Quitting Warzones: Working as Intended or Exploit?

[finelinebob]

... and I have still yet to see a single person answer me on how wonderful it would be if everyone followed their examples and everyone quit as soon as their side started losing. You mean to tell me that none of you are willing to argue that if anyone can use the Leave Warzone button that everyone should use it? None of you believe it would be best if warzones only lasted maybe 3 minutes before they all were shutdown because of too few people left on the losing side? None of you think you'd be having tons of fun if your team pulls ahead and you get credited with a win after racking up one or two medals, if that? Edited January 30, 2013 by finelinebob

[ChickenWangs]

I'd just like to get some official word on this topic, so please someone from BioWare fill me (and everyone else) in: When people quit warzones because they don't want to stay on a losing team -- is that a permissible use of the Quit Warzones feature and therefore working as intended and something that BioWare supports? Or is quitting a warzone an unintended consequence of that feature and therefore an exploit of the game code since it gives players an unfair advantage over other players?

 

I think everyone deserves an answer. Do you at BioWare think that quitting warzones, thereby screwing over the people in the warzone because you've left them shorthanded for a time and, far worse, screwing over whoever is at the top of the warzone queue because when someone quits, the top of the warzone queue gets pulled in to that loss, if that is something you folks at BioWare have no problem with and have no intention of addressing.

 

Otherwise, if it is an exploit, when are you going to start penalizing people for using it?

 

 

I don't know if you like staying on an entirely recruit geared team, but I certainly do not. If people cannot be bothered to collect 2750 ( I think that is the com cap) regular wz comms before hitting 50, are they really there to actually PvP or make everyone else's life miserable. Or someone could just get the war hero gear and put the mods in legacy gear and send it to their alt. There are two easy ways to make sure that YOU don't screw a team over by simply getting some gear before hitting 50.

[LogicalPremise]

and therefore an exploit of the game code since it gives players an unfair advantage over other players?

 

And this is where your logic breaks down.

 

I comprehend the concept you are trying to elucidate, but the problem with it is that you are arguing from exception. Removing the feature does not solve the stated problem -- that non-participance in WZ unfairly disadvantages other players.

 

Putting in a quitter's debuff will have three effects:

 

1) first, there will be many players who simply stop PVP once the time investment is no longer worth the reward. This will not be the 'bad players' sadly, who usually quit, but rather the good players who still que solo when their guild or premade isn't around. They are not going to bother with it at all, and the net result is degradation of the performance of the solo que members.

 

2) second, there will be many players who continue to quit and simply run dailies while waiting for the debuff to go away. This will also not address the problem. Combined with the lower number of people PVPing this will simply cause longer queue times and crappier play.

 

3) finally, there will be players who only sit on a defense area for meds or deathball, instead of bothering to contribute at all, essentially just farming medals for being forced to play.

 

I am not sure why you think this would encourage people to play, nor why you think that a feature available to all is being 'exploited' when an exploit is defined , very clearly, as unintentional use of a game feature that results in a ban. BW is not banning these people. It's similar to speed-running the pizza in ME3MP, it's a 'feature that is working as intended".

 

The fact that you disagree with this does not make it an exploit.

The fact that some players are inconvenienced by this does not make it an exploit.

 

The logical assertion that the leave wz feature MUST be meant for X and not Y, and thus using it for Y is an exploit, argues from the idea that Y is NOT meant for use, when there is no proof of such.

[DarkSaberMaster]

And this is where your logic breaks down.

 

I comprehend the concept you are trying to elucidate, but the problem with it is that you are arguing from exception. Removing the feature does not solve the stated problem -- that non-participance in WZ unfairly disadvantages other players.

 

Putting in a quitter's debuff will have three effects:

 

1) first, there will be many players who simply stop PVP once the time investment is no longer worth the reward. This will not be the 'bad players' sadly, who usually quit, but rather the good players who still que solo when their guild or premade isn't around. They are not going to bother with it at all, and the net result is degradation of the performance of the solo que members.

 

2) second, there will be many players who continue to quit and simply run dailies while waiting for the debuff to go away. This will also not address the problem. Combined with the lower number of people PVPing this will simply cause longer queue times and crappier play.

 

3) finally, there will be players who only sit on a defense area for meds or deathball, instead of bothering to contribute at all, essentially just farming medals for being forced to play.

 

I am not sure why you think this would encourage people to play, nor why you think that a feature available to all is being 'exploited' when an exploit is defined , very clearly, as unintentional use of a game feature that results in a ban. BW is not banning these people. It's similar to speed-running the pizza in ME3MP, it's a 'feature that is working as intended".

 

The fact that you disagree with this does not make it an exploit.

The fact that some players are inconvenienced by this does not make it an exploit.

 

The logical assertion that the leave wz feature MUST be meant for X and not Y, and thus using it for Y is an exploit, argues from the idea that Y is NOT meant for use, when there is no proof of such.

 

Sums it up nicely.

[LogicalPremise]

... and I have still yet to see a single person answer me on how wonderful it would be if everyone followed their examples and everyone quit as soon as their side started losing.

 

I feel that if you are being rolled by a premade that clearly totally outclasses you, everyone should quit. It's not fun for the premade, or the victims.

 

I think the reason it doesn't happen is half or more of the PVP'rs are farming comms for gear to RE stabs and have neither clue nor care about what happens in PVP.

[CrazyOldMystic]

I do not know if this is an exploit but I did find something strange. I was in the civil war we were loosing, because the imps were moving precisely where they needed to, and five of my team members decided to sit it out in the middle. Now I would have done the same thing if it was for sure a loss, but there was plenty of time to turn the tables. I was sickened by those players and left the warzone. What surprised me was I could, if I wanted to, re queue up for a wz with no down time.

[Solaufein]

100% not an exploit.

 

Want proof? First let's start with the definition of an exploit: "cases when [bioware] determine that a bug in the code can give an unfair advantage to a player." (Rich Vogel, Bioware, 31.01.2012).

 

http://www.swtor.com/blog/developer-blog-busting-bugs-and-fixing-exploits

 

Sure, you don't like quitters. Fair enough.

 

Using the button labelled "Leave Warzone" to, um.. leave the warzone is not an exploit of that feature. It is the INTENT of that feature. A player's motivation for doing so, and his decision as to when he'll use that feature, is irrelevant to the definition of an exploit.

 

There is no bug in the code here. The feature works as intended, it does exactly what it says on the tin.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Solaufein

[Darth-Rammstein]

As long as the wz weekly requires wins and not just /played like the daily does people will leave losing games. If you force me to stay under penalty of a debuff I'll probably just afk at the node for the principle of it. I've been in too many games where people don't call incs, they spread out and run into a pack of the other team one by one feeding them kills. Getting stuck with multiple pve/recruit geared players which place a handicap on the team, healing but none of the dps bother to help get the guy off me, or I mark healers and the idiots still go for the dps and wonder why they don't die...in circumstances like these, yes I will leave.

[finelinebob]

I comprehend the concept you are trying to elucidate, but the problem with it is that you are arguing from exception. Removing the feature does not solve the stated problem -- that non-participance in WZ unfairly disadvantages other players.

 

I never said anything about removing it because I see no need. I'd be perfectly happy to rely on people's maturity to stop them from quitting, and a quitter's debuff for those who lack maturity. When it comes down to it for people who have valid reasons for leaving, if they need to be elsewhere on short notice and therefore have to leave, they're probably going to be busy for at least 15-30 minutes so that sort of mechanic is not going to hurt people in this situation.

 

And I still see no arguments from the quitting advocates supporting the idea that if one person quits because your team has started losing, that all people should quit right then.

 

Your hypocrisy is showing.

[TUXs]

You bet it's an exploit. So are all those people who "disconnect"...we should ban em all!!!

 

OP...it's obviously intended and I'd MUCH prefer to have someone quit than to sabotage every node they "guard" while they wait to move on. Quitters are easy to replace and they generally weren't doing anything anyway of any value- we're better off without them.

[finelinebob]

OP...it's obviously intended and I'd MUCH prefer to have someone quit than to sabotage every node they "guard" while they wait to move on. Quitters are easy to replace and they generally weren't doing anything anyway of any value- we're better off without them.

 

There is little doubt that the rest of the team is better off without the quitters, but only because it's the lesser of two evils. People that selfish and immature are certainly not going to do anything to help their own team win if the first thought on their mind (or the second, or third...) is bailing like a rat leaving a sinking ship. I keep hearing "learn to play" as a defense from these quitters, but they don't mean learn to be a team player or learn the objectives of the warzone, they mean "learn to be as awesome as me" which, after you strip away the overinflated ego, means learn to be a selfish, spineless hack who knows they do not have the skill to help their team come from behind therefore it's time to find a new team to carry them.

 

I'm more concerned about the person who gets yanked from the top of the queue to take the place of the dead weight that finally left the warzone. If anyone is getting screwed, it's that person.

 

Besides a quitter's debuff, a vote to kick that actually worked would be nice. Then we could publicize who quits on a regular basis, back it up with screen shots showing chat windows with the message of them leaving, and then vote them out before the warzones even begin. But just like the quitter's debuff, BioWare is going to do nothing about this. BioWare has created a system where it is easy for players to exploit the benefits of being in a group and BioWare is too spineless to do anything to stop it.

 

Six+ pages of comments and BioWare is still on the sidelines saying nothing ... and past history has shown that is exactly where they are going to stay.

[Lesrach]

And this is where your logic breaks down.

 

I comprehend the concept you are trying to elucidate, but the problem with it is that you are arguing from exception. Removing the feature does not solve the stated problem -- that non-participance in WZ unfairly disadvantages other players.

 

Putting in a quitter's debuff will have three effects:

 

1) first, there will be many players who simply stop PVP once the time investment is no longer worth the reward. This will not be the 'bad players' sadly, who usually quit, but rather the good players who still que solo when their guild or premade isn't around. They are not going to bother with it at all, and the net result is degradation of the performance of the solo que members.

 

2) second, there will be many players who continue to quit and simply run dailies while waiting for the debuff to go away. This will also not address the problem. Combined with the lower number of people PVPing this will simply cause longer queue times and crappier play.

 

3) finally, there will be players who only sit on a defense area for meds or deathball, instead of bothering to contribute at all, essentially just farming medals for being forced to play.

 

I am not sure why you think this would encourage people to play, nor why you think that a feature available to all is being 'exploited' when an exploit is defined , very clearly, as unintentional use of a game feature that results in a ban. BW is not banning these people. It's similar to speed-running the pizza in ME3MP, it's a 'feature that is working as intended".

 

The fact that you disagree with this does not make it an exploit.

The fact that some players are inconvenienced by this does not make it an exploit.

 

The logical assertion that the leave wz feature MUST be meant for X and not Y, and thus using it for Y is an exploit, argues from the idea that Y is NOT meant for use, when there is no proof of such.

 

If Deserter debuff will not do it what will?

 

Since you do have clear thinking and good way to put things up. What would you suggest, as a mean, to stop Warzone Hopping? It clearly is 1 players choise where he/she screws the rest of the team over voluntarely. That is one player loading crap over 7 or less players. You cannot think that is right.

 

p.s.

I think OPs exploit argument is: When you get desperate, you start looking creative means to get where want to go. In his case ending Warzone Hopping.

[BogyOne]

I use WZ dailies for XP boost while leveling. I quite often jump in the place of guys who left before they lost.

 

Yay, free half of the daily. Keep deserting!

[Chlomamf]

The button is labelled 'Leave Warzone' for a reason. It's to LEAVE THE WARZONE. Shocking I know. It's hardy an exploit if it is a legitimate feature.

 

It's like saying that people who use Groupfinder have an unfair advantage over others for being able to find a Group more easily. The button is there for everyone, use it.

 

And how exactly leaving a Warzone gives that person an 'unfair advantage' is beyond me. Advantage at what? Getting out of the Warzone faster?

[nogoer]

If you prevent people from leaving they just won't queue up. Nobody is going to be happy if they're forced to "play" a game. Honestly I'm stunned that people still do queue up, especially as solo queue. Must be a lot of masochists.

 

I must be one because that's all i ever do is que solo. I'm not a particularly social player so i dont often find myself in a gruop setting. Queing sometimes takes a while so i que up as a diversion from my crafting or GTN activities. Must be why i usually find myself in a losing match...which is getting very old.

 

Also maybe i'm losing it but didn't tor have some sort of desertion or abandonment penalty at one time? Where you couldn't rejoin warzones for a certain period after quitting in the middle of one? I thought i remembered getting DC'ed during one and was then flabbergasted when i couldn't reque afterwards.

[Merras]

You want people to quit or to AFK in the corner... Id rather have them not get better and quit

 

Then let them AFK in the corner.

 

I started my first two warzones today as a replacement of quitters. Very nice to arrive already lost warzones, like Alderaan 500-200, or the second round to Voidstar.

[byteresistor]

Six+ pages of comments and BioWare is still on the sidelines saying nothing

They don't need to, the answer to your question is obvious.

[Choffware]

There should defiantly be a time penalty if you leave a warzone early. You should be prohibited from queueing for about 30 mins. The problem is people that quit open a spot for some one to come into a match that they have no chance of winning wasting lots of time for that player that had nothing to do with the loosing outcome of the match he just joined. Putting a time penalty on quitters will add incentive to stay for the rewards rather than do nothing for the next 30 mins (pvp wise you could always go do dailies). This seems fair to me since the penalty is just time against pvp rewards and not too prohibitive that someone wouldn't do it if the game REALLY stunk or some RL event was happening. Also gives people who don't quit a slight priority over people that do... Edited January 30, 2013 by Choffware

[Darth-Rammstein]

There should defiantly be a time penalty if you leave a warzone early. You should be prohibited from queueing for about 30 mins. The problem is people that quit open a spot for some one to come into a match that they have no chance of winning wasting lots of time for that player that had nothing to do with the loosing outcome of the match he just joined. Putting a time penalty on quitters will add incentive to stay for the rewards rather than do nothing for the next 30 mins (pvp wise you could always go do dailies). This seems fair to me since the penalty is just time against pvp rewards and not too prohibitive that someone wouldn't do it if the game REALLY stunk or some RL event was happening. Also gives people who don't quit a slight priority over people that do...

 

In this scenario one of two things will happen, neither of which is good for the team. One they will still quit but now that they have a long debuff they won't be able to queue up again...this will make queues longer for everyone especially if it's late at night. Second would be that they will just afk at the node and wait for game to end....I'd say it's fine as is just letting them leave. Most of the time if people start leaving early it's because your team is just outmatched and you won't win anyways....result is the same either way. I have had matches where I joined a losing novare coast and we turned the game around and won but this is somewhat rare and isn't as easy to do in other wzs.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Darth-Rammstein

[oslek]

The button is labelled 'Leave Warzone' for a reason. It's to LEAVE THE WARZONE. Shocking I know. It's hardy an exploit if it is a legitimate feature.

 

It's like saying that people who use Groupfinder have an unfair advantage over others for being able to find a Group more easily. The button is there for everyone, use it.

 

And how exactly leaving a Warzone gives that person an 'unfair advantage' is beyond me. Advantage at what? Getting out of the Warzone faster?

 

Exactly. I'm not going to stay in a Warzone that I don't want to be in. I'm not going to deal with teamates who are so stupid as to enter a post 50 zone without expertise, or players who just stand around waiting to collect comms. Two things would fix this:

 

1.) Give us the option to choose our Warzones. Everytime I get thrown in Huttball I exit out. If you are tired of players like me leaving, then allow me to choose my warzone. Until then, deal with me leaving.

2.) Put a filter in game that doesn't allow anyone in Zone without the proper amount of expertise. Standing around a flag while counting the seconds because our team isn't properly geared isn't my idea of fun. Until this happens,deal with me leaving because I refuse to be fodder for properly geared opponents.

 

If you take away my ability to exit then I'll just refuse to PVP.

Edited January 30, 2013 by oslek

[SDTAXantos]

Should just have a rating system based on wz rank and expertise. That way, people who decide to PvP for the first time at 50 will play equally terrible players. Unless their expertise is adequate, it would put them in the mediocre tier of match making. Up and up. Don't really know how to describe it in words, but somehow incorporate something that separates people who obviously don't care and won't gear or play prior to joining 50 pvp. "But I do care about PvP, lowbie is ********." Well, if you did PvP before 50, you would have most of your War Hero gear. So forgive me if I don't believe you. Edited January 30, 2013 by SDTAXantos

[LogicalPremise]

If Deserter debuff will not do it what will?

 

Since you do have clear thinking and good way to put things up. What would you suggest, as a mean, to stop Warzone Hopping? It clearly is 1 players choise where he/she screws the rest of the team over voluntarely. That is one player loading crap over 7 or less players. You cannot think that is right.

 

I have given it extensive thought. There has to be three aspects to it:

 

1) It has to encourage team work, not merely queing and sitting for defense medals

2) It has to make quitting not a burden for someone who suffers a disconnect or crash, but also makes leaving less desirable than losing.

3) It has to provide others who have someone leave a reason not to leave as well due to the loss of power from a missing member

 

The only ideas I have thought of so far are a few:

 

- a boost to all members of some sort (power? wz and valor?) for every missing team member. This has so many balance and abuse issues it's hard to make it work

- a stacking debuff to PVP that lasts a long time for quitters. 1 stack does nothing, 2 gimps you, 3 makes you incapable of receiving valor or comms. Again, problems exist.

 

I really don't know.

[Darth-Rammstein]

I've suggested this in the past, if you want to decrease the number of quitters in losing matches change the weekly to the way the daily is. 9wins/18played. This way people on the losing team don't have to feel like they wasted their time sticking around and the winning team still progresses faster...win win.

[kirorx]

I've suggested this in the past, if you want to decrease the number of quitters in losing matches change the weekly to the way the daily is. 9wins/18played. This way people on the losing team don't have to feel like they wasted their time sticking around and the winning team still progresses faster...win win.

 

Not a bad idea

[AdrianDmitruk]

I'm not going to stay in a warzone where I am backfilled and the team I backfill into is three-capped. Especially when I'm trying to finish my weekly. If I am part of the original team, I either stay or leave immediately so I get replaced before the match starts (can only take so much of certain warzones). If I am backfill, I have no obligation, moral or otherwise, to stay. It's perfectly reasonable to expect a fresh match.

 

Give us an option to turn off backfill (other than premades, my friends aren't always on); then, and only then, would a deserter debuff be appropriate.