I had plenty of games where we were up against a mediocre team and had one player in our team who quit. In many cases they weren't even rage quitting. Those games were ruined by the AI giving gold to the enemy. What exact problems do you have with a simple change as the AI simply not giving gold to the enemy team?

Player leaving mid game will always happen, regardless of any implemented system to preven that. And when that occurs, the AI will feed the enemy.

I don't understand what this has to do with the proposed change. This change will certainly not use as much time and effort as replays, clan options, pantheon fixes etc.

I don't see you mentioning anything about "fixing" the problem of a player leaving for any reason. You just think it all comes down to pure rage quitting where your team would lose anyway. But a player leaving for no apparent reason whatsoever can always happen and there is no reason to screw up such a game further by having the AI feeding gold to the enemy.

Basically, what he's saying is that it's better to fix the actual problems instead of swatting at symptoms like this idea is doing.

I agree.

I'm shocked that there isn't universal agreement on this.  Such is the nature of opinion, right? But nonetheless, I'm sure that anyone disagreeing with the suggestion at hand must realize how this will eliminate the AI feeding problems (and eliminating the feeding problem would make any game which was unfortunately made unfair due to incoming AI all the sudden a bit more reasonable to deal with).  Therefore, your disagreement confounds me.  And though any team stuck with AI will essentially be short-handed for the rest of a match and thus at a disadvantage, they won't be at any further disadvantage because of AI feeding issues.  I cannot imagine this fix being substantially time or resource consuming (maybe I am wrong, though; nevertheless, I still feel it important enough).  If anything, it will nicely complement all of the rules being set to deal with rage-quitting.  Must it really be one or the other?!  No, it need not be.  To ensure our utmost gaming experience, I am confident that Stardock will push this through.  This is necessary. 

 - andpancakes

signed

please reduce the AI farming

I think in a perfect world that the programmers would like to think that the AI plays at about the level of an average human, so that would be an obstacle to this sort of idea...but I don't really think it would be that bad of an idea to have the AI only reward a fraction of what a human death would. Its so easy to trick the ai into thinking it doesn't need to run until its too late...

The obvious solution is smarter AI  though . Probly not gonna see it till mod support is available though.

Look, in the games I play the absolute overwhelming percentage of the time quits are because of rage or connection issues.  Rage is being dealt with; throw that out the window.  Connection issues are also being dealt with (global fixes, ban players with known problems in your list).  So all that's left are "miscellaneous" walk-the-dog type of quits that happen so insignificantly they aren't worth attention at this time IMO.

I am not saying AI farming is fine; I'm saying this is hackish band-aid solution to a problem that, as you've stated, we're not certain will be nearly as pressing an issue once existing solutions are deployed.  We can reevaluate at that time.  When they do reevaluate, most likely they will implement the non-hackish intuitive more direct and customizeable solution I provided.

Heh, more like for the love of GOLD/EXP! lol 

May I remind you that I have had numerous games that people quits due to them lagging. As well as some people that quitted for no apparent reason, e.g. shortly before 1st kill. Any anti-rage quit measures are unlikely to be 100% effective either. AI will play a part in the game. What you have proposed is not 100% fail safe.

A handicap option is not bad as you suggested. I actually would like to see that implemented. Having options is always good. However I would like the default value to not give any god nor exp to players.

This idea has been around almost since the 3rd week the game was out.  RQ, DCs, walk the dog, (screaming kids/wife), you will always lose a player.  AI feeding is the reason people dominoe-RQ after an AI takes over.  Reducing or elimiating the gold/xp an AI replacement gives is the simplest way to fix this.  It changes the AI from a cash-cow for the other team to an acutal ally that may even help in some situations.

There are two main problems:

1) Sometimes people don't quit after they 'die a lot'. Some people quit after maybe their second death in game, and bitching about it to all their friends. This may be 5 or more minutes into it, and turn a reasonable game into something unwinnable.

2) Sometimes people have client side connection problems.  Their network kicks out for 10 seconds, and they get disconnected.  It'd be nice if this always happened in the first minute or two of the game, but it doesn't. It would be nice if this didn't severely penalize the team who had the disconnect.

3) Lastly, the argument of developer time is pretty moot.  We aren't suggesting some incredibly huge system change, but the injection of likely two or three lines of code:

What will take longer is to determine whether such a change is important enough to make. And that is the discussion we are having here.

What unique arguments have you made that I've not already debunked elsewhere?