PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
I dont want my teammates quitting and i dont want the enemy’s teammates quitting. I want good solid games. People who quit at the first sign of trouble dont deserve to play ranked and need much longer bans, days even. Or even rank losses. This way habitual babies that quit repeatedly will forever be in the low ranks or not able to play at all.
I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
I am just so tired of playing ranked in MCC and having match after match of people rage quitting which results in a guaranteed loss 99% of the time… The reason people do this is because these players know the worse 343 will do to them is give them some 1 or 10 minute ban.
We need a system like this at least for ranked, but i wouldnt mind if it was in social to.
I second that.
Although punishing players with bad connections is unfair to them, the system should be able to identify patterns or technical issues (ping etc) to punish mostly only quitters.
Warnings could be send to everyone with lots of canceled games to receive some form of penalty on the next exit/quit.
1-2 days no multiplayer access if a certain threshold is reached - 15 minutes no mp after each quitt - losing ranks/exp. - a sign beneath the name so people could kick such players out of their party before starting mp - players with high quitting rate can only join solo modes - players with high quitting rate can only join unranked modes - players with high quitting rate should never be host - the player name is overwritten with the word Quitter
> 2533274793250636;2:
> I second that.
> Although punishing players with bad connections is unfair to them, the system should be able to identify patterns or technical issues (ping etc) to punish mostly only quitters.
> Warnings could be send to everyone with lots of canceled games to receive some form of penalty on the next exit/quit.
> - 1-2 days no multiplayer access if a certain threshold is reached - 15 minutes no mp after each quitt - losing ranks/exp. - a sign beneath the name so people could kick such players out of their party before starting mp - players with high quitting rate can only join solo modes - the player name is overwritten with the word Quitter
I honestly dont know how feasible that would be. the game would have to be doing alot more than what games typically can do. Anyone can google how to simulate ways to make their ping spike / dc. Honestly there is no foolproof way for a game to “Detect patterns” to see if its real disconnecting or player induced due to how simple it is to simulate various ways of disconnecting. Its even easier to do this inconsistently so how is the game going to detect any patterns?
Honestly I stand by what I said that if you have a shoddy connection you should not at the very least play ranked because youre throwing serious games potentially.
Everything else you said I agree with. 343 needs to seriously drive home that its not ok to quit in ranked. If it were up to me i would use these systems in both social and ranked. of course social would be more relaxed and it would take a bit more to start getting these heavy penalties but in ranked it should be harsh. Doing things like what you suggested would seriously discourage the majority from quitting.
These little time outs do absolutely nothing, and reporting people doesnt do anything either.
> 2533274831074612;1:
> PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
>
> I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
343i already have a pretty harsh ban system imo.
Not everyone has super duper broadband for many reasons, I live in rural Scotland but I’m lucky, we have fibre, not everyone does, we have villages still with copper only a few miles from us, the global broadband infrastructures are not there yet, you’re asking for an elite broadband only ranked section, not going to happen. Besides, there will be still be disconnects for other reasons.
Mum and dad pull the plug at dinner time, the phone goes, the door rings, the super duper bb drops out, the game boots to main menu or dashboard (looking at Halo 5 and CoD Cold War for that), etc, etc, etc. There needs to be an allowance for quitting. Best we can hope is 343i monitor disconnects to identify the habitual ones from the occasional ones. It’s the fairest way.
Of course, you can punish those who quite. It would be good if the game can identify if someone is just closing the game or is leaving the match through the ingame menu.
So you will punish those who actually really do quit because of some stupid reasons.
Others with like bad connections would be spared from that. Of course there might be a way to cheat that system but it would be a good step into the right way.
I would also love the idea, that your whole service record is viewable ingame. I remember, that you were able to even see how many betrayls you commied on Bungie’s Halo 3 Site.
So it would be really good to see…
how many games games a person played - how many games games a person won - how many games of a person ended in a draw - how many games of a person ended in a defeat - how many games were actually quitedOf course it would be humiliating if someone could see that you (rage)quitted 10% and more of your games but - as I say - it’s in your hand and it’s your own fault.
Also it could be more detailed, did you quitted more social or competetive games.
So you could actually really punish those who ragequit.
When I imagine where I and a friend handled a Reach Invasion Slayer game 2v6 cause all our teammates quitted [we won something 80:45 or so] but I understand the main problem. Personally I rarely experienced quitting. Mostly just in Arena games when my team got annihilated but the enemy team 50:10 or so. I remember you were able to gain a steak medal when you won a match with at least 20 or 30 kills more than your enemy.
So there are in conclusion three valid options to wortk against quitting:
show it in the service record - make the system so good that it can identify and punish those that really quit and or close the game, sparing those who lost connection [only if those actually experienced that very often, but it would be still annoyong cause some will just deactivate their wlan or so] - Destiny’s kinda grace rule, when your team is fastly annihilated, the game will end [personally a really good system but it actually just fit’s into Halo like stupid pizza and pommes skins lol - like whenever will you achieve the killing-sprees medals]
> 2592250499819446;4:
> > 2533274831074612;1:
> > PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
> >
> > I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
>
> 343i already have a pretty harsh ban system imo.
>
> Not everyone has super duper broadband for many reasons, I live in rural Scotland but I’m lucky, we have fibre, not everyone does, we have villages still with copper only a few miles from us, the global broadband infrastructures are not there yet, you’re asking for an elite broadband only ranked section, not going to happen. Besides, there will be still be disconnects for other reasons.
>
> Mum and dad pull the plug at dinner time, the phone goes, the door rings, the super duper bb drops out, the game boots to main menu or dashboard (looking at Halo 5 and CoD Cold War for that), etc, etc, etc. There needs to be an allowance for quitting. Best we can hope is 343i monitor disconnects to identify the habitual ones from the occasional ones. It’s the fairest way.
Reading that it seems that only small villages there have copper… In germany nearly more than 50 to 60% of the cities, and towns in the provinces have copper internet cause as our government said “the internet is a kinda new-land”
> 2533274861263132;6:
> > 2592250499819446;4:
> > > 2533274831074612;1:
> > > PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
> > >
> > > I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
> >
> > 343i already have a pretty harsh ban system imo.
> >
> > Not everyone has super duper broadband for many reasons, I live in rural Scotland but I’m lucky, we have fibre, not everyone does, we have villages still with copper only a few miles from us, the global broadband infrastructures are not there yet, you’re asking for an elite broadband only ranked section, not going to happen. Besides, there will be still be disconnects for other reasons.
> >
> > Mum and dad pull the plug at dinner time, the phone goes, the door rings, the super duper bb drops out, the game boots to main menu or dashboard (looking at Halo 5 and CoD Cold War for that), etc, etc, etc. There needs to be an allowance for quitting. Best we can hope is 343i monitor disconnects to identify the habitual ones from the occasional ones. It’s the fairest way.
>
> Reading that it seems that only small villages there have copper… In germany nearly more than 50 to 60% of the cities, and towns in the provinces have copper internet cause as our government said “the internet is a kinda new-land”
I suppose it does but I was using my area as an example as I know it’s a fact. I know nothing about Germany’s bb but I don’t doubt other countries are at different levels, that’s why I stated the global infrastructures are not there yet.
> 2533274795123910;8:
> Just have people qualifying for a ban play each other instead, with no match records or rewards for a few consecutive matches.
Wouldn’t be a really good solution.
Punish people that they can’t play or are forced to play social playlists cause they get banned from ranked playlists for x-hours/days.
Otherwise, like I know my next two games will have no service record or so, so I will just play stupid and or betrayl some of my teammates [not too many cause otherwise I’ll be kicked].
This kind of system will punish also those that are forced to play your next few games with them.
> 2533274861263132;9:
> > 2533274795123910;8:
> > Just have people qualifying for a ban play each other instead, with no match records or rewards for a few consecutive matches.
>
> Wouldn’t be a really good solution.
>
> Punish people that they can’t play or are forced to play social playlists cause they get banned from ranked playlists for x-hours/days.
> Otherwise, like I know my next two games will have no service record or so, so I will just play stupid and or betrayl some of my teammates [not too many cause otherwise I’ll be kicked].
>
> This kind of system will punish also those that are forced to play your next few games with them.
Only those who’d qualify for a ban would be in those matches.
Those who can behave could get back to normal mm, those who can’t would be stuck there with no rewards until they can behave. There’d be no time to simply wait out, you need completed matches.
Then you’d do that. You’d still be separated from the proper MM pool, and you’d only affect others who have misbehaved, and too are there with you with no rewards or record of the matches. Just as you could be subject to other players with the same mindset as you.
No normal players would be present in these setups.
> 2533274795123910;10:
> > 2533274861263132;9:
> > > 2533274795123910;8:
> > > Just have people qualifying for a ban play each other instead, with no match records or rewards for a few consecutive matches.
> >
> > Wouldn’t be a really good solution.
> >
> > Punish people that they can’t play or are forced to play social playlists cause they get banned from ranked playlists for x-hours/days.
> > Otherwise, like I know my next two games will have no service record or so, so I will just play stupid and or betrayl some of my teammates [not too many cause otherwise I’ll be kicked].
> >
> > This kind of system will punish also those that are forced to play your next few games with them.
>
> Only those who’d qualify for a ban would be in those matches.
> Those who can behave could get back to normal mm, those who can’t would be stuck there with no rewards until they can behave. There’d be no time to simply wait out, you need completed matches.
>
> Then you’d do that. You’d still be separated from the proper MM pool, and you’d only affect others who have misbehaved, and too are there with you with no rewards or record of the matches. Just as you could be subject to other players with the same mindset as you.
>
> No normal players would be present in these setups.
Okay, so what do you want to do if there are less people in that? Of course at some point there will always be enough who broke rules but I would still prefer systems where those players get punish with temporal bans +msome malus in their servive record.
Especially this game is F2P, it’s better to say you will get a temporal ban than forcing people to play “toxic” matches. Like why should I play a toxic match or a match where I know it will not affect my Service Record but I will rather play another game where I just get a timely ban if I quit early.
I agree with OP that people with shoddy internet connections or poor power grid infrastructure should not be playing ranked matches. But there should be something that they could play online. Social playlists were absent at Halo 5’s release, that’s an unforgivable mistake that cannot be repeated.
One more thing: do you remember Warzone when people started to farm enemy teams by spawn trapping them on their home bases without destroying their cores only to make the match last longer and thus get more points to level up their ranks? I’ve been on the receiving end of that many times, and I never quitted, but I can’t blame the people who did because that was hell. Rather than quit games that went bad, I quitted Warzone altogether – that game mode was broken and 343 failed to fix it before I got totally burned out. My point here is that we should avoid being too harsh on quitters, at least in some game modes, when the real problem might be with the game economy favouring farmers and griefers.
> 2533274938827434;12:
> I agree with OP that people with shoddy internet connections or poor power grid infrastructure should not be playing ranked matches. But there should be something that they could play online. Social playlists were absent at Halo 5’s release, that’s an unforgivable mistake that cannot be repeated.
>
> One more thing: do you remember Warzone when people started to farm enemy teams by spawn trapping them on their home bases without destroying their cores only to make the match last longer and thus get more points to level up their ranks? I’ve been on the receiving end of that many times, and I never quitted, but I can’t blame the people who did because that was hell. Rather than quit games that went bad, I quitted Warzone altogether – that game mode was broken and 343 failed to fix it before I got totally burned out. My point here is that we should avoid being too harsh on quitters, at least in some game modes, when the real problem might be with the game economy favouring farmers and griefers.
Totally understand that with Warzone. In my opinion that grind for Achilles made it really more worse and the fix with just 12v12 or groups of 6 was executed waaaay too late
> 2533274861263132;11:
> Okay, so what do you want to do if there are less people in that? Of course at some point there will always be enough who broke rules but I would still prefer systems where those players get punish with temporal bans +msome malus in their servive record.
There’s always going to be enough people to get a match together. If it’s only one single player in the timeout box, then I’d say, as long as it funtions as intended, quite an effective way of making player behave.
Why is having players wait out a timer, more effective in getting them to behave, than subjecting them to the same experience they’re doing to others? If they continue as such in the penalty MM? Or preferable for that matter?
> 2533274861263132;11:
> Especially this game is F2P, it’s better to say you will get a temporal ban than forcing people to play “toxic” matches. Like why should I play a toxic match or a match where I know it will not affect my Service Record but I will rather play another game where I just get a timely ban if I quit early.
The penalty matches could very well be like normals ones. If players there are interested in getting back to normal MM with rewards and stat tracking, then they’d do best to behave, no? Either they learn to behave there, or they get to continue to play while being separated from the normal player pool and act as a punishment and reminder, to those who end up in the penalty pool.
If you don’t want to play penalty matches, then you either buckle up, behave and continue to do so, or, you stop playing altogether. Your bad behaviour is removed altogether from the player pool, in either case.
A random quit or disconnect won’t get you banned, you know that right?
Why would you rather that? Because it’s more convenient? It’s more comfortable? Because it doesn’t actually affect your game experience?
The issue I have with this, that I hope will be solved when infinite comes out, is that even with good internet connection, the halo 5 servers will leave one person from our fire team behind in the lobby. I play with 2 other people and 2 will get into the game while one of us is left in the lobby. So a lot of times we have to quit the game to go back and join the other person. If the servers were better this wouldn’t be an issue though.
> 2533274831074612;1:
> PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
>
> I dont want my teammates quitting and i dont want the enemy’s teammates quitting. I want good solid games. People who quit at the first sign of trouble dont deserve to play ranked and need much longer bans, days even. Or even rank losses. This way habitual babies that quit repeatedly will forever be in the low ranks or not able to play at all.
>
> I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
>
> I am just so tired of playing ranked in MCC and having match after match of people rage quitting which results in a guaranteed loss 99% of the time… The reason people do this is because these players know the worse 343 will do to them is give them some 1 or 10 minute ban.
>
> We need a system like this at least for ranked, but i wouldnt mind if it was in social to.
I think they should do what The Coalition did with Gears 5, where rampant quitters would get month to year long bans from matchmaking
> 2535428777172366;16:
> > 2533274831074612;1:
> > PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
> >
> > I dont want my teammates quitting and i dont want the enemy’s teammates quitting. I want good solid games. People who quit at the first sign of trouble dont deserve to play ranked and need much longer bans, days even. Or even rank losses. This way habitual babies that quit repeatedly will forever be in the low ranks or not able to play at all.
> >
> > I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
> >
> > I am just so tired of playing ranked in MCC and having match after match of people rage quitting which results in a guaranteed loss 99% of the time… The reason people do this is because these players know the worse 343 will do to them is give them some 1 or 10 minute ban.
> >
> > We need a system like this at least for ranked, but i wouldnt mind if it was in social to.
>
> I think they should do what The Coalition did with Gears 5, where rampant quitters would get month to year long bans from matchmaking
I’ve done all the campaigns, but haven’t touched MP that much since 3… and that’s amazing lol. It would definitely teach them a lesson (hopefully). But I think it should not be too crazy stringent. Perhaps weigh in games completed/quits/time since last disconnect/amount of quits in a given period. Start it at 10 mins and then extend to maybe 7 to 14 days.
> 2535428777172366;16:
> > 2533274831074612;1:
> > PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
> >
> > I dont want my teammates quitting and i dont want the enemy’s teammates quitting. I want good solid games. People who quit at the first sign of trouble dont deserve to play ranked and need much longer bans, days even. Or even rank losses. This way habitual babies that quit repeatedly will forever be in the low ranks or not able to play at all.
> >
> > I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
> >
> > I am just so tired of playing ranked in MCC and having match after match of people rage quitting which results in a guaranteed loss 99% of the time… The reason people do this is because these players know the worse 343 will do to them is give them some 1 or 10 minute ban.
> >
> > We need a system like this at least for ranked, but i wouldnt mind if it was in social to.
>
> I think they should do what The Coalition did with Gears 5, where rampant quitters would get month to year long bans from matchmaking
Well even if you ban people for a month or a year - new account, problem solved
> 2533274795123910;14:
> > 2533274861263132;11:
> > Okay, so what do you want to do if there are less people in that? Of course at some point there will always be enough who broke rules but I would still prefer systems where those players get punish with temporal bans +msome malus in their servive record.
>
> There’s always going to be enough people to get a match together. If it’s only one single player in the timeout box, then I’d say, as long as it funtions as intended, quite an effective way of making player behave.
>
> Why is having players wait out a timer, more effective in getting them to behave, than subjecting them to the same experience they’re doing to others? If they continue as such in the penalty MM? Or preferable for that matter?
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274861263132;11:
> > Especially this game is F2P, it’s better to say you will get a temporal ban than forcing people to play “toxic” matches. Like why should I play a toxic match or a match where I know it will not affect my Service Record but I will rather play another game where I just get a timely ban if I quit early.
>
> The penalty matches could very well be like normals ones. If players there are interested in getting back to normal MM with rewards and stat tracking, then they’d do best to behave, no? Either they learn to behave there, or they get to continue to play while being separated from the normal player pool and act as a punishment and reminder, to those who end up in the penalty pool.
> If you don’t want to play penalty matches, then you either buckle up, behave and continue to do so, or, you stop playing altogether. Your bad behaviour is removed altogether from the player pool, in either case.
>
> A random quit or disconnect won’t get you banned, you know that right?
> Why would you rather that? Because it’s more convenient? It’s more comfortable? Because it doesn’t actually affect your game experience?
Well you are right in this point.
BUT remember - if there is a hard punishment like there is no careertracking, especially in a F2P game there will be always several people that will constantly break the system. Like some streamers on Twitch who just ragequit and then cry and mobilise their toxic fans that that system is unfair. Also what would be the plan, if someone is behaving, comes back, mess around again, comes back again to mess up again. If there will be some kind of ban for 1 day or 1 week or longer, they will just play with a second account.
That was also [another szenario] in Halo 3: people were too bad to get over Skill 30 or 40, created new accounts and destroyed the experience for those who are actually not that good.
> 2533274861263132;18:
> > 2535428777172366;16:
> > > 2533274831074612;1:
> > > PLEASE 343 implement more harsh punishments for these people who quit all the time in halo infinite.
> > >
> > > I dont want my teammates quitting and i dont want the enemy’s teammates quitting. I want good solid games. People who quit at the first sign of trouble dont deserve to play ranked and need much longer bans, days even. Or even rank losses. This way habitual babies that quit repeatedly will forever be in the low ranks or not able to play at all.
> > >
> > > I dont care if someone has a spotty connection and gets caught in the crossfire. If your connection is bad you shouldnt be playing an online ranked game in the first place getting disconnected and ruining the ranks for others.
> > >
> > > I am just so tired of playing ranked in MCC and having match after match of people rage quitting which results in a guaranteed loss 99% of the time… The reason people do this is because these players know the worse 343 will do to them is give them some 1 or 10 minute ban.
> > >
> > > We need a system like this at least for ranked, but i wouldnt mind if it was in social to.
> >
> > I think they should do what The Coalition did with Gears 5, where rampant quitters would get month to year long bans from matchmaking
>
> Well even if you ban people for a month or a year - new account, problem solved
Nope, cause if someone is habitually quitting so much to warrant needing a new account just to play, that resets them to rank 1. meaning they wont ruin matches for serious players who are close to average, average, or above. Sure people can just keep making new accounts but that always puts them back at the start of Skill based matchmaking and rankings.
