Does anyone happen to know how the mechanic of throwing resigned/AFK units to the highest rated player came to be? Did anyone ask for this? It's so tiring experiencing this every game, and I'm just wondering why this exists? How is this in any way good design? How many complaints does it take until it's considered a mistake?

A player resigns, therefore I am expected to manage two different sides of the map, because I am the highest rated player? How does that follow? At the most basic level, as the highest rated player on the team I am already expected to exert the most effort out of anyone else on my team to achieve a win. So how does it follow that I should be expected to double my exertion due to a solo resign out of my control?

It really doesn't matter if they're put on Wait or anything, as the fact that it happens at all just kills my focus, as not only do I have to address the front in front of me, but I also have to just suddenly address a new front on the other side of the map. It takes times and focus, off of my own front, to assess what to do with this new front "gifted" to me. "What exactly has been given to me? What is it capable of? How is this front looking? Is there anything I could or should do with it? Maybe I could give it to someone else? Which players are nearby? Out of those nearby, who would be most capable of taking care of it?" These questions are not exactly trivial, especially on top of managing my own front, and they're often asked multiple times a match due to intermittent AFKs or multiple people resigning by themselves.

If I want them, I'll /take them out of my own will. Why force anyone to take anything?

quote: the highest rated player on a team is arguably the best player to receive the units

I never argued for anyone to receive units.

quote: A lower ranked player doesn't have anymore focus than any highest ranked players, and in fact they probably almost always have much less. I know that I struggle a lot with keeping track of many different things at once, and I am sure you could do much better than I could.

I don't see how any of this is relevant to what I'm saying.

quote: I never argued for anyone to receive units.

quote: A player resigns, therefore I am expected to manage two different sides of the map, because I am the highest rated player? How does that follow?

To me that sounds like you were confused why you had to be the person to get the units, if that's not what you meant to say then sorry, I misunderstood.

quote: I don't see how any of this is relevant to what I'm saying.

You were saying how you were getting your focus killed, I was saying that your focus is/should be better than everyone else's focus, because I was trying to say that there aren't any other players that it would be better to hand off units to (which I was saying because of the possible misunderstanding above), and I think we agree that there should be some kind of "/take" system, however that will work.

There is a simple solution. If there are units you don't want or can't manage, choose a player near them you can trust and give them to him. So in my view this mechanism does makes sense since the top player should have the best judgement as to what to do with those units - how to use or whom to give.

I'm confused too, since after cabinboy downvoted my suggestion above, we played this game:

https://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/1425839

Unfortunately, we had 4 afkers/solo-resigners, and cabinboy gave me all their units (first time ever such thing happens). I suppose it was intended somehow to disprove my suggestion, to show me that it wouldn't work. But it doesn't make sense because I suggested to distribute units wisely, to the closest player etc., not to someone that you are angry at, or "want to teach a lesson".

Anyways, this seems to be a part of a broader issue of an internal conflict of some high-ranked casual players about their place in team games.

quote: Unfortunately, we had 4 afkers/solo-resigners, and cabinboy gave me all their units (first time ever such thing happens). I suppose it was intended somehow to disprove my suggestion, to show me that it wouldn't work. But it doesn't make sense because I suggested to distribute units wisely, to the closest player etc., not to someone that you are angry at, or "want to teach a lesson".

I'll admit that I was miffed, but regardless of my miffed-dom, let's look at this game you linked:

* The_Amazing_Player goes MIA at the start of the game. The closest player is rollmops. I give him the commander.



* Logikfreak goes MIA at 16 minutes. The closest player is rollmops. I give him these new units. Technically there was also the spider player, but you might be able to tell from the screenshot why I wouldn't trust them with planes.



* RincewardWizard goes MIA at 29 minutes. The closest player is me, on the far east side of the map, but it doesn't matter as all of his units got nuked, so nothing was gifted anyway.
* lolkek333 goes MIA at 31 minutes. What's left of his units is adjacent to mine. I keep them, but at that moment I did not have the attention to spare to make sense of what he had, so they lied dormant. Around this point it seems I had two strider hubs at the same location, having not noticed being given the second one, as my attention is on the front.

* SoggyWOTSIT goes MIA at 33 minutes. The closest player is rollmops. I give him these new units.



* [tre]pak goes MIA at the end of the game with nothing but two fusions, a solar, a lotus, and an unfinished detri. It really didn't matter who I gave it to at this point, but I will say I did give it to the second closest player rollmops rather than the closest player (Hougo).

In the timeframe of the game that mattered, you were given units sourced from three players, all three of them closest to you, one of them only a commander, which coincides with what you suggested a high-ranked player should do with these units.

If this alone was a problem for you, then please keep in mind I experienced the same spam to a greater degree in that same match, as very high-ranked players experience this almost every time they play lobpot, often with units on the other side of the map, without any prior notice, despite already having great responsibilities. Not like there was any griefing or poor performance from me, especially as by the end of the game my Value Killed and APM were the highest of the team (the latter surprises me as I mostly played with striders), all it was was giving away units given to me by MIA players.

But yes, as I was a bit miffed, there was something I wanted to teach here.

GOING AFK TOO MUCH SHOULD HAVE A CONSEQUENCE !

RESIGN SHOULD ONLY BE A TEAM VOTE IN LOB POT !

WHEN I PLAN TO PLAY A GAME I ALLWAYS MAKE SURE I HAVE A HOUR FREE TO PLAY...

cabinboy: I admit when I wrote originally "there is a simple solution", the word "simple" is unsuitable. I meant, it may simplify things for you. In that game I indeed was a bit overwhelmed, but managed to do useful things with most of the stuff I received, such as building eco and nuke, scouting with the received air and founding that the enemy has trinity, reclaiming unneeded stuff etc. If it was bigger team/map so I would receive stuff, say, from one afker, I think I would be totally ok with it. Regardless, I think your BA-like suggestion is better. But while that solution needs some dev approvement and work, my suggestion may help you right now, so you are invited to give me from time to time some stuff you receive :)


If this discussion is going to have its own topic in the forum, I have a title for it: "The Purple Man's Burden"

Team mates going AFK is more of a multiplayer problem than an RTS problem. I think ownership of AFK players should go to people with similar or lower skill/army value/overall performance, as higher skilled players probably have their own plans and units and won't bother picking up after someone else.

Other games (like FPS) also allow outsiders to join in and replace missing team mates. Maybe people that haven't spectated should be randomly asked to replace a resigning team mate.

Also yes, I did go MIA at the start. Sorry.

^ I agree taking specific units would be better than all-or-nothing, and it should be discoverable.

How about making AFK units selectable and putting the Take button in the command panel when they're selected? (This would be the only button)

[Spoiler]