It took over a year for them to do this?

Been playing since day one and right around the end of 2016 I stoped playing. The whole having people ditch out on matches was always a huge problem not just in Multiplayer but in story to. Me and my friend always hoped they would institute the same punishment that was handed to people leaving Multiplayer was given to story mode leavers. But after about 8 months we figured it would never happen. The past month I came back to polish of DLC Character lore. Shortly after starting a story mission i had to run out for a few minutes. I decided to quit the match so the players wouldn’t get locked behind shard pads with an afk. I wasn’t gone long when I came back i was informed I couldn’t do anything but rejoin said story mission… why did that take so gawd darn long Gearbox?

That was around before the end of 2016…but if they don’t try to join anything or they join another players lobby they can get around it

3 Likes

Didn’t even know it was a thing.

I don’t play certain story missions and will just leave if people vote for the ones that I hate. Granted, that was back in late 2016, given that PvEers just play on private to ensure that they play the ones they want nowadays, and the other way to go around it is if a full party turns into a 2 man, people will just quit afterwards since 2 man is boring as hell.

If no one is playing in the server, the game is deleted, therefore any punishment attempted is nulled.

I don’t even see the point to try to reinforce restrictions with PvE. The game’s technical issues is more than capable to disencourage anyone from multiple attempts. Any more restrictions is redundant.

1 Like

Starting PvE with 3+ players and then having people quit out is a huge problem because the enemy difficulty doesn’t scale to the new (lower) number of players. Once the match is set up server side, that’s it.

Forcing people to jump back in to the PvE match is both good and bad depending on what kind of player they are. As long as they aren’t an ■■■■■■■ who’s jumping off the ledge and wasting the pool of lives, even a bad player is an asset.

You kinda strengthened my position.

There is no point in adding layers of punishment to PvE, such as forcing players back to the same map they just bailed from, since if the now 2 man, formerly 5, faces a number of mobs meant for 5 players, then they get brutally slaughtered so the game ends or they will just quit themselves to save time.

And the players that quit can just join in another private party to erase their dungeon ID, or whatever it is called, to play another match.

Basically, there are simply many existing methods and circumstance that could eliminate any penalty.

But such limitations and lack of robust and fluidity is due to how GBX decided to make their game always online without drop in and drop out situations. This is a crippling design flaw that magnifies when there is a low player base or server stability falters.

For PC users, you need Steam, GBX servers, and your own ISP to be working at all times in order to have your progreys recorded. And none of these 3 things are a guarantee all the time. And this did not factor in power failures and weather conditions. You want to know how many times games didn’t end up going anywhere because one of the three malfunctioned?

I’ve has friends delete this game due to this. Even solo PvE and Private Versus is affected. It’s not like GBX doesn’t know how to make offline games, just look at ALL Borderlands games, but no, they had to do this to Battleborn, and it really hurt the overall experience when there are already hundreds of other existing problems.

Is there a point to add in any punishment when there are already more than enough obstacles to discourage people from playing?

I mean, assuming you can actually finish your match that is.

1 Like

It should actually. While the number of existing enemies doesnt change, their health changes appropriately if people die on hardcore or dc. and all future spawns should be affected so their numbers are appropriate.

I had to get 4 people to help me test this in february i think it was. and while its possible they changed it, i highly doubt it.

so while the extra numbers of enemies can be overwhelming if theyre gone right after a huge spawn, they do weaken as soon as the player cpunt drops :slight_smile:

I never tested it but from experience (almost 700 missions completed), I never struggled more to finish a mission after players left. I’m tempted to say that it does scale.

This is a rumor debunked more than a year ago by devs themselves. Why is this still a thing?

oh cool, didnt know

It’s still a thing because I’m not paying attention to the enemy’s health, I’m just keeping track of who has to die still.
I’ve never noticed a difference honestly.

I’ve never had any problem with people disconnecting and I played PVE a lot. It’s hard for me to imagine a situation where difficulty rises after somebody disconnects, especially if you take in account difficulty curve (2-3-men missions are easiest, followed by solo and 4-men, with 5-men missions being hardest).

It’s probably when you’re matched with several weak players and one good player and he leaves.