I say cut the favour they gain when they leave by half. Since it's not always the end of the game, such favour isn't actually decided. Likewise, they may not have ended up staying for the entire length of the game. It would be a way to stop people from abusing the system to farm favour.

I think this is a great idea and much needed.  Alternatively, it could be made into a voting type system.  Let the team decide as a whole if they're going to surrender or not.

I'm more in favor of voting for Surrender.

If majority agrees, game is ended, if not it continues and anyone quitting will get NOTHING.

You must NOT reward quitting. Quitting is a deliberate choice and someone legitimately leaving because he doesn't have time left to play does not care about rewards, he really has to go.

Ragequitters are just sore losers, they must not be rewarded in anyway and need to learn to accept defeat.

If someone leaves, then rest of team can vote again for Surrender.

Very glad to hear this is being worked on.

I think it's essential to remove the Demigod from the game, with no AI replacement. The tricky part of conceding is in preventing abuse by either team.

For reference, TDA rules in DOTA allow a team to forfeit the match if every team member types 'ff' after 50 (or 55?) minutes of play. At that point it's safe to say there is no forfeit abusing, but it's a relatively arbitrary metric to esteem when the game is truly over.

Voting as a team is a good idea, but is susceptible to griefers refusing to end the game (or disagreements amongst players). Limiting the favor they receive to what they have immediately earned is a good idea, but would this encourage people to refuse to forfeit in order to get any end-game favor they may receive?

An interesting option might be to have a set of conditions that must be met before a team can concede. Similar to the after 50 minute rule in TDA DOTA, instead the condition is based on game status; i.e. flag captures, war rank, total gold per team, kill-death ratios, and other variables. This way, a team would be allowed to forfeit and retain all of their currently earned favor points only if the game is truly over, so they aren't able to deny the opposing team of a fair, full game. Also, it prevents the opposing team sitting on an overwhelming advantage while one player on the losing team refuses to leave for whatever reason.

Now I just need to goad Frogboy into rage-quitting...

Sorry Frogboy, I don't like your idea. I think this will just lead to a bad tendency where fewer games will be played to completion, and forfitting long before the game would normally be finished will be consider the new norm. I do not want to play a game where win/lose theorycrafting replaces the endgame of every match.

Selfish, impatient people (that ragequitters are) need to be dissuaded from leaving a game in progress. Punish them, take favor away, implement a 'quit game in progress' % that will be displayed in the lobby, make leaving games hurt if it happens often. Make them understand that quitting a game in progress ruins the game, and it is not acceptable. I realize there are many problems, like seperating disconnects from fake disconnects and quits etc. But it will lead to a better game in the end.

You wouldn't be the first ones to actually enforce some rules to keep a game organized, instead of just letting anyone do what they want.

I do think this idea could be acceptable (as a team surrender option) once someone does ragequit, and the remaining players are stuck in an already losing battle now with the 'help' of the AI that replaced the quitter however. And increase the difficulty of the AI replacements to Nightmare, or just drop the AI all together already sigh. Every player with more than 10 games under his belt is better than the Nightmare AI.

Lastly, I love the open communication and desire to please the customers coming from Stardock, but don't bow and scrape to selfish, impatient people who don't care about balance or the health of the game in the slightest. It makes me lose the respect I had. The devs should be the objective ones. The vast majority of players don't know what's good for themselves.

imo , the whole team must decide to concede and cant happen before 10 mins into the game .

also , removing ai if someone "ragequits"/drops is very important.

and if a person leaves without conceding with his team , it would be cool if we could add a mark to that player so it can be seen by all players in the lobby or on the statuspage, matching only people within certain amount of marks with eachother in pantheon would be good aswell.

like 0-5 marks

6-15 marks

16-30 marks

30+marks.

5 marks removed per month would probably be sufficient to count out drops as well.

that would imo work to everyones advantage , and people who like to leave can play with the ragequitters as much as they want

votes are too much of a hassle.

Instead there should be a surrender option, but the game is only surrendered once > 50% of the players choose to surrender. (That means both players in a 2v2, all but 1 player in 3v3 and 4v4, and 3 players in a 5v5).

Dalzk, why would your allies do that

and if they leave right now chances are high the AI replacement just feeds and turns the tide

Just a few things:

Other RTS's don't have this problem to the same extent, since if the games outcome is know.. more or less everyone leaves, and rolls a new game.

However in DG (& dota for that sake as well) are pretty much the only RTS's that rage quitting is considered a shameful act.

With this in mind, it would be interesting if this problem could be appraoched in a similar fashion as other RTS's ..

So with this in mind, I think changing win conditions will change the perception of the expected game length... people may be more inclined to head out and start a new game, if all of a sudden we're up against team of AI.

Situation: Hop into a panth game, CURRENTLY if theres connection issues, people drop, w/e say it 3v3, and quickly turn 3v0 within first 30 seconds (damn quitters) .. Now I would have to finish this comp stomp before i cna have my "win" and my favour .. (and of course most importantly, the forces of light also get their favour!)

Now this situation, should it be replaced with an ability at the end there for the game to recognise that im more or less going to win (i dont recall ever losing to AI .. at least panth lvl ai), allow me to leave the game, and start finding a new one, with the system accepting my win/favour.

This would allow turn around to be increased, allowing my games per hour to go up, it would also mean I may not need to achieve the required win requirement, but maybe all the other heroes left. This could potentially have a side effect on panth macthes were people disconnect on launch, and then cause the panth game to START with ai ... then the game could be considered an auto-win or somesuch ..

The ultimate change I think comes down to making me not too concerned with people quitting .. making me able to get to the end of the day with more time played, in game, with real people.

Savvy?

I agree, no AI replacement, becaause no body can replace a player and it would make the game fair. Because what kills people a lot is that the enemy farms the AI for gold, making it pointless to play. I could continue to play a game if a teammate rage quit on me if they had no AI. I'd enjoy the challange, and try to make up for it with more exp and gold.

how about canceling that not even match? im no friend of freewins :/

the main issue at this point is the connectivity or the fact that GPG wants us to have botmatches ( i think most of us has joined a full ai match without disconnecting players). so if we fix that, we dont need to autowin any match.

about the Topic:

i agree with the team can decide if loss idea. i cant agree with giving away the gold from leaving player, if u go to mageslayer(or every other artefakt) in early game because of a quitter u can slay entire enemy team. a better ai for leaving players would be a small help.

just my 2 cents