First off i don’t like join in progress at all. And i hope at the very least that in competitive playlists in H5 there is no join in progress. But what i find a more important issue is quitting games, the punishment you receive for doing so and the position your teammates are left in.
Here are my suggestions:
Quitting: You lose xp. Quitting too many times in a short period of time results in a 10 minute probation from competitive play (i.e. ranked playlists).
Vote to Forfeit: In general once a teammate has quit, that team is most likely to lose. In that situation the teammates left on the team are unfairly disadvantaged and will most of the time lose the game and possibly drop ranks. Here’s a solution: When a teammate quits, from the start menu an option appears to “Vote to forfeit”. A time limit of 2 minutes would be given to vote to forfeit (so that you cant just wait until the last second in the game and quit). If the vote is unanimous, the game ends, the winning team gains their xp as usual, the losing team loses nothing and gains nothing. That way if you think you can pull off a 3v4 you can chose to keep playing, and otherwise you don’t get penalized. Each time another teammate quits you’ll get another chance to vote (i.e. you chose to keep playing a 3v4, but then another player quits and you know there’s no way you can win a 2v4. At that point you can vote to forfeit again).
What about a toggle on/off for join in progress. Players who don’t want to join a match mid-game won’t have to, but when someone leaves in the middle off match, there’s still the possibility that your team will be brought back up to four players and there’d be no need to forfeit because of it.
> What about a toggle on/off for join in progress. Players who don’t want to join a match mid-game won’t have to, but when someone leaves in the middle off match, there’s still the possibility that your team will be brought back up to four players and there’d be no need to forfeit because of it.
My suggestion really applies to ranked games more than social playlists (because i really hope that distinction exists in H5). Ranked playlists wouldn’t work well with join in progress and i don’t think there’s much point of having a toggle option because then 90% of players will toggle join in progress off and then you won’t get players anyway.
> What about a toggle on/off for join in progress. Players who don’t want to join a match mid-game won’t have to, but when someone leaves in the middle off match, there’s still the possibility that your team will be brought back up to four players and there’d be no need to forfeit because of it.
Honestly though, no one is going to choose to join a game already in progress.
I love this idea! That’s one of the bigger pet peeves I have with competitive team play. The only scenario I see this being an issue with is if the other team is partied up with one of your teammates (if that is even allowed in ranked), and so that your traitorous teammate obviously wouldn’t vote for the forfeit.
One thing I think would help the forfeit option, though, would be for there to be more noticeable notifications to alert you when a teammate quits, as well as when a teammate votes for a forfeit to help remind you of what is available for you at that point.
If a successful vote to forfeit occurs, do those who voted to forfeit avoid losing exp AND any affect on rank or do they only avoid losing exp?
Great ideas, I really like the compromise these ideas bring to the table. Here are my thoughts:
I like the forfeit idea, especially when you’re one of 2 remaining players getting crushed by a team of 8.
A punishment system should impact your ranking… the whole “wait 10 minutes” isn’t much of a disincentive. It also doesn’t reach the majority of quitters in an adequate timeframe.
JIP is a good idea but poorly implemented in Halo 4. It shouldn’t be in any kind of competitive playlist but certainly has a place in the social ones.
Also, JIP should be a toggle for those who don’t like joining a game mid-action.
Thirdly, JIP should use a more strict timing/scoring system. Joining halfway through a game isn’t really fun for anyone… keep it to the early stages of each match.
Forfeiture of a match should be the same as quitting/losing in all respects other than avoiding potential bans. You forfeit rather than be required to play out a match you cant win to avoid a quit-ban. Evrn then you might want to limit the number of forfeits allowed in a day.
All it would take for abuse is to have one team mate out of a party of 4 quit to allow the forfeit if we weren’t penalizing rank.
Bans for quitting should be severe, but not be complete. Players could be banned from a particular playlist for a day or be relegated to social lists only for that same day.
> Bans for quitting should be severe, but not be complete. Players could be banned from a particular playlist for a day or be relegated to social lists only for that same day.
Well that’s a bit unfair. What if you actually have to leave and go do something for an hour and you get back just to see that your banned from your favorite playlist.
Three quits in an hour could get you banned for 30 minutes. OR. Two quits in 30 minutes could get you banned for 30 minutes.
> > Bans for quitting should be severe, but not be complete. Players could be banned from a particular playlist for a day or be relegated to social lists only for that same day.
>
> Well that’s a bit unfair. What if you actually have to leave and go do something for an hour and you get back just to see that your banned from your favorite playlist.
>
> Three quits in an hour could get you banned for 30 minutes. OR. Two quits in 30 minutes could get you banned for 30 minutes.
Reasons don’t matter, quitting is quitting and not sportsmanlike behavior to your teammates. Besides, if you quit for the reason stated above, then the penalty doesn’t affect you anyway. No, I think the only kind of worthwhile punishment is one that affects your VIGR. It needs to stick, not give you an excuse to play another game for 30 minutes.
I sort of enjoy JiP, i’ve had a lot of close games where we squeak out a win, if I went positive, then I know I was the gamechanger and without me I think the team would’ve lost a man down.
With that said, the majority don’t like JiP and they already confirmed it wont be included in H5. I don’t like the vote surrender option, because you find that games with that (league of legends), if theyre voting to surrender, if they dont get their way they either AFK (even worse, free kills) or just play crappy increasing the gap and furthering the chance for team to vote yes to surrender.
you should always play to win, and if you’re voting to lose then you’ve already lost basically. also even if you’re playing crappy, voting to lose discourages your teammates who might be playing good
I like this idea. It would allow people to end games where the other team has a huge advantage or is being spawn killing scrubs.
But Join in Progress needs to be in the game. Quitting bans do absolutely nothing except annoy players into leaving.
I think JIP sucks and should never happen.
If you quit you should have to sit out until the game you quit is completed. And I agree that a vote to forfit option. It always sucks in Big Team where its 8 vs 2 in slayer and the 2 are hiding.
> Also, JIP should be a toggle for those who don’t like joining a game mid-action.
I prefer no JiP. I play with two other people usually. So we are a team of 3 going into Team Slayer. We love 3v3 games, but with JiP, we always have a 4th person thrown on our team who usually costs us the game because they don’t know how to play with our playstyle. If my whole team has the toggle off, and the whole team has the toggle on, then we would lose out and be forced into having that 4th person join anyways. Getting rid of JiP is the best way to go so things are consistent and everyone can be happy. There are too many variables that go into a “fair” JiP system for it to be enjoyable for the majority of players.
> Forfeiture of a match should be the same as quitting/losing in all respects other than avoiding potential bans. You forfeit rather than be required to play out a match you cant win to avoid a quit-ban. Evrn then you might want to limit the number of forfeits allowed in a day.
>
> All it would take for abuse is to have one team mate out of a party of 4 quit to allow the forfeit if we weren’t penalizing rank.
>
> Bans for quitting should be severe, but not be complete. Players could be banned from a particular playlist for a day or be relegated to social lists only for that same day.
I agree with your first assessment, that forfeiture = losing in that there should be a negative impact to some stat or other. The main purpose of forfeiture is to end a match that has already been decided so we can move on to the next match. This is what’s happening when we get the “quit cascade” after the first guy quits anyway.
No sort of quit punishment is worth the effort because it’s usually a “crime of passion.” You know you’ll get punished but you do it anyway because emotions have overloaded. Sort of like the death penalty. At best a quit stat should be monitored and “hardened criminals” could be “confined” to, for example, being only matched with other quitters.
Kind of like “therapy.”
> > Forfeiture of a match should be the same as quitting/losing in all respects other than avoiding potential bans. You forfeit rather than be required to play out a match you cant win to avoid a quit-ban. Evrn then you might want to limit the number of forfeits allowed in a day.
> >
> > All it would take for abuse is to have one team mate out of a party of 4 quit to allow the forfeit if we weren’t penalizing rank.
> >
> > Bans for quitting should be severe, but not be complete. Players could be banned from a particular playlist for a day or be relegated to social lists only for that same day.
>
> I agree with your first assessment, that forfeiture = losing in that there should be a negative impact to some stat or other. The main purpose of forfeiture is to end a match that has already been decided so we can move on to the next match. This is what’s happening when we get the “quit cascade” after the first guy quits anyway.
>
> No sort of quit punishment is worth the effort because it’s usually a “crime of passion.” You know you’ll get punished but you do it anyway because emotions have overloaded. Sort of like the death penalty. At best a quit stat should be monitored and “hardened criminals” could be “confined” to, for example, being only matched with other quitters.
>
> Kind of like “therapy.”
I like your second paragraph mentioning regular quitters getting matched with others like them. Maybe a cup of their own tea would open their eyes.
I don’t know how matching quitters with quitters would work out in the end logistically, but i like it.
Rather its probably better to track quitting and escalate bans if you’re going to punish it at all. Especially if we see a forfeit option to quickly end unfair matches.
> All it would take for abuse is to have one team mate out of a party of 4 quit to allow the forfeit if we weren’t penalizing rank.
If for instance someone quits on purpose to avoid losing rank for his whole party, all the members of his party could lose their “immunity” to losing rank. In other words, even if they forfeit, the people who are in that persons party will take a loss, where as any other players on their team won’t.
There can also simply be a deadline halfway or just over halfway through the match where vote to forfeit is no longer possible, for example in a CTF game with score limit 3 and one team is leading 2-0, or in a slayer game when one team hits 30. This way late-game forfeiting isn’t as easy.
Bottom line, i shouldn’t drop a rank because xXJoeHalo117Xx decided to quit 30 seconds into the game.