Board Thread:Game discussion archive/@comment-26299078-20150410192954/@comment-3003548-20150419005631

I too recently had my internet die randomly and got a warning, forcing me to say "I Agree" to not do something I have no control over. Now I know it's supposed to only really stop you from playing when you have repeated "offenses," but it's a slap in the face to those who actually try hard to avoid leaving games, especially when you're trying to log back in multiple times before realizing your connection is just gone for whatever reason (not something common, but it happens). It would be wise of them to actually check your effort to reconnect, and alter the first warning accordingly, or punishment when it has occurred more than once recently (that is, it should weigh in a bit less). I'm not asking for it to do nothing, but they really should treat their potential paying customers better, also keeping player's outlook on the game more positive.

As for whether it's "sensible" to prevent you from playing, do you have a better, less controversial punishment? By all means, I would be interested in hearing it.

As far as I can see, it just needs to be tweaked. Another potential change, though it may seem illogical at first, would be to lessen the weight of the recorded leave if your team wins afterward. The reason is that they were not as disatisfied with the outcome. This isn't so much to "reward" players for leaving at opportune times, but rather to focus the more recently harsher Leaverbuster on the offenders that do the most damage. A team losing is a decent measurement of this. A similar thing that should weigh in is that in Co-op vs AI, if a player leaves, a bot takes leave as well. While losing roles can still hurt, this is a much more acceptable situation to be in. PvP games should also weigh more heavily, as players are typically more emotionally invested, so Co-op vs AI could be toned down slightly for that alone, as well. Of course, they could be doing many of these and I wouldn't know. If so, it would be nice if they did let us in on it, so it would be easier to respect the system. Naturally, they should emphasize that the weights are *greater* for worse offenders, rather than lighter for others.

In single-player bot games, it is ludicrous to d/c / threaten a player for afk'ing or leaving respectively, but they do this even in training, while you're messing with options, saying you afk'd and it d/c's you. I remain baffled that they have yet to address this issue (checked the SR one recently after a long absence; and yes it's still easily the most annoying tutorial I've yet to see). There's definitely some work to be done.