Score limit decrease when people leave

[Melongod]

My proposed solution is that when a player leaves, the score limit is decreased by a fraction (x) of the starting score (s), minus the winning teams current score (w). And x=1/(number of players on the losing team + 1). Score limit = s-x*(s-w) And this occurs every time a player from the losing team leaves.

What this achieves is that the earlier a player leaves, the more time is saved and the more players that leave, the more time is saved.

[carlosrpg]

exploitable I think. Someone could just DC on the winning team to make them win quickly

[imaGecko]

it does say players on the losing team

[Haganeko]

Plus, it doesn't eliminate the problem of long, dead games, just mitigates it. It also apparently requires us to differentiate both teams' kill limits, which only adds confusion to an already complicated proposal.

[imaGecko]

mitigation is elimination for this kind of issue

[Haganeko]

It is not. You'll still have to spend a long time playing those games. Just not as long.

[imaGecko]

long time not as long

[Haganeko]

Yeah. If before you had to spend an hour being miserable, now it's only twenty minutes! Great!

[Melongod]

this is SEPARATE to the StL system.

[Haganeko]

If the StL system is implemented then this is unnecessary, no? It looks to me like an alternative to it.

[imaGecko]

"Yeah. If before you had to spend an hour being miserable, now it's only twenty minutes! Great!" Thanks for confirming that it works.

[Haganeko]

It mitigates the problem. Proper StL mechanics will solve it, by reducing the miserable time to zero.

[Melongod]

This works in conjunction with my proposed StL

[Haganeko]

Sixteen points left means sixteen bosses. Sixteen bosses you need to kill instead of the game just declaring itself over so you can move on.

[Melongod]

I see no problem with that. 16 score is not hard to achieve that early in the game.

[Melongod]

In the case that the last person on the losing team wants to play it out, they actually have a practical chance to.

[l34Um1]

You still havent answered the question why we need this if we have slt

[Melongod]

Teams with people who have abandoned occasionally still win. I speak from personal experience, Chris and i often win games where people on our team leave. Having the score limit decrease makes it possible for people to stay and play it out IF THEY WANT TO. but with the stl that i proposed, no-one has to stay if they dont want to. in fact it encourages them to leave.

[Haganeko]

Having MMR still on the table does not encourage people to leave, it encourages them to stay. Which is your objective - you want to make it possible, viable and rewarding to stay and try to turn the tide. Encouraging people to leave is ending the game or making it clear to them they can't win (which is something we should only do when, well, they can't win).

[l34Um1]

" I speak from personal experience, Chris and i often win games where people on our team leave."

This is a stupid argument, stop making it. The game is 5v5.

[Melongod]

Answer this then. What happens if people flat out refuse to leave when they are the last player remaining on a team?

[l34Um1]

Play it out or leave. Read my suggestion for stl.

[Melongod]

You CAN'T just play it out without lowering the score limit. It just drags the game out for FAR too long.

[l34Um1]

Read my suggestion for stl

[Melongod]

which can be seen where?

[Haganeko]

Implementation issue is up. Closed.