Queue Dodging Timeout Feedback

careful. next time you drop you will have a 20 hour banishment. best solution is to make our quams known to the devs until the realise their error and fix their “solution”

Great, just make sure to buy aoe4 :slight_smile:

You have failed to show there’s been any appreciable loss in players as the result of the change, and right now it’s had the most unfortunate errors since it’s brand new. A poll does not reflect reality, and reality tells us the change in players is flat (I.E. no change) so unless you’re going to prove that 25% of players straight up quit, and show why it’s not represented in the player statistics, it’s bunk.

I saved you the trouble of debasing your own argument by cutting out the exaggeration. Thank me.

A result of preferred map, which I’ve already indicated was a bad decision to implement that we should gut if we had any sense about us. Hopefully the timeout change will address this slightly. You’re comparing problems on day 1 of timeout versus a month or a year down the road, and as such you’re sensationalizing it. I don’t blame you, but at the same time, you can’t expect me to agree to your critique when it’s the result of a problem the timeout system is intended to help aid, less than a week after release.

Oof. Again. There is absolutely no statistical corollary to your claim that 25% will quit. Either you’re wrong, or it’s brought back an equally large number of people who absolutely cannot stand the alt-f4 nonsense and are happy to actually be able to play. I’m not ignoring 25% of the players. Your assertion of displacing 25% of players is bunk. Get over it.

Damn, what’s with all these complaints about people not being able to ditch games all about then? Weirdly, while there’s a lot of one-true-map believers in here, about 30% of the thread is literally people complaining about how there’s game-crash bugs giving them a timeout. Which is a legitimate problem, but blaming Timeout for that problem is a stretch to say the least. Which is exactly what you do again, with Smurfing by conflating it with Timeout.

Oh damn? So… Timeout is the issue, and not the ease of smurfing… That’s what you take out of this? Again, you blame the system you oppose because you don’t like it as a result of problems that aren’t caused by it. I hope you’re not delusional enough to think removing Timeout solves these problems.

Do you think a player who plays exclusively Arena and a player who plays exclusively Arabia, because of map bans/pref map/alt+f4 are going to have a well-balanced game if they both have 1200 ELO on Arabia? How about Arena? Nomad?

The purpose of ELO is to properly match opponents to an equal skill level. Allowing people to play whatever map they want and then gain ELO on the back of that map familiarity advantage spikes ELO gain, and causes unfair matches. Unlimited map bans make this problem worse. You either didn’t read, or didn’t understand the context, so there it is again.

1 Like

I think this is far less problematic than you make it seem. Maps are different but they are not different enough to warrant entirely separate Elo ratings, we’re still playing the same game and build orders work across different maps.

I might not be able to beat someone who has practiced arena more than I have (or someone who has played solely on arena), but that’s not a fault of the system, I should have practiced arena more and developed a more optimized build for it if I intended to win that matchup. So instead of coming over to the forums and making a thread whining about unbalanced Elo, maybe I’ll watch the replay and work on a better strategy for next time, or ban Arena in my next queue if I didn’t enjoy the matchup.

Good thing we have a map pool system then, I’m not advocating for unlimited bans, I was just pointing out that “elo integrity” is wayyyyyyy down in the list of problems when it comes to considering unlimited bans or “opt-in” as a viable system.

I’m stopping to argue with you now because as usual you seem to read parts of sentences instead of the full sentences, miss 90% of what I wrote and then argue things that I have already replied to.

Why do you keep mentioning player stats, I did not claim that we have lost 25% players, I claim that we have the intention to lose 25% players:

Isn’t the sentence clear enough? I’ll say it again, with this patch DE devs have not discouraged Alt-F4 at all because the penalty is so easy to circumvent.

As usual, fruitless debate, you keep using provoking terms while blatantly missing the evidence, first you said only a minority was complaining, now you admit there’s many people complaining but reduce their complaint to “booh we can’t ditch games anymore”, no need to argue against that, people can just read the thread. The first reply and most liked comment in the thread is TWest saying that he doesn’t like the change because people resign early in his games but yeah he’s probably just a salty Alt-F4’er trying to hide the truth.

3 Likes

there is my model system.

1 Like

Let’s explain the “pot/kettle” analogy

Pot:

Kettle is black

I’ll always attempt to give you a discussion, because I’m not a quitter, but let’s not start getting prickly about who says and does what, yes? If you don’t want to engage with me, don’t.

what about polls who dropped the game cause it’s too annoying to search for 15+ min for one game?

Also, I dont care about 25% of leavers, why should i? 10k or 7.5k does not matter to me.
At least I can play now, and some players will return. May be return more than 25%.

PS seems to work 10/10

I would be unhappy about such a change too. It’s kind of a ridiculous example since the current system is nowhere near that bad. Nevertheless, I would still not be forced to play ranked BF. If anything, that system would probably encourage more lobby play, or maybe even quickplay, the thing that is supposed to be what 1mappers want ranked to be but isnt cuz nobody plays there.

Im not saying the lobbies are perfect, but it is not like you cant balance teams yourself. And if you saw Rustycrow’s post recently, you’ll note the MM for ranked isnt perfect either. It would get even worse with infinite bans.

I agree we should change the discourse away from “play my maps!” and “I wont play ur maps!” arguments. In the current system, though, everyone has to compromise a bit on what they want. It’s much better if we all agree to play each other’s maps so that others in return will play ours, because that would be an ideal - if fragile - situation.

1 Like

You’re also punished for quitting once in game before a certain time limit, by losing ELO and ban time.

IMO the changes don’t go quite far enough.

In addition to the ban, players should be guaranteed the same map every time until they play it past a certain point. This should include not only resignations, but also all your units dying. So if you go afk and your opponent kills all your villagers/buildings, you get the same map again.

If you only want to play one map, you should be playing Lobbies, not ranked. It was good enough for 17 years, it’s good enough for you now.

2 Likes

wtf. i can only assume you are trolling. thats the silliest idea ive heard on the topic

4 Likes

Totally ignoring the fact that those Lobbies were ranked and changed your Elo 11 - boy if you dig up the past, at least make sure it’s in your favor

Also absolutely insane proposal

4 Likes

ALT-F4 Update made matchmaking worse. You’re forced to play maps you dislike and u either have to play it and grief or resign at start making game for 9 other players meh. :grinning:

If devs were interested to improve ranked tg mm, they would fix smurfing/boosting issues instead of focusing to this garbage update fix.

5 Likes

What’s so insane about it? If you want to play the game, play it right or deal with the consequences.

I can think of nothing more entertaining than the endless salt of people forced to play arena over and over until they play it for real.

You can ask for a refund despite having 1000 hours if you prove you got banned cause the actions of others, which in current state is demonstrable and easy to replicate.

You don’t get a timeout, you are getting a ban, you can’t use the game, the punishment are cumulative and there ain’t any cooldown, if you got a 20 hrs punishment 2 days ago, the next time you get another punishment you don’t start in 5 mins, but you continue with the +20hrs ban(which seems to be the max), so if you are unlucky enough and got a bunch of games where your allies dropped early, or the game just crashes as thousands of reports since release, you are damned.

Also if you don’t know something about laws, avoid the subject, not in all countries the winner can demand the fees of the trial, if you demand a corporation it is under the laws of that country not the usa laws.

2 Likes

Ok , this new time out thingy is literally the worst decision the devs made . i resigned in a game at min 3 , cuz i tried to go for khmer 15 pop into scouts . somehow i lost a vill to a boar so i resigned , now i have a time out …

2 Likes

Hey Devs, thanks for ruining the game! and forcing everyone to play BF! Wonderful!

1 Like

Actually it’s a good implementation, finally they punish those who constantly waste the time of others and are for whatever reason not able to host a lobby, where they would 100% get their specific map.

To everyone resigning min 0 or deleting your starting tc: this is not a solution. You can and will be
(rightfully) reported for this and get sooner or later your well deserved ban. The constant trouble of having to make new accounts and grinding them up is not worth it.

2 Likes

This thing sucks, sorry.

1 Like