be ported all they have to say is hey wait a sec. The porter can back up and it will cancel out the port because it interrupts the spell. I don't think a group port should have a confirm box on it either. Before I port I ask if everyone wants one. Yeah a raid is a little more difficult but I am sure if it is about loot someone will speak up.

[redde]

Tulula@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote>If someone does not want to be ported all they have to say is hey wait a sec. The porter can back up and it will cancel out the port because it interrupts the spell. I don't think a group port should have a confirm box on it either. Before I port I ask if everyone wants one. Yeah a raid is a little more difficult but I am sure if it is about loot someone will speak up.</blockquote>Assuming the socerer gives warning. The OP was not at fault here, it was the guy who ported him. All he's saying is allow people to have the right to control their own travel. Yes there are more important things to add to the game, but that is no reason to say it wouldn't be a good feature. The fact that people still roll on no trade loot is irrelivant - there are always people who don't pay attention and try to set the record for most number of clicks in a minute, but I'm sure that if you compared the number of no-trade items won by 'the wrong' person now, and before they implimented the confirm box, you would see a dramatic drop. Same story here.

[erin]

<cite>redders wrote:</cite><blockquote>Tulula@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote>If someone does not want to be ported all they have to say is hey wait a sec. The porter can back up and it will cancel out the port because it interrupts the spell. I don't think a group port should have a confirm box on it either. Before I port I ask if everyone wants one. Yeah a raid is a little more difficult but I am sure if it is about loot someone will speak up.</blockquote>Assuming the socerer gives warning. The OP was not at fault here, it was the guy who ported him. All he's saying is allow people to have the right to control their own travel. Yes there are more important things to add to the game, but that is no reason to say it wouldn't be a good feature. The fact that people still roll on no trade loot is irrelivant - there are always people who don't pay attention and try to set the record for most number of clicks in a minute, but I'm sure that if you compared the number of no-trade items won by 'the wrong' person now, and before they implimented the confirm box, you would see a dramatic drop. Same story here. </blockquote>Yes there are always people who don't pay attention, as in the OPs case, the guy that ported him wasn't paying attention.  Or acted maliciously.  One or the other right? And these people will always exist.  We've now got confirm buttons on tons of stuff because of these people.  Lets not keep adding more, in order to protect us from idiots, please. If you group with an idiot, these things will happen.  Stop grouping with people like that. Next we'll want a confirm button before leaving a zone on lockout.  Oh wait... yeah got that. Then we'll need a confirm button for rezzing... oh wait got that, because there were a handful of incidents of griefing, so lets add a confirm button for the entire population. Next?  Confirm for every loot?  Confirm for every zoning?  Confirm for evac? I feel its up to me to choose my groupmates wisely, I don't need to be wrapped in bubble wrap with all these protections against idiots.

[nookin]

Confirmation on Druid Portals, please.

[Mion da Peon]

There is already a confirmation box that asks you if you want to zone out of a raidzone after the timer is set. Ports should have been included in this feature when it was implemented imho.  I see this request as more of a bug fix than "another feature".