On quitting when you know you've lost in a team game

Don’t. Of all the selfish crap you can do. What is with this idea that you have to win in order to have fun. If you are in a team game, do not quit. Every minute you survive is another minute your ally only has 1 enemy to fight instead of 2 and a chance for him to save you. If you can’t handle this level of respect for fellow gamers, don’t join team games.

If you’re in a 1v1 fine, quit, I think this is lame also that folks don’t see this as an oprotunity to look around and enjoy the scenery as the remainder of your fleet is destroyed, or strike up a conversation with the like minded gamer you just battled to discuss the battle you just had and learn from it. But whatever.

1 Like

The RTS with the most lively MP scene these days is probably Starcraft 2, and over there it’s considered relatively rude to stick around past the point of defeat. The sense is that you’re wasting everyone’s time then. Obviously the dynamic is a bit different for team games, but I wouldn’t be surprised if some of this was bleedover from that.

Yes but doesn’t this usually come after the offence ‘gg’? But I get that in a game as refined and old as SC, people are looking to win and move on. There are a lot of new players in HWR, and the lack of a lobby means in game is about the only place contextual dialog can take place.

Regardless of that, if you are in s team game you shouldn’t quit the moment it looks like you are going to lose. To win is fun, but to come back from near death, or to save an ally is magical.

Everyone playing the MP beta is playing with their Spark account connected - you had to create one to use it. I keep thinking that it we added something to rank those matches and provide a score, we could maybe track a ladder.

There’d need to be some way to specify that a game was a ladder one as well.

I haven’t thought much about the logic behind a ladder - any thoughts?

3 Likes

Did you post this in the wrong thread? Snow was talking about a ladder in the MP lobby thread. Sorry dude, gonna have to report you to the mods for being off topic. :smiling_imp:

1 Like

Well, I meant to bring it around to the whole ‘rage quit’ thing - saying that the ladder logic could award points for winning based on the relative ‘score’ in that game at the time of the quit, halved due to the early exit. Doh.

4 Likes

Yes, this was the case in many glorious games of old. People used to play to the very end and it was satisfying. I think it’s a sign of the times that a lot more people quit and leave when they think they are going to lose.

Perhaps they are just trying to save some time and move onto another game? Who knows. As a players of old, it’s probably easier for us to recognize when a game is truly over than some of the newer players.

Hopefully, that will change over time.

1 Like

Can you provide us some detail on what you’re collecting (if anything) on your/steams end? The end game stats already have an interesting sue fife the in terms of units built vs units destroyed. As a HW race player I typically have 200 + units built and lose 150 of them, where the HW2 races build 40 and lose 30.

Barking Dog tried an in game ladder. It didn’t work well.

It’s just a thought - and it isn’t what we have (which isn’t my area, so I am not sure - I think stuff like game start/end stats, race, etc - pretty basic stuff), it’s that we could add intelligent tracking to enable ladders. It wouldn’t be my task, but I keep thinking it would be interesting.

2 Likes

An elo system with ranks would be a good start in my opinion.

Ranking would be useful I think, even if the game isn’t currently populace enough to do full blizzard-style matchmaking-laddering

Some of the best games I have ever played were losses in HW2. I’ve also played in games where defeat was 99% only to be saved by a team mate and go on for the win. In HW, you just don’t know until the fat lady is on stage singing away.

Check out Quake Live ELO - the points awarded or lost are weighted against the score differential.

http://www.qlranks.com/

The only problem is tracking team games fairly because there is no separate team play score and the fact one is punished severely for losing to a much lower ranked player which may be an issue unless there is a max points one can lose.

This is fair in principle but in practice someone who is at your skill level just joining the ladder (much lower skill level as far as elo score is concerned), or playing on a weaker team you simply can’t carry will cause you to drop significantly.

Some of the features:

Win vs higher score - the larger the gap the more points you get
Win vs lower score - minimal +1 to 5 elo or none at all
Win vs much lower score = -1 elo
Loss - always -elo based on score differential

Don’t know exact formulas.

1 Like