In many matchs played with the team, often, if not in every game, a player leaves the game. This happens after a very short time of the game, almost always in non-compromised situations (firepluk docet). This behavior creates problems for the rest of the team, compromising the game and the result thereof. Said behavior then leads to an Elo loss attributable directly to the player who left the game. This is not justifiable in any way. Therefore it would be right to apply a penalty equal to 100% of elo loss more than the players who continue to play properly. For example, if the losing team consists of 4 players "A, B, C, D" and altogether has lost 24 elo points, each player with the current system loses 6 elo points each, while with the system that I suggest, if the player who resigned the game, creating problems to the rest of the team is to not only lose 6 elo points, but 6 + 6 (100% more) = 12 elo points in total. This way is credited to the players remaining in the game, not to spoil the game and the fun also to the opposing team.
+0 / -0
|
Low elo gives players easier matches. There are people who would exploit this rule to lower their elo. In fact, the people who resign early probably care less about having high elo than other people.
+5 / -0
|
Other games tend to punish leavers by having an automatic exponential time out after said player leaves the game. The more times this player leaves the more he has to wait to be able to play again. There are other punishments too like for example Dota 2 locks you into one game mode with low matchmaking priority which essentially means that you are going to be playing with other leavers. If you win a game then you can play normally again. If the abandoned game count stacks and you get reported a bunch then you get temporarly banned.
+2 / -0
|
This is not the problem. I do not care what he thinks anyone who leaves the game and why. the fact remains that ruins the game. In many of steam games, this behavior is punished severely, because spoils the fun of teammates and opponents. For example in Dota, steam game, it is a game that is played by thousands of players in the world, where this behavior is not acceptable, and is punishable by a suspension of access to the normal games for 2 to 5 days or more , depending on whether an occasional behavior or applicant. (It is clear that the loss of connection does not matter if the player reconnects within a certain time). here Elo has nothing to do. Growth in the interest of the popularity of the game, besides its beauty, is in the seriousness of the rules that the player knows when a game starts. No matter the strategy of those who leave us a game, who goes out and leads to harm this must be penalized. "Dura lex sed Lex" the Romans said and rightly so. The proposal of the decrease of the ELO is cited as a form of punishment, since there already a few players you can not afford to suspend some :)
+0 / -0
|
I do not think that the exact solution is report the player to leave , but the program should automatically do it in the moment that you push the " resign " button , and when the game ends subtract its Elo rating to those who have left the game . It is not sympathetic to report others :)
+0 / -0
|
I'm not disagreeing that there is a problem, just that elo is not the right punishment because it does basically nothing. A short automatic ban sounds feasible and seems to be the most common solution. So I guess the discussion is really about whether it is a good idea to implement it.
+3 / -0
|
I'm sorry but I disagree . if a game should please everyone , everyone needs to be on the same floor , same rights . it would be appropriate to apply both the ban and reduction methods elo . I repeat , it is less burdensome for those who remain in the game to know not to lose the same elo points of those who created the problem . since those who resigned is almost always a strong player , losing in the example I've done before 12 points is not a big deal , but reduces the elo loss of teammates . primarily a reward for those who do not ruin the fun of the opponents. Very often I see 12 specs and a few players , in my opinion this incentive to play more. Thanks for your attention.
+0 / -0
|
alternatively you could suspend the decrease in the elo rating applied to the team that has suffered neglect in addition ban the player . It is not fair that others pay for those who leave , because now it has become a custom of many players
+0 / -0
|
Currently there is not system to even detect who quits early, for example    bamn1 has a 100% "stay until the end" rate. How would you differentiate between AFK, Quits and Crashes? What about people who afk whole game but move their mouse once at the end of the game?
+0 / -0
|
Elo loss is unquestionably a reward for the player that abandons the game. Lower elo means that said player will be balanced as if he was less skilled thus giving him a higher probability of winning since he gets matched with worse players. Do you really want to encourage throwing matches? Because that would be one way to do it. The people who usually in fact care a lot about elo don't resign on their own since they still see a chance of winning (even if it is dim). quote:
How would you differentiate between AFK, Quits and Crashes? |
You don't. Thats why one abandon per 10 games is justified in DoTA 2 and even if someone disconects they still have 3 minutes to rejoin until the game is considered as abandoned for the player. quote:
For example in Dota, steam game, it is a game that is played by thousands of players in the world, where this behavior is not acceptable, and is punishable by a suspension of access to the normal games for 2 to 5 days or more , depending on whether an occasional behavior or applicant. (It is clear that the loss of connection does not matter if the player reconnects within a certain time). |
Untrue and I already spoken of that in the previous post: abandoning is acceptable if it is sporadic.
+2 / -0
|
ok . It will not be the appropriate solution. I think that perhaps says googlefrog both the player's ban That resigned . if a player is afk for 2 min is no problem if it is not reconnects more . the same if the game crashes , you can reconnect . It can give a time after which the ban is applied , as in Dota2
+1 / -0
|
Make an "inverted elo rukes" punishment. U gain elo for losing, and lose for winning a game. You want an easier game? U need to fucking win! Oh, and remove punished players from ladders, cuz 20k elo. Or, "elo inflation". Punished player has their elo loss on lost game shrinken by a certain percentage for every pre-resigned game.
+1 / -0
|
Winning also gives you elo. Thus giving elo as a punishment also granting elo you only will make people who care about elo resign prematurely all the time to farm it. Or even worse. Elo as will literally lose its value thus making the games unbalanced to the extreme.
+0 / -0
|
if u gonna punish early resign, are you gonna punish late resign (for letting 20players pointless wait for example) also? just keep in mind this is a game, for fun
+0 / -0
|
If what they want is to loose elo, then the punishment is to keep their elo the same if either afk, not connected, resign or kicked. For computing the elo of the other players when the game finished, the "bad" player elo should not be taken into account. (so, if you win a game when one was afk, he keeps his elo and his team mates get more elo or loose less elo)
+0 / -0
|
The problem isn't caused by ELO and the solution can't be achieved by screwing with ELO. The problem is the balancer putting highly skilled player together with nabs. This can only be avoided by not balancing games (=roflstomps every round) or using a matchmaker. Higher ELO players will be paired with other high ELO players and get rewarded for their skill by getting challenging enemies instead of challenging teammates. So please, use  if you don't want to be paired with newbies all the time.
+2 / -0
|
If you think you found something where ELO is at fault, go here to discuss your improvements. Better metrics are always appreciated.
+0 / -0
|
No,i not think must punish late resign. it does not make sense. The game was compromised . According to me it is just eliminated the possibility to resign . Except in cases of match 1 v 1 , as it happens in chess. And except the vote of all the players who make up the team , or the majority of them. In Dota 2 AND OTHER GAMES YOU CAN NOT RESIGN. IT WOULD NOT MAKE SENSE. Excuse my English . But I think it is too focused on sull'Elo speech. The reference was to the criminalization of the behavior itself . It ' true that what concerns him , but what interested me was to see that the fun in 50% of matches vanishes when you are reduced to playing with one or two players less , not the end but the beginning of the match . Even for the opposing team it is not fun to win that way . The other night I played a game against five opponents , including me of my team 4. After 5 min, 1 player has resigned and we have played 3 on 5. It ' was fun for opponents ? I do not think so as it has been for us. What I ask is that there is the rule " if you decide to play , play to the end" , if you win is if you lose .
+0 / -0
|
quote:
In Dota 2 AND OTHER GAMES YOU CAN NOT RESIGN. IT WOULD NOT MAKE SENSE. |
 You sure? I can find more screenshots from different games. Except that in the many games you are able to resign, just not individually. Well... inactivity is a sort of a resign method and so is exiting the game prematurely.
+3 / -0
|
quote:
The people who usually in fact care a lot about elo don't resign on their own since they still see a chance of winning (even if it is dim). |
I don't care much for elo yet I usually stay until the end (or until I feel that the game is unrecoverable/unfun). I personally can see why early resignation is annoying. That being said, I think there should be a way to mechanically/culturally discourage people from resigning early. Such as putting marks on people who leave 10-15 minutes before a match offically concludes (or the first two to resign if 1 person continues to play 10-15 minutes past everyone else). People with 3 marks will get a 5 minute game ban with each mark afterwards adding 5 minutes to the ban. Each mark deteriorates after THREE matches of team games (that did not end up adding a mark to a player's account). This would only affect the TEAMS game type (and not the custom game type). Such a mark would show up as "DISHONORABLE ALLY" (With time remaining) and autospec them from all team type games (except their own). This means if Sfire decides to resign early 7 times, under this system he would have a 20 minute block from all team games and would need to play 21 games to clear the marks.
+0 / -0
|
