Almost every game ranked or whatever must have afk or leaver. Game need an option to leave without consequence. Why I must waste time beceuse somebody dont want to play. ANd everyone of them of course “losing conneciton”. So add DAMN option to leave game when there is 1 afk . Why losing ranking points or time only beceuse somebody TROLL or just AFK. 21 CENTURY u ban for chat, but u dont fix leaver’/afker problems
If you were completely forgiven for leaving when you have a bot, parties could do stuff like have someone alt f4 when it looks like the game is going south and the rest of the group doesn’t lose rank points. You could cycle who leaves and stuff like that
I think if someone leaves before 10, the game should just end though
1 Like
Loss forgiveness for having a leaver would obviously have to be designed not to work in premade groups. Even then it should not be complete, but something like awarding 50% less points to the winner and deducting 50% less from the losing team.
The leaver would lose a full 500-600.
That being said they never implemented it in 2016 as promised so I have very little expectations it will happen any time soon.
1 Like
“Consequence” is the result of the action, there is always a consequence.
What you mean is without “punishment”.
When people conflate the two, they tend to have a poor understanding of actual consequences, and look to minimize the consideration of ‘bad outcomes’ without actually putting thought into the how/what/why those ‘consequences’ exist.
Fantasy scenarios are not valid arguments.
we have seen numerous cases of stacks abusing matchmaking rules and the like. There’s no reason to think people would not abuse a system like this.
I’d rather players get bonuses for sticking it through a game where one or both teams suffer leavers or actively afk people while also ensuring people that conveniently come back at the end of the match get nothing.
I would even go as far as penalizing players that die a lot, but that could be just as difficult if not more so to try and implement than the above suggestion.
Absolutely rarded that in 2026 you’ll lose the same amount of ranked points if someone just quits from start and you lose. And you’ll get the same amount for winning 4vs5. Although, if anything, it’s better if they fix the MM and report system rather than turn it into OW2 MM (find match - someone leaves - quit match - find match again and repeat)
I am surprised no one yet brought up the room-temp IQ takes:
- “It happens to both teams, so it’s fair”
- “You have 4 slots empty on your team and there’s 5 on the enemy team. They’ll get more leavers and afks than you”
Fantasy 
scenarios are not valid arguments
The forums aren’t run on :arguements
Teams where all 5 leave ends the match in 15 seconds (with announcements visible to other players in the match) and the match gets cancelled and will not mark as such for stats nor for leaver penalty.
But yeah, wish it was a fantasy scenario, at least for “not mark for statistics” because there’s some special snowflakes who care about that 100% win rate stack abuse.
Never seen it happen once in 11 years and I’m not sure how it relates to what I said previously
Hailfall described how the leaver adjustment could be abused, you decried it as ‘fantasy’, and Samisha pointed out that people currently abuse some of the leaver/flag rules to protect a false winrate on their accounts.
Just because you’re not familiar with something doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, or that suggestions prone to abuse by be deterred if people realize the extent of abuse without having to try the implementation for every game iteration.
You’re partway to a flat-earther argumentation.
You’re just not a very smart person. Your obsession with me all these years is also noted.
“I saw people leave in a lobby to abuse the system” amounts to what exactly? Please use your brain friend. You are so close to actual critical thinking.
“I saw 5 people leave a lobby to avoid a loss” means “I saw 5 people leave a lobby to avoid a loss”. It does not mean “The most common outcome is people leaving to avoid a loss”. Because that’s not how it happens. If you can get a video or replays of 5 players leaving a game to avoid a loss and demonstrate that it happened 5000 times in the last 1 to 2 months, then I’ll take you more seriously. Right now, I’m more inclined to believe “I saw 5 people leave a lobby to avoid a loss” is more around the 0.00001% of all matches played when it comes to how often it happens.
So no, I don’t care that a few people abused the system to avoid a loss, because the chances of that happening are miniscule.
The fantasy scenario statement isn’t meant to say it has never happened before, it’s actually about that very particular and lazy application of a very stupid statement like
Who are “people”? Who are these “people”? 0.0001 percent of the playerbase?
I seriously suggest you go to your local community college and sign up for an Ethic 101 class where you can learn about Plato & Socrates and learn how a coherent thought is constructed. The basics of building a fallacy-free idea.
Please Google: hasty generalization fallacy.
This fallacy occurs when you take the behavior of a small, non-typical subgroup (in this case, a small group of people who abuse leaving to avoid a loss) and then draw a broad conclusion from it (in this case, that allowing people to leave a match with a leaver would cause this to become the norm).
Most people are not a-holes or cheaters. Most people just want to come home from work, play a match or two of Heroes of the Storm, then go to bed. We are not even talking about the same thing. I am talking about respecting people’s time. There are many games that let you leave the match if you have leaver on your team. This has been implemented and works in other multiplayer pvp games and it has worked for decades. You are talking about your fantasy scenario where people are out there leaving games to avoid losses en masse and changing something will open the floodgates to everyone else.
I get it. It’s your first PvP game. You never had the skill to play any other competitive multiplayer game so you have 0 experience seeing this system implemented elsewhere where everything is just fine and dandy.
You’re not a smart person. Heroes of the Storm is not a special game and it’s playerbase is not special. Change is good and respecting people’s time is good. Your logic is barely coherent, and you have a hard time understanding things on a fundamental level. No, I don’t care about your fantasy scenario where any change to anything is bad. You have been crying for years, possibly decades, that any change to anything is a terrible idea.
You would not make a good developer and I would never play anything built by you. Games are about pleasing your playerbase to keep them coming back, and most people do not abuse any systems to inflate their winrate, and respecting their time when they have one or more leavers on their team is a completely acceptable change that I wager would be welcome by mostly everyone. You build the game around the majority, not some non-typical and miniscule pool of players. Get a grip on life dude.
The fact that this has to be explained to your is the problem. Your logic amounts to “some people abuse government assistance for their own profit, therefore everyone would be doing it if they knew how” or “some people commit government assistance fraud, so everyone else will too”.
It’s such a simple dumb person thing to say. I am telling you my dude: Ethics 101 class at your local community college. It will help you greatly in life.
To be fair, I merely explained the fantasy claim that its well, a thing, and people even slight generalized minority, abuse it.
It’s a good thing that games don’t get leaver penalty if 5 people all leave, this is normal but sadly not well known outside 4/5 stacks because its mechanically hidden without like, testing how it works.
It’s not a good thing that it doesn’t flag games for stats though. So you can end up with some really cursed stats. Like high level profile but the games played are way less than the number.
What is good is we have, the systems implemented, is just it could be way better if it allowed more features like: Game cancellation from early leave but no penalty or game cancellation from far into the game by allowing people to leave but count as a loss on the board.
There’s like, so many games doing this its baffling that HotS doesn’t at all.
For someone trying to lambast others for a lack of intelligence and experience, you have a tendency to not think things though, essentially put your foot in your mouth with what you complain about, and then loop the some conduct over and over again. Which indicates you’re resistant to actually learning from your mistakes.
But kudos for being wrong with pretty much every assumption you continue to make about me. If you were better informed, and had more experience, then you’d be better capable of telling when others are informed and experienced instead of blowing up in the backfire effect.
Since you haven’t noticed, the ‘majority’ of my posts (ie, not actual ‘majority’) are pointing out simple bits where people lack information, and then they fault others for effectively unrelated grievances. Chronic scapegoating tends to not magically change if people are left to the own devices. Granted, replying to them rarely changes anything, but there’s other people around here than argument-obsessed anons.
So long as people have [thing] to blame, they use that to rationalize all sorts of other issues, much like your overcompensating rant there. Maybe if you bothered to actually read things through, you’d notice the magical irony you’re presenting with your philosophy rant.
I’m aware you didn’t read your own rant, I’m aware that you don’t read things that look like they don’t agree with you. If you bothered to read things, you wouldn’t be bouncing from one game to the next despite having an ‘ivory tower’ you have to climb down from, and then back up again. If that tower was as ‘ivory’ as you keep trying to pretend it to be, you’d still be up there instead of demonstrating your wonderful display of double-standards and difficulties with reading.
When you don’t read, you are rejecting useful information and when you lack useful information, you’re going to have perpetual, but preventable problems that are consequences influenced by that ignorance. People are supposed to ‘learn’ from those experiences and improve from them. That’s why game communities tend to revolve around information to address common complaints. But some players take it upon themselves to be offended by such things, and then take pride boasting about their willful ignorance.
I’ve tried dispelling misconceptions you have from Dota 2 that you bring here because I’ve played Dota 2. I also try to point out analogies from other game genres, or point out where other devs have attempted to address chronic problems that stem from pvp interactions because I play all sorts of other games, participated in those communities, and share those experiences with others that seem like they don’t have those for themselves.
But you conclude I haven’t played those games despite being unable to indicate how those accounts convey incorrect information. You don’t know, are rather, you don’t want to know. You aren’t literate-enough to have “fallacy free ideas” so you draw incorrect conclusions adverse to the actual information available, and effectively drown in your fallacies.
It seems you haven’t acquired enough experience to be able to honestly tell others have experiences you do not, because you do not have enough experience and prevent yourself for attaining that level. It seems like you’re too busy scapegoating and running off into redherrings to do otherwise.
But oh boy, you have that Ethics 101 
A number of failing games attempt to build around the ‘majority’, and the ‘majority’ of their player base don’t stay. If you bother to play more games with an actual interest in learning about them, instead of reinforcing confirmation bias, you’d be capable of drawing a very different conclusion from game-design aspirations.
It takes information to be able to make gradations instead of polarized opposites.
But you’d have to bother to read to realize how wrong your conclusions are. However, then you’d have to cope with the magical realization of being wrong, and clearly that’s a fallacy-free notion you don’t want to consider. GJ, on those non-sequiturs.
ff should exist.
ff should exist without penalty if youre 4v5 and the guy should recieve full penalty.
1 Like