Logical fallacy of punishing WZ quitters - It will hurt more than help

[SWImara]

Punishment for leaving a warzone makes sense, there might be better solutions but this one is totally reasonable.

 

Yes perhaps some will AFK or otherwise grief their team once they decide the match isn't worth it. But there are always a few ********s in PUGs, I doubt this will make that behavior any worse.

[wessik]

See, this is the thing about this idea of giving a punishment to WZ quitters. I'll put aside the whole argument that everyone should have the right to play how they want to play and that if everybody can leave at will, then nobody is punished when people leave because everybody else can leave too. I'll put aside the argument that now you are going to be stuck playing in games where the other team exploits and you have no chance to win. I'll put aside the argument that now when you get UI bugged, crash out, or get forced out of the Warzone some way through no fault or choice of your own, you are going to get punished. Forget all those arguments for now.

 

Players that want to leave a Warzone, but are forced to stay due to the penalty, they are just going to not try. Worse, they are going to sandbag their own team if it will expedite the end of the game by the other team winning. They are going to throw the ball to the other team. They are going to leave nodes undefended. They are going to friendly yank you into the fire/acid. They are going to watch the other team bomb the door and do nothing. They are going to just try to get kills fighting on the sides or in between nodes if they aren't the type to enjoy griefing their own team (and trust me, lots of people will do this, especially since they are introducing cross-server Warzones that will give people total anonymity). You can't make people do what they don't want to do. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

 

There is already a penalty for leaving warzones early, and that is not getting your valor, commendations, XP, or credits. Aligning the Dailies with this is the right thing to do, so that people do not have much to gain by leaving a Warzone and have more to gain by staying in it even if it is a loss. Penalizing people with a deserter debuff or any kind of lockout is only going to cause different, and much greater pains to the players who want to stay in and compete. I would much rather let someone leave and get a new player who might want to help the team, than make that first person stay and be stuck with a wasted spot, or worse, essentially giving the other team a 9th player.

 

as much as someone leaving sucks... unfortunately, i agree with you...

[goxwerd]

I still do not understand how people seem to think that you can leave a game and basically screw over up to 7 people and just be able to requeue...

 

 

Game hopping should be discouraged. It is not in the spirit of the game and it creates poor quality of play all around.

 

 

Its an accepted statistic that if you make it not free to bail on a warzone people tend to stay and play. Maybe a handful of people will be babies and give up but for the most part( me included, currently i bail on games if it just looks bad) i wont be doing that when i can't for free. I play for personal pride mostly so yes i dont like to be in awful matches anymore than anyone but if i have to stay ill stay and play my best.

 

A nice 15 min deserter will be fine so someone has to think twice if the game is really that bad to have to wait 15 min to queue up again.

 

 

The fact of the matter is you are not anymore of an asset to your team than the bads you are crying about. And by having open free leaving you basically start a chain reaction in some games that are even close..

 

Im sure some people will afk more too but there are mechanics that can be put in place that combat that ( BW will probably be super slow to implement but oh well)

Edited February 16, 2012 by goxwerd

[Smashbrother]

See, this is the thing about this idea of giving a punishment to WZ quitters. I'll put aside the whole argument that everyone should have the right to play how they want to play and that if everybody can leave at will, then nobody is punished when people leave because everybody else can leave too. I'll put aside the argument that now you are going to be stuck playing in games where the other team exploits and you have no chance to win. I'll put aside the argument that now when you get UI bugged, crash out, or get forced out of the Warzone some way through no fault or choice of your own, you are going to get punished. Forget all those arguments for now.

 

Players that want to leave a Warzone, but are forced to stay due to the penalty, they are just going to not try. Worse, they are going to sandbag their own team if it will expedite the end of the game by the other team winning. They are going to throw the ball to the other team. They are going to leave nodes undefended. They are going to friendly yank you into the fire/acid. They are going to watch the other team bomb the door and do nothing. They are going to just try to get kills fighting on the sides or in between nodes if they aren't the type to enjoy griefing their own team (and trust me, lots of people will do this, especially since they are introducing cross-server Warzones that will give people total anonymity). You can't make people do what they don't want to do. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

 

There is already a penalty for leaving warzones early, and that is not getting your valor, commendations, XP, or credits. Aligning the Dailies with this is the right thing to do, so that people do not have much to gain by leaving a Warzone and have more to gain by staying in it even if it is a loss. Penalizing people with a deserter debuff or any kind of lockout is only going to cause different, and much greater pains to the players who want to stay in and compete. I would much rather let someone leave and get a new player who might want to help the team, than make that first person stay and be stuck with a wasted spot, or worse, essentially giving the other team a 9th player.

 

Actually people who are forced to play will simply just farm medals for their own benefit.

 

That's still far better than having a chain of people leaving because other players won't join games that are losing and half way through.

 

And BW can always implement some time of anti-afk system too if they want to.

 

When WoW added deserter debuff, it made the BGs much better. There's no reason to think otherwise.

[Umythiel]

You're almost right. Remove the penalty, it isn't needed. If you remove the penalty, your other options will be enough to convince people who don't like playing with bads to stay for personal gain, which is about 90% of your quitters. The other 10% of quitters get punished with this sort of a penalty unfairly because it's RL aggro or game-related bug issues.

 

As for the win or loss, don't award valor/credits/xp (for under 50) based upon a win. Award it based upon individual performance toward the warzone objective. The boolean math isn't that hard:

 

==============

Team A

==============

 

• Bob has huttball between 2:03 and 2:15 into the game, bob is increasing his valor/comms.
   
  
• Bill has guard on bob, bill is increasing his valor/comms
   
  
• Jenny and Brody are healing bob and bill, Jenny and Brody are increasing their valor/comms
   
  
• Mike, Ashley, and Jethro are fighting within a constant 20 meters of the ball carrier and using CC's, they are increasing their valor/comms
  

 

=================

Other Team

=================

 

• Jeff, Jay, Steve, Pedro, Alexandria, Lisa, and Peter are attacking bob, bill, or jenny, they are increasing their valor/comms
   
  
• Skyflash is at the opposite end of the field looking up at the ceiling and using the "a" and "d" keys to turn his character and attacking random players at the spawn with his leet TRASER MISSEL!!!!!11!!1!!!PEWPEWPEWPEWPEW!!!1!1!! - Skyflash is not increasing his valor or comms.
  

 

With this model as a very vague example of a single wz, both offense and defense are increasing their valor and comms. When they score a huttball, They see increased valor and comms spread equally amongst the participants of the hutball. The way you control this is to place a vicinity buff on the team similar to the debuff you have from touching the huttball. The vicinity buff wears off in once enough time has passed with you not being around the huttball for the time that it would take a person without sprint to reach the other side of the arena from their spawn.

 

You get valor and comms based upon your individual performance toward the objectives of the game, win or lose, regardless of level (for 1-49). If this was the case, you would never catch me leaving a warzone again, and you'd start to see a new class of player breed, instead of some other MMO's leftovers.

 

You should apply for a job as pvp developer for BW. This is what they should be doing. Not penalizing people for leaving but making it worth it to stay.

 

If you face a premade in hutball they will get 5-0 and farm you for 10 minutes. You will end up with 2 medals. If the wz starts with 6 on your side 8 on the other your not going to get the first door down in voidstar, say goodbye to your objectives score and medals. A civil war with people that don't understand the concept, mindlessly running between 2 turrets getting farmed by the defenders thus netting you 2 metals because you actually stayed to defend the one turret you had.

 

If I can get a decent return, for staying in a loser wz I would stay. 15 minutes to walk away with 40 coms, 2k credits, 800 valor is not worth sticking around.

[Celebrus]

When WoW added deserter debuff, it made the BGs much better. There's no reason to think otherwise.

 

Actually, when WoW added a deserter debuff, and cross-server Qs, you started seeing games with people triple boxing three characters (only one being actually used, and even that to a questionable level of skill), you saw 3-4 bots that were programmed to do nothing but auto-attack an enemy, die, respawn, and auto attack another enemy, COMPLETELY BYPASSING THE AFK, VOTE-AFK, AND DESERTER DEBUFF.

 

With as easy as it is to exploit/cheat/completely undermine this game, you'll see the same things virtually before you ever see a benefit from the deserter debuff.

 

Take your entitlement elsewhere, simply because you suck and shouldn't be played with does not mean that I should be forced to endure a game LOSING next to you.

[drdarpa]

When WoW added deserter debuff, it made the BGs much better. There's no reason to think otherwise.

 

No it didn't. It gave me ample reason to stop queuing solo altogether and giving dual boxers the privilege of playing with a grand marshal.

 

Also, this is not wow. The game mechanics differ in this game. Apples are not oranges.

Edited February 16, 2012 by drdarpa

[Caribroo]

Wait until we have ratings in warzones, people will quit after their first death. **** will be sad to watch.

[drdarpa]

Wait until we have ratings in warzones, people will quit after their first death. **** will be sad to watch.

 

You wouldn't need ratings with the system I proposed, since your reward is based solely on your performance in achieving objectives regardless of gear.

[Tierce]

Actually people who are forced to play will simply just farm medals for their own benefit.

 

That's still far better than having a chain of people leaving because other players won't join games that are losing and half way through.

 

And BW can always implement some time of anti-afk system too if they want to.

 

When WoW added deserter debuff, it made the BGs much better. There's no reason to think otherwise.

 

WoW also allowed full premade teams, this game does not. A Win in WoW gave far more Honor(Valor in SWTOR) than a loss, this game does not. It was nearly impossible to sandbag your own team in WoW, in this game, there are many ways to hurt your own team. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

[EternalFinality]

Actually, when WoW added a deserter debuff, and cross-server Qs,

 

There was a very long time between when the first one happened and when the second one happened.

 

And yes, the first one made Warzones in WoW much much better.

[Celebrus]

WoW also allowed full premade teams, this game does not. A Win in WoW gave far more Honor(Valor in SWTOR) than a loss, this game does not. It was nearly impossible to sandbag your own team in WoW, in this game, there are many ways to hurt your own team. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

 

I will go out of my way to insure that everyone suffers as much as I do for any game that I feel I should be allowed to leave.

 

You can quit a WZ without ever leaving, with no punishment, or even better, find a way to help the enemy team.

 

I can see myself forgetting which side I need to take the hutt ball to, forgetting that the guy planting on the door needs to be shot, and forgetting that I'm the last person at this node all because my frustrations are up at not being able to leave.

 

Oh well.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Celebrus

[goxwerd]

There was a very long time between when the first one happened and when the second one happened.

 

And yes, the first one made Warzones in WoW much much better.

 

 

 

FUnny too in rift same thing first 3 weeks of the game had no deserter. It was annoying as heck, boom you get a debuff and lookie there less people leave and since people dont want to look like they suck they try to play well.

 

 

But also Rift had it so if the other team was SOOO much better you could just sit in your spawn and wait for them to win fast. Which made losses less painful.

 

I think that is part of the problem with Tor now that i think of it, Even if you are on an awful team with no chance you are forced to go die over and over. When in other games you could just sit at your graveyard and wait it out. Everyone won in a way. The premade got a fast win, the losers didn't have to sit there and be killed for 15 min and got out of the game fast.

 

I know that sounds bad but i think that makes the warzone grind much less painful is if you are being destroyed you aren't forced to go be farmed like you are in TOR.

[Race_Starraker]

Totally disagree and my years of experience playing PvP on EQ 2 proved to me that there is nothing wrong with a 15 minute wait if you leave a WZ for any reason.

 

It's not that big a deal.

[Fidopro]

OP is correct, we saw this happen with WoW already

 

the only thing the penalty will solve is less threads about people leaving and more threads about people AFKing

[Howbadisbad]

ITT: I leave warzones when we are losing because I am a sore loser.

[Tierce]

I will go out of my way to insure that everyone suffers as much as I do for any game that I feel I should be allowed to leave.

 

and I present exhibit A, trust me, there aren't enough letters in all the alphabets in the world to cover how many players will think just like this. All those who think they are getting vengeance by forcing players to stay in a game by pain of a lockout penalty, you brought a knife to a gun fight.

[Slackfumasta]

I will go out of my way to insure that everyone suffers as much as I do for any game that I feel I should be allowed to leave.

 

You can quit a WZ without ever leaving, with no punishment, or even better, find a way to help the enemy team.

 

I can see myself forgetting which side I need to take the hutt ball to, forgetting that the guy planting on the door needs to be shot, and forgetting that I'm the last person at this node all because my frustrations are up at not being able to leave.

 

Oh well.

 

This is called griefing, and it's a reportable offense. Enjoy your ban.

[EternalFinality]

and I present exhibit A, trust me, there aren't enough letters in all the alphabets in the world to cover how many players will think just like this. All those who think they are getting vengeance by forcing players to stay in a game by pain of a lockout penalty, you brought a knife to a gun fight.

 

Your threats are empty.

 

Fact is, trash leavers leave games because they don't want to "waste their time."

 

What this change does is either wastes their time by locking them out or forces them to waste their time by staying. They'll either afk (bored out of their minds) or try to grief.

 

Over time, they'll decide it's just not worth it anymore and stop queueing, or queue less often knowing they'll be trapped for 15 minutes with everyone flaming them for being a terrible person.

 

And the rest of the playerbase benefits.

 

So go ahead, threaten all you want - you're the one who will suffer far more than everyone else. And it makes me glad.

Edited February 16, 2012 by EternalFinality

[Celebrus]

This is called griefing, and it's a reportable offense. Enjoy your ban.

 

We know better than to assume that BW bans anyone for ANYTHING with what most of us see on this game on a daily basis. The absolute least of which being people that leave/don't contribute to warzones.

 

Give me a break, talk about idle threats.

 

It's actually amusing that you think you could get someone banned for something as subjective as not shooting at a person who is actively planting a bomb on a door in voidstar.

 

ITT: People that can't take their frustrations to their pillows at night instead of ranting about non-issues.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Celebrus

[Umythiel]

Your threats are empty.

 

Over time, they'll decide it's just not worth it anymore and stop queueing, or queue less often knowing they'll be trapped for 15 minutes with everyone flaming them for being a terrible person.

 

And the rest of the playerbase benefits.

 

A product never got better because fewer people decided to use it. All that happens is it loses the ability to support itself, thus lessening the quality of that product for everyone.

[EternalFinality]

A product never got better because fewer people decided to use it. All that happens is it loses the ability to support itself, thus lessening the quality of that product for everyone.

 

More empty threats. "The game will die without the scumbag leaver douches!"

 

No. YOU are what kills games. Remove the cancerous players and the game improves.

Edited February 16, 2012 by EternalFinality

[KungpowSalmon]

So you just want to punish these people because you don't like them, you don't like how they think, they're different than you. This is not logical or rational.

 

You know what? You're right. I don't like deadbeat pvpers. I don't like rage quitters. I don't like how they think, and I don't like how they act. And I especially don't like the ones who believe they are self-righteous enough to try and defend behavior that is detrimental to the spirit of good competition and worthy challenge.

 

It's completely illogical and irrational to think that anyone should dare stand in their way...

[KungpowSalmon]

Remove the cancerous players and the game improves.

 

This guy gets it. Thank you for saying that.

[Tierce]

You know what? You're right. I don't like deadbeat pvpers. I don't like rage quitters. I don't like how they think, and I don't like how they act. And I especially don't like the ones who believe they are self-righteous enough to try and defend behavior that is detrimental to the spirit of good competition and worthy challenge.

 

It's completely illogical and irrational to think that anyone should dare stand in their way...

 

And so you want these people forced into playing on a team with you and you think it's going to be to your benefit?