EPTAuto leaver?
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
lifessavers
17 Posts
| ||
|
HeroHenry
United States1723 Posts
| ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
| ||
|
FliedLice
Germany7494 Posts
At least that seemed to be a problem in teamgames a while, no idea if it still works, might be something different. | ||
|
echO [W]
United States1495 Posts
| ||
|
MuteZephyr
Lithuania448 Posts
The only thing you can do is report the idiot and hope Blizz makes a fix for this sometime soon. | ||
|
MicroJFox
United States38 Posts
The justification is this: in a random 4v4, the chances of a team winning is 50%. In a random 3v4 (one dropped), the chances of the smaller team winning might be 30%. Assume each game takes 20 minutes, and to join and drop immediately takes 1 minute. To get 500 wins, the normal player will need to play 1,000 games at 20 minutes each, taking 20,000 minutes. The dropper will need to join and leave 1,667 games at 1 minute each, yielding a total of 1,667 minutes. Thus, the normal player needs 20,000 minutes to get a 500 icon, the dropper needs 1,667 minutes. | ||
|
Noev
United States1105 Posts
On January 20 2011 08:52 MuteZephyr wrote: Portrait farming, people are super lame. He still gets a win of the team wins, thus he can just leave a bunch of games and then wait. The only thing you can do is report the idiot and hope Blizz makes a fix for this sometime soon. This has been a problem for a long time and blizzard has still not found or implemented a fix for it yet. But yes as others have stated its an easy way to mass games and wins to gain achievements portraits or whatever else blizzard rewards players who win a lot of multiplayer games with. | ||
|
lifessavers
17 Posts
 | ||
|
Morphs
Netherlands645 Posts
I find more joy in pursuing that flashy diamond... | ||
|
KillerPlague
United States1386 Posts
| ||
|
god_forbids
United States111 Posts
"Oh poo, dey dun pley da game da way poopsie sez to play it, QQ i'ma ban dat bad man! ban ban!" Who cares how other people play? This is not a bannable offense any more than 6pool/4gate/etc. and results in the same amount of high-pitched whining. Anyone "serious" about 4v4s (ha!) would play with a team anyway so why do you care if someone leaves the game? Because they get worthless pictures that make them look "better than they are"? Point the finger at Blizzard for putting the incentive there rather than cry about abusive players and try to ban them. | ||
|
DrSeRRoD
United States490 Posts
| ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:12 god_forbids wrote: Wow. Hate, nerd rage, jealousy. That's all I see here. "Oh poo, dey dun pley da game da way poopsie sez to play it, QQ i'ma ban dat bad man! ban ban!" Who cares how other people play? This is not a bannable offense any more than 6pool/4gate/etc. and results in the same amount of high-pitched whining. Anyone "serious" about 4v4s (ha!) would play with a team anyway so why do you care if someone leaves the game? Because they get worthless pictures that make them look "better than they are"? Point the finger at Blizzard for putting the incentive there rather than cry about abusive players and try to ban them. Yeah, all abusive players should be left to abuse the system, and no discussions or attempts should be made to try to resolve the abuse. The loopwhole is there, therefore it is perfectly acceptable to mess up thousands of other players games. Perfectly reasonable. | ||
|
Keitzer
United States2509 Posts
1. tournaments are 1v1 2. if you're serious team gamer, play with a team, not randoms | ||
|
kerpal
United Kingdom2695 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:26 Keitzer wrote: meh, i don't think it's a bannable offense since 1. tournaments are 1v1 2. if you're serious team gamer, play with a team, not randoms it's not just about serious play.. i think there should be some kind of protection for people who just want to play fun 4v4s. just cause you're not serious doesn't make it nice that someone drops out of your game and leaves you a man down. it's ruining other people's experience for the sake of personal gain, i don't know about bans, but i'd like to see something done. | ||
|
god_forbids
United States111 Posts
There is no loophole and this is not abuse. The only thing the 300-second minimum rule has done so far is deprive me of legit wins when my team goes for a fast rush and the other guys leave to deprive us of achievement credit. Shall I QQ more about that? | ||
|
Keitzer
United States2509 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:31 kerpal wrote: it's not just about serious play.. i think there should be some kind of protection for people who just want to play fun 4v4s. just cause you're not serious doesn't make it nice that someone drops out of your game and leaves you a man down. it's ruining other people's experience for the sake of personal gain, i don't know about bans, but i'd like to see something done. that's like saying "ya 1v1 is fun, but the 4gates man, they ruin it... for their own personal gain" i see no difference in the threat level. and thus blizzard will not act on this. | ||
|
DarkRise
1644 Posts
Ofc people do it for easy wins to get portraits | ||
|
HuggyBear
Australia377 Posts
| ||
|
red_b
United States1267 Posts
let there be no doubt that there are many on this site who post simply to be contradictory as a means of entertainment. | ||
|
Zocat
Germany2229 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:36 Keitzer wrote: that's like saying "ya 1v1 is fun, but the 4gates man, they ruin it... for their own personal gain" i see no difference in the threat level. and thus blizzard will not act on this. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/777597897?page=2#32 They said they wanted to hotfix it. So either the hotfix is still not in place (though mentioned months ago), or the leaver doesnt realize this / just wants to annoy people. | ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
 It's really quite lame though - maybe they should limit the number of ladder games you can join within a specific time limit? | ||
|
Deja Thoris
South Africa646 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:12 god_forbids wrote: Wow. Hate, nerd rage, jealousy. That's all I see here. "Oh poo, dey dun pley da game da way poopsie sez to play it, QQ i'ma ban dat bad man! ban ban!" Who cares how other people play? This is not a bannable offense any more than 6pool/4gate/etc. and results in the same amount of high-pitched whining. Anyone "serious" about 4v4s (ha!) would play with a team anyway so why do you care if someone leaves the game? Because they get worthless pictures that make them look "better than they are"? Point the finger at Blizzard for putting the incentive there rather than cry about abusive players and try to ban them. Theres no nerd rage or hate, its a discussion on how it impacts others games. I care how other people play if they are part of my team. It's implicit in the type of game that all people should work together as a "team" - you know, hence the team game. People like this are ruining the experience of others and thats why Blizzard intend to fix it. **Edited out the bit about trolling. | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
| ||
|
Mahavishnu
Canada396 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:12 god_forbids wrote: Wow. Hate, nerd rage, jealousy. That's all I see here. "Oh poo, dey dun pley da game da way poopsie sez to play it, QQ i'ma ban dat bad man! ban ban!" Who cares how other people play? This is not a bannable offense any more than 6pool/4gate/etc. and results in the same amount of high-pitched whining. Anyone "serious" about 4v4s (ha!) would play with a team anyway so why do you care if someone leaves the game? Because they get worthless pictures that make them look "better than they are"? Point the finger at Blizzard for putting the incentive there rather than cry about abusive players and try to ban them. Oh you just got called out son, at least don't let him know it's you? | ||
|
imyzhang
Canada809 Posts
On January 20 2011 11:31 Mahavishnu wrote: Oh you just got called out son, at least don't let him know it's you? if you think about it who the fuck wouldnt be pissed to have to play with a huge disadvantage due to some asshole leaving the game? it's like you're walking down the street one day, but magically one of your legs disappear, or something as equally as disappointing. I'm sure blizzard realizes how much this irritates their customers, and probably has/will do something about it eventually. | ||
|
god_forbids
United States111 Posts
On January 20 2011 11:31 Mahavishnu wrote: Oh you just got called out son, at least don't let him know it's you? What does that even mean? On January 20 2011 09:34 god_forbids wrote:I understand what you are saying but beyond the fixes already implemented, Blizzard is not interested in this "problem". Allow me to expound on "fixes already implemented." Credit towards achievements/portraits will not be granted if the player leaves a team game before 240 game seconds (5:00). That is a fact. Also, players' status is set to "Busy" in the background after leaving a team game (until that game finishes) and since patch 1.1.2 this means they will not get achievement toasts - so no time is saved by leaving early because the game will not be credited if they join another game. So people who leave early are not gaining anything from this. On the other hand, since their resources will not be wasted on their own structures before units can be produced, the 3v4 is actually lopsided in favor of the 3 team. You can macro up a more powerful army quicker. How is this less fun, or "broken"? | ||
|
ThunderBum
Australia192 Posts
| ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
| ||
|
TheGiftedApe
United States1243 Posts
| ||
|
idonthinksobro
3138 Posts
But if you are really high in diamond 2v2 sometimes people leave in order to get a ridicilous rush done that can hit before you are able to have viable defense out. | ||
|
Kenpachi
United States9908 Posts
| ||
|
Hellwitch
Canada272 Posts
| ||
|
DrSeRRoD
United States490 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:52 Zocat wrote: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/777597897?page=2#32 They said they wanted to hotfix it. So either the hotfix is still not in place (though mentioned months ago), or the leaver doesnt realize this / just wants to annoy people. Just read the rest of the thread  They state it WAS hotfixed.http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/777597897?page=15 Bashiok "This fix was applied with 1.1.2" They cannot farm achievements without spending a certain amount of time in game and they probably don't realize it. | ||
|
DrSeRRoD
United States490 Posts
On January 20 2011 12:21 god_forbids wrote: Allow me to expound on "fixes already implemented." Credit towards achievements/portraits will not be granted if the player leaves a team game before 240 game seconds (5:00). That is a fact. Also, players' status is set to "Busy" in the background after leaving a team game (until that game finishes) and since patch 1.1.2 this means they will not get achievement toasts - so no time is saved by leaving early because the game will not be credited if they join another game. So people who leave early are not gaining anything from this. On the other hand, since their resources will not be wasted on their own structures before units can be produced, the 3v4 is actually lopsided in favor of the 3 team. You can macro up a more powerful army quicker. How is this less fun, or "broken"? I know a system is in place but where did you get these details of 240 seconds (gametime vs real time) and also them not being able to requeue? I have heard of the first but not the second. Do you have a Blizz post, post on testing this with data, or speculation? | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On January 20 2011 12:21 god_forbids wrote: What does that even mean? Allow me to expound on "fixes already implemented." Credit towards achievements/portraits will not be granted if the player leaves a team game before 240 game seconds (5:00). That is a fact. Also, players' status is set to "Busy" in the background after leaving a team game (until that game finishes) and since patch 1.1.2 this means they will not get achievement toasts - so no time is saved by leaving early because the game will not be credited if they join another game. So people who leave early are not gaining anything from this. On the other hand, since their resources will not be wasted on their own structures before units can be produced, the 3v4 is actually lopsided in favor of the 3 team. You can macro up a more powerful army quicker. How is this less fun, or "broken"? I'm trying to think of a reason why are you so condescending and ridiculing. Maybe you had to deal with too many rushes that involved players leaving the game to bypass the time limit and share resources faster? Obviously 4 player team is going to have easier time controlling units and can also share resources not that much later. What's more, the more inexperienced the (now) 3 player team is, the harder for them will be to use the additional resources they did not expect to have. They also have to spare their attention to defend the 4th base. The more they neglect it the more exposed it will be and the harder to defend because of that. You seriously can't see those downsides? | ||
|
Aikin
Austria532 Posts
| ||
|
CurLy[]
United States759 Posts
2) Make more unit producing structures than normal 3)????? 4)Profit | ||
|
Aerakin
185 Posts
"If I can't leave for 300 seconds, then I leave after 301 seconds" Better just do: leave = loss (and something if you actually played and got eliminated) | ||
|
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
| ||
|
god_forbids
United States111 Posts
I actually got this from testing and digging around in the forums where the "portrait farmers" lurk. And I see now that 240s was for 1v1, so I may be wrong :$ A couple patches ago it was 240s for Co-op as well and 270s for Team League but I think most timers are now 5:00 game time, ~215s real time. As to the second point, the toast awareness part was in the public patch notes but some farmers believe this has the effect described above. @beetlelisk Sorry if I seem "condescending and ridiculing." I will try to watch my tone :D But also, someone "called me out" as being an auto-leaver and in general I found the whininess of this thread irksome. I do see the downsides you mention. But Activision has already proven trigger happy with banning accounts - which, we must not forget, costs $60 and countless hours to replace - and I think this would be a pretty frivolous reason to advocate insta-bans. Warnings, sure, but ... @others It seems that some are just not paying attention in this thread. Timers are already in place and people auto-leaving in 1s are just unaware that this does not work anymore. Credit is not given towards achievements, though points are awarded for the win. Leave = loss is silly because there are many cases where you can contribute a lot to the victory and not be in the game until the very end. I just don't see where this is a huge issue, maybe? | ||
|
lifessavers
17 Posts
On January 21 2011 08:36 god_forbids wrote: Sorry if I seem "condescending and ridiculing." I will try to watch my tone :D But also, someone "called me out" as being an auto-leaver and in general I found the whininess of this thread irksome. ? So you were one of these people that left for achievements or did you just leave for fun? I do not see how someone can "call you out" as an auto leaver without evidence or reason. | ||
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
On January 21 2011 09:22 lifessavers wrote: So you were one of these people that left for achievements or did you just leave for fun? I do not see how someone can "call you out" as an auto leaver without evidence or reason. It's very easy to call someone out without having evidence, your call out could be completely false, but it becomes your word against theirs. I see no problem with Leave=Loss. As long as it's when you still have a command center. I hate people who leave, especially when they leave because they think the game is over. People in team games seriously lack and understanding of this game, if they think it's EVER over until it's over. the GSL with marinekingprime and nada proves that. But in team games it's even more apparent. I was recently playing with a guy I had met just through b.net and we were in a 4v4, and he went for some stupid hatch near their base rush, ended up leaving after his 2nd proxy hatch was just starting to get attacked. Me and one other random guy stayed in the game and ended up winning. It frustrates me when people just leave before it's over, I havent' run into people quitting at the start of a game very often at all | ||
|
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
| ||
|
RaiZ
2813 Posts
On January 21 2011 09:41 LoLAdriankat wrote: Why didn't they make it so the leaver couldn't join a game until the team he ditched finished their game? It's so god damn fucking simple. If that was the case they'd have done it already. Did you ever think about being disconnected and not being able to play for like 2 hours cauz your team haven't finished their game ? | ||
|
god_forbids
United States111 Posts
On January 21 2011 09:22 lifessavers wrote: So you were one of these people that left for achievements or did you just leave for fun? I do not see how someone can "call you out" as an auto leaver without evidence or reason. I put it in quotes because it is false (see post by Mahavishnu). I do not leave games early, as a matter of fact I agree completely with thurst0n (loved/hated MKP v. NaDa, ofc!) that it isn't over till it's completely over. In team games you are still in even if you lose 100% of your units and buildings; then you can be another pair of eyes as well as an assistant for micro if your allies let you have unit control. I actually love playing 3v4 or 2v4 because that extra income is so OP if you know what to do with it (and I'm a proud silver-gold player so it isn't hard). But thurst0n's and RaiZ's posts also highlight the fact that "leaving early" has many causes, from not understanding the game i.e. 'Bronzie Syndrome' to disconns, etc. So it would be foolish to flat-out say Leave = Loss. And as we can see from Blizz's response so far, you can't force people not to leave the game. They leave even when there is nothing to be gained from it. What boggles my mind is that - to some here - it's not enough to take away any potential rewards from auto-leavers, we need to punish them with the perma-banhammer as well. That just makes my head spin, hence my original post on this thread. | ||
|
DrSeRRoD
United States490 Posts
On January 21 2011 08:36 god_forbids wrote: @DrSeRRoD Thanks for the reply. | ||
|
NehR
Sweden87 Posts
| ||
|
CooDu
Australia899 Posts
1v1 is where it's at for me. | ||
| ||
