Full SR lose for leavers still?

How is this still a thing in competitive? The whole concept of “It will be abused” is an absolutely pointless argument when it comes down to actually looking at how that would be “abused”.

If you have a group of 6 friends and they all think they will ‘abuse’ this system by leaving… first of all- the person who leaves, gets hit with a 100 SR hit, which I think is fair. Then lets say in the most lenient (fair) system, the other 5 get no SR lose and the ‘winning’ team get half the normal SR gains.

Now if someone wants to abuse this, not only will they need to have multiple smurf accounts at nearly the same level, they will have to be content with burning that 100SR and dealing with an eventual competitive ban for leaving games so frequently. So they will what? Purchase another account, grind to level 25 and do it all over again? The time that this process would take is absolutely insane to have any meaningful impact. Not to mention most ‘win rates’ are like 70% at BEST, so you’re going to lose fairly frequently.


How many times must we say, it would be abused because of peer pressure


I really doubt that. How many times did someone pick a crappy DPS and refuse to switch? In fact, the MORE the team tries to pressure someone into switching to a new hero the more likely they won’t.

Stop using the same unproven argument. The OW dev team is wrong on this.


Help me understand exactly how it would be abused because I don’t see that as a real possibility at all. Would it be abused once or twice a season- maybe? I know I would never leave a game on purpose to save my friend 20/30 SR lose so I can take a 100 SR hit. Not to mention repeatedly doing this- putting my entire account at risk

1 Like

I’m just pissed that it keeps giving you losses and taking your SR when you get a Blizzard Error or the game server doesn’t even let you connect, before the match even starts.

SR doesn’t feel like it represents my skill at all, if it’s already been reduced by hundreds due to the game’s tendency to have technical issues.

I suppose. But I don’t think there is any way around that. You need a consistent connection/computer to be able to play this game

Nope. You’re naive. People who regularly stack with the same people would absolutely abuse this. If a significant portion of the population literally downloads a third party program (hack) to increase their odds of winning a video game, you honestly can’t see how even more people would rationalize using a poorly thought out leaver system to rank up? You really don’t understand how humans work.

Many people at high levels have 5+ accounts, so they could easily take 4 leaves per secondary account per season to get their group’s main accounts higher. With 5 friends, that’s 80+ losses on everyone’s main account having a reduced penalty if they implemented a system like this (every loss unless they’re playing hundreds of games in the season). With no SR loss, you’d literally need to be an abuser to be top 500. It’s math.

How would it actually be abused though? People would group to boost ONE account? and then just cycle out a new person everytime? That would take an absolutely insane amount of coordination. And then if a person boosts BEYOND where they are supposed to be, so lets say you get a gold to boost to Diamond, they will lose way more frequently so you just starting burning through a 40 accounts to what? Gain 200 SR? And then lets say this person boosts their gold friend to GM in an even more insane scenario- they would lose easily 80% of their games.

And then who does this really hurt? The ‘winning’ team still gets SR… the losing team ends up even?

Remember when nuking was a thing being used on opposing players to make them lag and eventually lose connection. Now you have an incentive for players to do it to their own team mates when they are about to lose.

This is just an example of how it can be abused but here is the idea of why something like this would not work:

In economics there is a concept called incentive. An incentive is something that is designed to encourage a behavior. Usually incentives are intentional and meant to encourage people to buy more of a product. This can be things like ‘The 10th one is free’ or ‘Buy 2 get the third free’. Incentives get people to do these things because they get something out of it. This can also lead to abuse because incentives can sometimes work too well. Most times you see limits on offers like the ones I described like ‘Limit 1 per customer’ or ‘Not available with any other offer’ to discourage behavior that they don’t want.

Now in overwatch we have already seen some incentives that have created problems. Golden weapons are a good example because it did such a good job of encouraging players to play competitive that it brought in players who don’t care for the mode and only want the competitive points. Now in terms of the leaver thing, you have to look at the idea of no loss of SR as an incentive. This is because it’s a benefit and people will be encouraged to find ways to get the desired outcome. The bully someone to leave thing may not work but do we really want to encourage people to be more toxic then they already are. Truth be told we also don’t know what kind of exploits may exist that could make this an issue. All adding what you propose would do is encourage people to find them.

Thus in the end it’s better to create punishments that discourage behaviors you don’t want rather then try to create incentives because its easier to make it non exploitable.

I think a better solution would be to alter respawn timers to try and even up the 5 v 6 a little bit so that the team with the leaver has a fighting chance.

1 Like

Increase the leaver penalty significantly.
Abuse problem solved.

1 Like

No offense, but if you can’t even conceptualize how the abuse system would work, you have no right to make blanket arguments claiming abuse absolutely could not happen, especially when this has been explained countless times in these threads.

Take a 6 stack. Players 1-5 log into their main accounts, player 6 on one of his leaver accounts (which is still close to his real rank because he still solo queues with it and still gets wins in a group). They queue competitive. If they win, they play another game. If they’re about to lose, player 6 leaves. Players 1-5 receive no or reduced SR loss, and player 6 gets a leaver loss and a suspension. Player 6 swaps to his real account and player 5 swaps to a loss account. Repeat until 6 losses are accumulated (but no SR loss on main accounts!), then player 6 swaps to his second leaver account (he bought 5 for $100). Repeat this until all 6 players get a loss on their second leaver account. Repeat until all 6 players get a loss on all 5 leaver accounts. Every person in the stack now has not lost or had reduced loss for 25 games that they legitimately lost. Their main accounts are all now 500 SR above where they should be at 20 SR per loss, or 250 SR above at 20 SR x 50% reduction. And that was just 1 leaver penalty on all of their secondary accounts. After 2 to 4 losses per leaver account, they have inflated their SRs by 1000 and can’t even group on their leaver accounts anymore. Obviously their win rates will start to drop, but you don’t need to go to the extreme of 1000 SR gained through abuse to see that it’s a problem. Even 100 SR gained through abuse at high levels is an issue.

Also, any system that reduces losses without reducing gains inflates overall SR, which hopefully you can understand is a problem.

New problem introduced: I have someone who has left 2 games on the other team. Blizzard increased leaver penalty to 125 SR, so he is sitting at the same SR as me, but is actually 250 SR in skill better. My team loses the game because the increased leaver penalty screws up matchmaking. I’m now at a lower SR than I should be.

It’s a very careful balance.

So when I’m on a team and beating the other team so badly one of them rage quits, I now have to wait 20 seconds to respawn? So now my team that was roflstomping the other team might get a loss because the weakest link on their team rage quit and Blizzard gave the other team an advantage? Seems pretty unfair to the better team. Also it would breed toxicity to encourage the weakest link to leave when you know you’re actually better off without them.

This brings up an important point that is left out of most of these debates: most of the time the team with a leaver was going to lose anyway.

Thats assuming they win… if you have a 6 stack of boosted accounts- you will lose a ton more.

1: I meant suspension time mainly not SR. Hard to keep rotating leavers when every one of your accounts is banned for a week after one night of playing.

2: You’re forcing the vast majority of the player base to suffer for a small percentage of potential abusers.

3: You can’t tell me that Blizzard doesn’t possess the ability to analyze reported leavers and see they are always grouped with the same 5 people and punish all 5 accounts.

I wasn’t suggesting a change to the point where it felt like they had an advantage. I was just thinking you could make it feel like winning was still a possibility.

Be honest, at least 9 out of 10 times right now, if you have a leaver on your team it’s a loss. That happens even if you were winning when they left. It’s incredibly unfair now! Something must be done to try and make it more fair.

Edit: I will add that I have been on multiple occasions winning when someone left causing us to lose. Example: the time we completely stomped the enemy on attack on Hollywood. Pushed the cart with ease. Then we switched sides and someone had a DC. We got stomped. They did come back, but by that point the match was almost over and couldn’t be saved.

Want to know what would feel worse than losing a game despite being on the better team just because someone’s power went out? Losing a game on the better team because Blizzard coded in an advantage to the other team just because someone rage quit. In the first scenario, that’s just life, and mathematically overall, your SR goes up because of it (you get 6 wins from the current system for every 5 losses you get due to unintentional leavers). In the second scenario, it’s not “just life,” it’s Blizzard intentionally punishing the better team, so it would feel super crappy.

1 Like

Again, no one here is talking about coding an advantage. I am suggesting that we try to mitigate the disadvantage.

Either that or when someone leaves the match should just be canceled and the leaver banned for a time period that increases every time they leave.

1 Like

…are you serious? “Mitigating a disadvantage” to a team is giving them an advantage. Is your next argument going to be that subtracting a negative number doesn’t yield the same result at adding a positive number?

Respawning in 10 seconds while the other team respawns in 15 seconds is an advantage. Just because your team is at a disadvantage being a player down doesn’t make it not an advantage relative to both teams respawning in 10 seconds while your team is down a player. Certainly the team of 6 is still more likely to win, but the team of 5 has an advantage the other team does not have.

There should be absolutely no incentive given to making someone on your team leave. This gives a team incentive to try to get someone on their team leave in some situations.