Add a fill option for game/scenario leavers.

Add an option for a spectator to fill a scenario spot whenever a player leaves before the max join turn comes up. It would make games more consistent and the player base wouldn't leave the game after having 50% of their games ruined by trolls or rage quitters.

Not sure if this was ever brought up here or discussed, I made this in the spur of the moment after I had a game ruined lol

I hate this idea, it defeats the entire purpose of trolling...

Very, very good idea. So it doesnt matter if people leave as long as we get someone else to replace them. But how would you decide what player should join or not? Imagine if a r4 take a r10 spot. Would that matter? I like the idea.

Scris de RED DEATH, 12.12.2018 at 18:51

Very, very good idea. So it doesnt matter if people leave as long as we get someone else to replace them. But how would you decide what player should join or not? Imagine if a r4 take a r10 spot. Would that matter? I like the idea.

It would honestly be better to have a rank 4 fill a rank 10's spot than to have a whole game completely stop because a role is unfulfilled. I saw the thread fcd3 posted in about how he was looking into punishment for leavers. I think the discussion that is more important is how we can save these failed games so that the community doesn't quit out of frustration.

Agreed

Scris de RED DEATH, 12.12.2018 at 18:51

Very, very good idea. So it doesnt matter if people leave as long as we get someone else to replace them. But how would you decide what player should join or not? Imagine if a r4 take a r10 spot. Would that matter? I like the idea.

Host gets message.

X Wants to join as Y. Yes or No.

What if I have an addition to that. (Not sure if it is possible though within the programming but, let me know what you think of it).

Lets say that we change the whole joining/leaving/spectating part of the game? For example if a player has to go, or seems to have internet problems (you name it), he clicks the button [Leave & Allow spectator to replace spot].

You might ask now, which of the spectators will replace this spot? Well... what if you can choose as spectator to enter a reserve list or just spectate the game regularly? The system should automatically place a number on the waitinglist/reserve list, and the at number 1 replaces the first one that leaves and so on.

I think this probably works the best on scenarios, since this is a no-go with clanwars and duels lol.

The benefit of a system like this, it will like you've said above, keep the games going and more consistent, and I think the games would be way more fun, like a world game of 20/20 fighting till they lose, instead of a world game that empties in 5 turns.

Alright, this system may cause another problem: When you beat your enemy and he leaves but you have to fight someone else after. Let's say you are playing Colonial and you are UK and you have been fighting Spain all game. Spain loses a battle and ragequits t40 but someone after him comes and plays and it goes like that for many turns. Many people can also get angry because game was going to finish just for someone fresh to take over the enemy account with host approving and troll the game. Trolling is still possible.

Scris de RED DEATH, 12.12.2018 at 20:25

Alright, this system may cause another problem: When you beat your enemy and he leaves but you have to fight someone else after. Let's say you are playing Colonial and you are UK and you have been fighting Spain all game. Spain loses a battle and ragequits t40 but someone after him comes and plays and it goes like that for many turns. Many people can also get angry because game was going to finish just for someone fresh to take over the enemy account with host approving and troll the game. Trolling is still possible.

The option to join would expire when the standard max turn to join would expire.

Scris de beep, 12.12.2018 at 18:53

Scris de RED DEATH, 12.12.2018 at 18:51

Very, very good idea. So it doesnt matter if people leave as long as we get someone else to replace them. But how would you decide what player should join or not? Imagine if a r4 take a r10 spot. Would that matter? I like the idea.

It would honestly be better to have a rank 4 fill a rank 10's spot than to have a whole game completely stop because a role is unfulfilled. I saw the thread fcd3 posted in about how he was looking into punishment for leavers. I think the discussion that is more important is how we can save these failed games so that the community doesn't quit out of frustration.

There is a game called vain glory that punishes players who abandon games by banning them temporarily from games. (You get a few warnings, then bans, which progressively get longer).

Agreed, very good idea

Agreed.

Scris de beep, 12.12.2018 at 18:27

Add an option for a spectator to fill a scenario spot whenever a player leaves before the max join turn comes up. It would make games more consistent and the player base wouldn't leave the game after having 50% of their games ruined by trolls or rage quitters.

Not sure if this was ever brought up here or discussed, I made this in the spur of the moment after I had a game ruined lol

i Agree this too but, i think this needs to have, when an host want to change host i think it's needs to select who will be the host, not the system

Scris de beep, 12.12.2018 at 20:36

Scris de RED DEATH, 12.12.2018 at 20:25

Alright, this system may cause another problem: When you beat your enemy and he leaves but you have to fight someone else after. Let's say you are playing Colonial and you are UK and you have been fighting Spain all game. Spain loses a battle and ragequits t40 but someone after him comes and plays and it goes like that for many turns. Many people can also get angry because game was going to finish just for someone fresh to take over the enemy account with host approving and troll the game. Trolling is still possible.

The option to join would expire when the standard max turn to join would expire.

teamwork/alliances become more meaningful !

I played 3 ww1 today and all of them failed because of leavers at turn 2-10. so i agree with your idea

Scris de Tribune Aquila, 12.12.2018 at 18:50

I hate this idea, it defeats the entire purpose of trolling...

Agree

We can still troll by getting their spot and going afk tho. Xaxa Unless they implement what WD said.

"I think this is a good suggestion, but an automated solution would be better.

One way to automate is to give it to the one with highest rep count, oldest account, most games or index which is a combination of multiple factors such as mentioned earlier.

An automated approach is more objective, simpler for developers, easier for hosts (many people already dislike being a host because it's too much work/stress), more challenging to abuse and you have the possibility of creating an incentive. Example of the latter: the player with lowest abandon rate in the queue gets the seat, now everyone has an incentive to watch their abandon rate (leave less frequently)." = HU4Rollz

how about player/s with least early surrender/abandon rate get to join ?

Scris de Ludditez, 14.12.2018 at 15:26

"I think this is a good suggestion, but an automated solution would be better.

One way to automate is to give it to the one with highest rep count, oldest account, most games or index which is a combination of multiple factors such as mentioned earlier.

An automated approach is more objective, simpler for developers, easier for hosts (many people already dislike being a host because it's too much work/stress), more challenging to abuse and you have the possibility of creating an incentive. Example of the latter: the player with lowest abandon rate in the queue gets the seat, now everyone has an incentive to watch their abandon rate (leave less frequently)." = HU4Rollz

how about player/s with least early surrender/abandon rate get to join ?

this would make a huge gap in ranks, and create a very unbalanced situation for certain games like WW1 where you have a r10 Serb and a r6 AH or NWE where you got a r8 USA and a r15 Mex, but the idea of player with the lowest abandon rate and highest rep would be a better idea as players would try and play as more friendly people and not try and be a dick to everyone around them

So your fix would be ?

That's basically without trying to be a pseudo what i posted !
(least s/a rate lets not overheat the servers even more with infinate player combinations).
as for actual rank...
what does that count for with the number of alts floating about ?