It’s not “my” suggestion. And I don’t have to convince you (fortunately). As I mentioned before, I suspect you don’t see this kind of topics as a debate between rationale persons, but rather as a contest to write as many insults and provocations without getting flagged…
If you don’t like an accurate assessment of your position’s value, don’t bring it to the table.
When you do bring it to the table, announcing it to the great void for the fiftieth time, don’t be surprised when something comes out of the void to tell you it’s very late and they’re trying to sleep.
What a rant O.o
…
Why you don’t just say: “Eat it now that all the haters got their will with an unnecessary punishment.”?
If you talk about alternatives, maybe you should consider alternatives for that blunt punishment that doesn’t helps anybody. Instead you are just bullying on people who actually look for alternatives.
Whilst I must say that the weird predictions of swaggy are indeed weird, but that’s no reason to bully on the in my eyes unnecessarily punished alt-f4. There must be a solution without punishment.
And currently ranked is 3/4 arabia anyways. It’s basically arabia ranked, not random map, what we get (if we don’t ban arabia) is an arabia elo. Nothing else. Why not just taking arabia out of that “random map” elo? Just make a pure arabia elo and a random map elo without arabia. Two queues, no alt-f4, finally a meaningful random map elo, everybody is happy.
PS: I never alt-f4 btw. I just don’t like people trying to enforce punishments on other to force them to do what they want them to do or being punished. That’s so toxic. Why can’t we allow anybody to play the game how he likes it to play?
1 Like
No idea what you mean there but if you say that based on WoeIsToWho’s quotes, probably better to check my original posts instead (and realize I likely said something entirely different).
Maybe you did, but actually they aren’t better than what whoistowho is saying about your predictions.
And it doesn’t help that you try to defy him with pedantic justifications, cause your predictions are just weird and completely made-up. Better you would stop with them cause it gives a “cheap” attacking point for whoistowho.
I have no idea what you call “predictions”, as you said the 70% Arabia pickrate comes from aoe2stats. If you don’t like something, quote it and epxlain why, don’t just post to say “I don’t like what you said”.
THings like this. I mean really? Only because you fit in the “intention” which is actually almost an insult to the devs you don’t claim it will happen?
And that’s hipocrit also because if there was no “danger” to lose 25 % of players how could anybody ever claim that there would be an intention to lose them. NO danger => no intention. So the prediction of potenially losing 25 % of the players is prerequisite for the intention to lose these players.
And how can it even come to your mind that devs would ever intend to lose 25 % of the players… I mean, seriously… What a nonsense.
Is this explanation enough for you?
You’ve got it all wrong, as someone who’s just dropped into this conversation with absolutely no context. I’m happy to catch you up to speed, and yes, I get a bit incisive. Here’s the context:
And now, to start answering your relatively lengthy, pretty much entirely saturated Ad Hominem…
This isn’t intended to be a punishment. This is there so that the people who are in the queue, trying to have a nice game, have a better chance of actually having a game worth playing. If someone is consistently resetting the queue for an uncounted large number of people because they don’t get the map they want, the most reasonable path to solving that problem is taking them out of the queue for a bit to improve the quality of experience of the players they would otherwise be diminishing by doing so.
Unless you have a much better solution, that works cleanly within the matchmaking system and isn’t unlimited map bans, or something that legitimately can’t work but people think it can (using a personal banlist of players, etc.) this is the best way to ensure the players who are just trying to get a game, can get a game.
I’m not bullying anyone looking for alternatives. I’m clamping down on one reoccurring character who has refused to stop saying the exact same thing every single time they get the chance in one of these discussions and then castigating their opposition when they disagree.
You seem to be laboring under the misunderstanding that Swaggy is arguing in good faith. You can stop doing so.
You can find answers to literally everything you’ve said otherwise, including an answer to this tidbit, in my record-digging posts. As you can see, my position is pretty well fleshed out, I considered the Timeout system to be a solution to a current problem that has gotten out of hand whilst hoping for a much more effective long-term solution that gives the players what they actually want. You can stop now.
Meanwhile, Swaggy literally spent twenty posts of one of the oldest Alt-F4 threads making it clear that he believed (at the time) that ALT-F4 was totally cool, and that the system is broken, so we should be giving those people medals and giving them unlimited bans.
I don’t know Swaggy’s opinion as of late… Maybe it’s changed?
Polls show ~25% players use Alt-F4 regularly, and the patch’s goal is to prevent Alt-F4, so yes, devs have the intention of losing 25% of their players with this patch. People who alt-f4 because they don’t want to play Megarandom are not going to suddenly accept Megarandom because you punish them, they are going to either take the penalty, or stop playing ranked.
As to why we are NOT actually going to lose 25% players, well, when the patch comes after 1 year of people begging for the fix, and in the first 3 hours people find out that you can simply delete your own buildings to circumvent the penalty, do I need to explain why I’m not really scared?
And I think punishment can never be the solution if the problem is caused by flaws in matchmaking. And the current system is. Especially in Multiplayer.
And yeah I read the other threads too. But you need to be more destinct in your formulations if you don’t want to have confusion. How should I estimate that your discussion in here is about a completely differen, actually more specific thread? I just can’t. And I also don’t think that’s true, cause you almost nerver used the word “multiplayer”.
Yes I agree, that alt+f4 in multiplayer is an issue. But alt+f4 in multiplayer is also often just because of the elo/smurf abuse of other players.
Why do we punish the peorple who don’t want to get stomped just because of the absurd elo hunt of a few… I think I am free to call them “narcissists”. Because that’s what they are.
I think it’s absolutely legit to escape from these people with alt+f4. Now you have to play them, what is absolutely absurd.
So the current “solution” actually makes multiplayer life even worse than it was before, cause now you have to play smurfs, knowing that you will lose just because of their absurd elo hunt.
Maybe you should ask yourself what you actually want to argue. And don’t use this kind of melodramatic, accusing narrative. That makes no sense. Just say that you don’t think this kind of punishment works. If that’s what you want to say.
1 Like
This is something I constantly ran into in those old discussions, which is that there are problems with the system that are causing ALT-F4’s. I agree, totally, that these problems are worthy of addressing, but my problem starts with conflating this with Timeout. Yes, this is a problem, but we’re going to blame it on Timeout since you used your one tool to escape it, and then got put on a waiting list?
My argument is really simple here: Why not just solve the problem you needed to ALT-F4 from, and then there wouldn’t be a reason to ditch? That’s the proper answer anyway. Even if there was no timeout, dodging bad actors would just require you to queue up again anyway, which wastes your time in either case. Timeout makes it worse, I sympathize, but I’d rather focus my energy in solving those specific problems rather than blaming it on a system that is made to solve something else, and has incidentally made that worse, yeah?
Smurfing is it’s own problem we should take a close look at, and I think we can agree on that. I don’t think we have to forsake the timeout system for that cause.
And here I disagree totally. Before you can ever make an argument for punishing people for “misbehaviour” you must make sure that the misbehaviour is never caused because of your flaws in matchmaking. And if matchmaking leads at least partially to alt+f4 because there are too one-sided matchups (because people exploit the matchmaking system), then you need to fix matchmaking FIRST before you can punish anybody for escaping too one-sided matches.
Always sweep first in front of your own door before blaming others.
1 Like
So, you can dig up 20 messages above, I posted 2 hours ago that Arabia was played 70% of the time to counteract the variety argument, then WoeIsToWho came and quoted one unrelated sentence out of a 5 days old post, with tons of ad hominem, then you are now coming and doing the same.
If you don’t like this post that’s fine but keep your “accusing narrative” and “pedantic” accusations to yourself, and at least read the original post, there is a difference between the tone I’m using to reply to a guy with which I talked already 10+ times in the same topic, and the tone I used in the original post.
And here we disagree totally. How are you supposed to fix a system when the system is feeding you junk data because the matches you care most to know about (since they’re the exceptions to the rule) aren’t being played out? If we already know what the problem is, we should be fixing it right now, irrelevant of timeout, and this shouldn’t be an issue. I don’t think these things should be exclusive.
This would mean you’re again conflating a different issue with timeout and blaming timeout for the problem. Just solve both, don’t blame one.
(I know you’re not exactly blaming timeout but rather critiquing the order of operations, I really do get that, but is critiquing the order of operations really more valuable and important than pushing the issue to get fixed? You put on a thread, I’ll support it. Said the exact same thing to Swaggy, what feels like a year ago, when he mentioned separating queues and ELO, that if he wrote up the thread I’d be the first to support it. Now here we are. Damn this is a long parenthetical.)
The only way this wouldn’t be true is if we don’t know enough about the problem to fix it properly, in which case, we need to see what happens with the timeout system in place to find a good answer. I don’t necessarily believe this is the case, I think we could probably be looking at solutions for those problems with what we already know, but that’s just lax action on the part of the developers. Blaming timeout for that doesn’t make sense.
TBH I think multiplayer smurfs are the way bigger problem currently than multiplayer alt+f4.
With alt+F4 you eventually can get a kinda “balanced” matchup, but with the smurfs you may get more games, but only one-sided ones unless you smurf yourself…
Is this then the solution, everybody smurfing on multiplayer? So matches are then completely random again?
That’s a serious problem, cause smurfing is actually really “contagious” to use your term from before. And now we opened the door for the desease and closed the only way to evade it by punishment.
I don’t want to make prognosis there, but I think we are playing with the fire there.
And I don’t know why smurf-pushing elo is allowed while alt+f4 is forbidden. That makes no sense. The ladder is way less toxic than the first. It completely breaks multiplayer matchmaking. And it is actually intentionally toxic opposed to alt+f4 which is maximum selfish. Yes selfishness is also not so good, especially why do you play multiplayer if you are selfish? But intentional evil is way, way more toxic.
Why would you and ur teammate resign? Shouldn’t the guy whose teammate dropped resign or just get beaten quickly
Do you see how all of what you’re saying here, could be the start of a thread where we figure out how to handle that specific problem?
You’ve given me one, clear, succinct position that summarizes smurfs and their impact on the game, and we’re unfortunately going to ignore it instead of having a meaningful discussion on it, because you’ve posted it in a timeout thread instead of making it’s own thread, which it clearly deserves.
1 Like
It doesn’t work properly. If you get a connection error in Quickplay or Ranked - which has happened more times than I care to remember - you will get punished with a timeout which is complete and utter nonsense and vastly annoying!
Furthermore, I sometimes still get matched up with players who chose a map that I banned - ARENA - but it still forces me to play that; under the new rule, I am forced to play a map that I banned in order to not get blacklisted??
So I would suggest that the connection error and the bug that sets you up with banned maps be fixed first.
2 Likes
How do you get a map you banned? O.o
After a few days with this update it does seems at first glance, from the point of view from someone who doesnt mind what map they play on, that this has helped overall. However, hard to say how much of that is just from the queue not dropping after someone dodges, not so much the bans. Would still have much preferred a way to give more agency to players rather than punish them. Surely giving individuals another ban or 2 (for team games), but leaving a cap of 4 bans when players group up wouldn’t be too unreasonable? Ultimately I’m just glad some initiative has been taken after 18months of this problem 
1 Like