the leaver SR penalty is an important part of being able to smurf efficiently
Yea but if power goes out for a few hours or ones computer crashes and it has to get fixed or something? I think there should be at least a bit of leeway for potential situations like this.
Good, force them into a bracket similar to their own skill.
That can be exploited, so unfortunately every instances of disconnect must be met with the same consequences.
I’m sure many people would burn their “free skip” for a match if they had the power to.
1 Like
I don’t think its a problem because if someone leaves a game they loose some rank and in team people are given the option to quit without risk of their rank.
The problem is that players need reinforcement to treat a ranked ladder game seriously. If you are not willing to commit to playing a game where not only your rating but the rating of your teammates matter, then you should not enter Competitive Play.
Unforseen circumstances are always possible to any player. That is why the SR penalty is fixed at 50 SR per leaver violation and the starting suspension is only 15 minutes. A just right amount of time to get a player’s attention and work to resolve issues before they attempt to play again.
Skill rating is a culmination all of your matches including the matches you won due to a problem with a player on the opposite team. The fixed penalty for SR is a visual deterrent which reinforces the idea part of your skill includes your ability to actually complete the games.
The rule is that if you leave or disconnect after you participate in a match, you have two minutes to return to that match without penalty. If you fail to participate (deal damage or healing) at the start the match will cancel and you will be penalized. If you fail to return within the two-minute window, you can still return, but your personal result will be marked as a loss and the penalty will be applied regardless of the match outcome. If you fail to return by the time the match ends normally, you take the loss and penalty regardless of the match outcome.
Again the leeway is the small penalty. Otherwise players would not take the time to fix their persistent issues.
Details of Blizzard’s policy regarding tech issues and why penalties are still applied can be found in this forum post:
3 Likes
Not leaving isn’t a skill and doesn’t compliment your game sense or mechanics.
Realistically what should be done is a standard win/loss modified by a percentage deduction on gains/losses based on when the person left. If there are concerns about the abuse of this mechanics, negate it for people queued in groups. This will bolster ladder integrity and keep people on track to where they should be in a skill bracket. Competitive restrictions are the only necessary punishment for leaving.
Leave a match and you have to complete x number of quickplay matches before you can queue back into ranked. This scales higher the more you leave, ultimately ending with a permanent season restriction.
Your second statement contradicts your first statement… 
Without the SR loss, players would essentially have 2 ‘get out of jail free’ cards each season…
Refer to my most recent response please. The leaver in question would still receive a standard loss, that much can’t be helped. However, we shouldn’t look at SR as a reward system because it’s used as a metric to calculate a person’s skill for match integrity. Adjusting SR as a penalty actively sabotages those calculations. There are better modes of penalty than arbitrarily adjusting a person’s skill rating.
Long story short, it’s not a “get out of jail free card” because that person should be matched with the people they were playing with as they were of similar skill.
1 Like
Are you saying they should have the ‘loss’ recorded on their profile but don’t lose SR?
No, they would lose SR equal to receiving a standard loss. As I said, that much can’t be helped. There will never be a perfect system with too many factors outside the control of devs. However, given enough time, those additional SR deductions skew the ladder more and enable smurfs to abuse that system to negate what would otherwise be a win and maintain a low rank that they shouldn’t be in. Now, they could still do that with a standard loss, but the calculation sabotage would be mitigated to the best capacity. Couple that with the necessity of completing a series of QP matches before ranked is enabled again and I think we could cut down significantly on not only leaving, but smurfing in whole.
No. I believe there should be leaver penalities to a point, but maybe 1 or 2 free leaves per season in case of something like blackout or computer crash.
Then as I said, it’s a ‘get out of jail free’ card if their team is getting stomped and the chance of high SR loss is high it would be easy just to d/c and minimize SR loss…
No, as I said to the other person, it would essentially be a ‘free avoid losing SR’ option each season. It would be abused…
I suppose we’ll have to agree on a difference of philosophies. You view SR as a reward, I view it as a data element used to calculate match integrity. Winky face.
Also, I don’t think you understand what I said at all. They wouldn’t be saving any SR by leaving… lol.
Scenario for concept:
Player X leaves a match at 2:31 seconds. The average match time in playable minutes is (idk what like 12-15?)
Current model: Player X receives a -50 SR deduction and a small, nominal suspension.
Proposed model: Player X receives a standard loss (which would be what 20-25 without PBSR factors?) This part of the calculation isn’t a penalty, it’s just a result of a loss. The penalty would be a competitive suspension that requires increasing games completed in QP to re-enable competitive. Meanwhile, the 11 players who had their game sabotaged by the leaver would receive minimal gains and losses pending on when the leaver left. (and as I said earlier because I feel like I’m going to have to repeat myself again, if we’re worried about the abuse of this model, these reductions wouldn’t apply to players grouped with the leaver in question)
If the leaver left at the 10 minute mark of an avg 12 minute map, then no reductions would be made to SR gains/losses to either team as the match had been played mostly to completion by the time the person left.
What does this accomplish? Ladder integrity is supported by a couple factors.
-
Leavers will have less incentive to leave, considering they will have to invest time into QP matches, and won’t simply be able to afk until their timer is up to queue in comp again. This will ultimately result in more completed games without intentional leavers.
-
Smurfs will not be able to maintain a lower rank as easily, and this will ultimately reduce the incentive for people to smurf in general.
And lastly, this is just in concept, the numbers I’ve provided shouldn’t be taken as absolutes.
Wait let me clarify. No. They still loose SR, but the penalty I am talking about is the one where your XP gains is reduced by 75%. Thats what I think someone should get a pass on for 2-3 leaves in a season.
I didn’t say that. My argument was on the basis that players believe that…
It amuses me after all this time that people still don’t see any system that preserves SR (or greatly reduces loss of) for players impacted by a leaver will be abused.
I appreciate the concept you’re putting forward but it’s idealistic (and a little naïve) in the sense it doesn’t factor in people who just want to climb at any cost…
It’s not idealistic, it’s logical and I’ve explained the logic to you. I’ve done data analysis for over a decade now, and using a metric designed to pair similar elements being used for punitive purposes is poorly designed. What’s idealistic is doing the bare minimum (-50 SR slap and a minimal time restriction) and assuming it’s going to have a positive impact on the longevity of aforementioned pairings.
…
Leaving is still way too common and every leaver ruins the match for 5 more people.
If you have disconnection issues, just stay away from comp mode. And this is coming from someone who has lost lvl 5 endorsements several times just because of disconnections especially considering how hard it is to get it back.
Yes, it’s extremely common, and that stands as the largest element of proof that existing measures are not adequate.
Yes they aren’t. But loosen the penalty won’t make the things better.
If anything there should be something to encourage staying in the match to the end.