Penalty to players that quit in the middle of a game

It really pisses me that after a 2 hours game in a 4vs4 war, some guy decide that he's not going to win so he quits leaving his team in disadvantage plus leaving his oponent frustrated.

The game needs something like penalty points with real punishment to those kind of players. It doesn't need to be mandatory to all games, but maybe an option to the game creator.

I agree this is frustrating. There was a discussion about this some time ago, and the consensus was the loss of SP (from surrendering either 1/2, or none if abandoning) was enough of a deterrent. Now also you can refuse to rep the person. I dont think its necessary to punish them further, and if they do it constantly they will get a reputation and no one will play with them.

Yeah it isnt really a big problem, just a slight loss of sp for the winning person

It's still annoying as hell... Not getting rep is not really some punishment, and statistics doesn't mean anything...

At least you could do is to put on profile how many games that player left, otherwise won/lost ratio doesnt mean much.

If it means nothing, why do you want to punish people which leave harder? They don't get SP if they do it, even for a long game, and you get your win in every case. They could surrender as well, what would be the difference for you? Again it would be 4vs3, but the player gets a loss in his win/loss ratio. You wrote statistics doesn't mean anything and since a loss in the statistics is the only difference to surrendering you contradict yourself.
So finally do you really need this loss in your opponents w/l ratio to push your ego? Mind again: Your opponent could also surrender, but he gets half of SP then and the only difference is the loss.
Sry guys, but your arguments are beyond absurdity.

No, i meant BECAUSE OF LEAVING statistics doesn't mean anything. For example, someone has 300 wins and 50 lost games, but he actually left another 200 games so statistic in that case is not correct. What's the point of statistics if it ain't correct?
And that thing about ego, i can just lol at it...

Statistics wouldn't mean anything, even if leaving games would be forbidden. You can never know if a game was lost because the opponents spam allied, who was the enemy (was it a top player or just a noob), did somebody have disconnects. If I play 100 games against rank 4s and win all of them, who would care about this wins? But I would have a "cool" w/l ratio.
If you're a good player, you will win your games. Whoever cares about the w/l ratio has a serious problem with his self confidence and is probably not one of the top-players. It's the same type of players which keeps complaning about turn-blocking, because the search a reason why they're not good in this game, despite the fact that they play 24/7.

I agree that statistics can vary, and that every game counts as its own but it would be still be more fair if leaving a game counts as a loss, right?
Btw, are you implying on me with that last sentence lol?

I imply that players who have seriously the opinion that w/l ratio is important are often exactly the same guys who spam-ally in a game, fight a single player and if this player finally leave the game because it was obviously an unfair game they start calling him a coward or create whine threads about game abandoning in the forum.
As I said before: If you know that you won a FAIR game or even a game where you fought multiple players and your opponents finally leave, you also know that you won the game. And if your opponents know that the game was fair, too, then they also know about the fact they lost. So why caring about w/l ratio since it's finally not accurate, even if abondining would be forbidden?

No, it wouldn't be fairer if leaving would count as loosing, since if you leave an unfair game your opponent gets a win but you keep your ratio + you and your opponents know that the game was unfair.. On the opposite: If you won a fair game and your opponent left you still get your win and the knowledge that you beat your opponent.

And here is the point where I imply that loosers project their knowledge of being bad onto players which left their so called "fair games".
In the end w/l ratio is so unbelievable unimportant and will never reflect a players real skills. You don't get a name by your ratio but by beating good players and playing good games, being nice to others and trying your best to improve this game.

That's what I imply.

Not getting rep is a severe punishment. : (

This idea is absolutely retarded.

What if someone has to go to bed, dinner or jus tgo out for no reason. Why should they lose the game? I often have to go unexpectedly and I would hate losing because of that.

Kirjoittanut KYBL, 10.01.2012 at 06:46

This idea is absolutely retarded.

What if someone has to go to bed, dinner or jus tgo out for no reason. Why should they lose the game? I often have to go unexpectedly and I would hate losing because of that.

This thread is frickin' ancient...

Kirjoittanut Caulerpa, 10.09.2011 at 04:56

and statistics doesn't mean anything...

otherwise won/lost ratio doesnt mean much.

aristo needs to see this