Mineral Leaver Bonus redux

[MOTHER]

The old mineral bonus/sec was too much but no mineral bonus is just as unfair. if 1 player or 2 players leave, your likelihood of losing is so high, there is no point in continuing anymore. Here is my proposal:

 

In addition to the 1 mineral per sec you normally receive, you should get:

 

1 mineral every 4 seconds if 1 player leaves.

2 minerals every 3 seconds if 2 players leave.

3 minerals every 2 seconds if 3 players leave.

4 minerals every 1 second if 4 players leave.

 

If the passive mineral gain is 2 per sec, then in addition to that you should gain the following:

 

2 minerals every 4 seconds per player if 1 player leaves.

6 minerals every 3 seconds per player if 2 players leave.

6 minerals every 2 seconds per player if 3 players leave.

8 minerals every 1 seconds per player if 4 players leave.

 

 

If you do the maths, this is most fair and the team with the less players won't get a single dime more than they truly deserve.

 

The mechanics for this are already present in items like Lost Treasure and Miner's, I doubt it would take much effort to reinstate this.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Jessika

[Hogwarts]

The old mineral bonus/sec was too much but no mineral bonus is just as unfair. if 1 player or 2 players leave, your likelihood of losing is so high, there is no point in continuing anymore. Here is my proposal:

 

In addition to your own 1 mineral bonus per sec you normally receive, you should get:

 

1 mineral every 4 seconds if 1 player leaves.

2 minerals every 3 seconds if 2 players leave.

3 minerals every 2 seconds if 3 players leave.

4 minerals every 1 second if 4 players leave.

 

If you do the maths, this is most fair and the team with the less players won't get a single dime more than they truly deserve.

 

The mechanics for this are already present in items like Lost Treasure and Miner's, I doubt it would take much effort to reinstate this.

 

Quit for a new game. The rating system is broken. There is nothing stopping you from leaving.

[John]

Implement automatic forfeit instead if 3-4 people in 1 team leaves.. ty

[MOTHER]

@Quid

 

Irrelevant. It's a given that nothing is stopping me from leaving and the time wasted trying to find a gg is another issue. The point is to give reason to stay in the game that is fun and fair for the players.

 

@John

 

That really doesn't help. Because in that case, the team with 1 leaver should forfeit - no pub game will ever even start.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Jessika

[Hogwarts]

5v3/4 will never be fair.

 

Its a whole another hero with a whole set of skills

 

What is your ingame name anyway. Do you ever go to the aos chat insc2. ? Do you even pub i never see u but on the fourm.

[MOTHER]

You're right, nothing can substitute the loss of another player/hero but that doesn't mean we should deprive the handicapped team the fair amount of minerals that they would normally get in a 5-man.

 

Also please understand that this change is directed primarily at the pub scene, which is made up of the majority of AoS players, where it is very normal to lose 1 or 2 players in the first 10-15 minutes of the game. In an IH setting, 3/4v5 is an automatic rematch usually.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Jessika

[MrGrim]

5v3/4 will never be fair.

 

Its a whole another hero with a whole set of skills

 

What is your ingame name anyway. Do you ever go to the aos chat insc2. ? Do you even pub i never see u but on the fourm.

 

Ad hominem argument, not productive at all and logical fallacy in arguments.

[SmittyGFunk]

If your team is outnumbered by 51% or mor it could auto forfeit. The 5v2 would get ended but 5v3 still playable would not. Unless the 5 are complete fools there is no 2 that can outlane 5 regardless of k/d ratios. Also requiring 51% would not end 2v4, it would only end 5v2, 5v1, 4v1, 3v1.

[MOTHER]

@Smitty

 

Auto-forfeit creates a whole new array of problems, imagine a 5v3 scenario where one of the 3 decides to be a dick and leaves, ruining the game for the 2 who may or may not have had a legitimate chance of winning. Forfeit/surrendering should always be a choice, you can't take that away from the players - this isn't a league game we are talking about.

 

This is besides the point though, auto-forfeit or not, a team of 5 gets 5 minerals per second, if they lose a player, that stream of minerals needs to be sustained and reallocated for the sake of fairness if nothing else. We have to come to terms with the reality that a 5v5 pub game from start to finish is rare and the developers ought to take that into account when trying to create an enjoyable experience for their primary player base.

 

The old mineral bonus system did not work simply because the team with the less players ended up getting more minerals and faster than they should've, this was apparent especially in a 3v5 scenario which was very common then and now.

 

Removing it did not solve anything, players still rage at the feeders and newbies, still demand that they leave without the promise of the mineral bonus - I'd say it made things much more worse by making it harder to find a good pub experience out of a 20-50 minute investment.

 

It's all about choice, while I and many of you know that if you're in a 5v3 situation and you're in the 5, it's tedious trying to win before but achievable, likewise if you are in the 3, winning was achievable. The odds may not be in your favor in the latter scenario but this is a game and gambling is part of the fun. If you don't want to participate in a 5v3, you can leave but you shouldn't be unfair to the team with less players by taking away their minerals and you should definitely not force a forfeit. Playing is a choice, and any game like I keep saying should be fun AND fair.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Jessika

[mynhauzen]

I had a game few days ago as a rancor with raynor. We won 2v5. It is possible:)

[Wrath]

In addition to your own 1 mineral bonus per sec you normally receive, you should get:

 

The base income is 2 per second, not 1 per second.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Wrath

[MOTHER]

If it is indeed 2 then the new mineral bonus changes to the following:

 

5 minerals every 10 seconds per player if 1 player leaves.

12 minerals every 9 seconds per player if 2 players leave.

24 minerals every 8 seconds per player if 3 players leave.

56 minerals every 7 seconds per player if 4 players leave.

 

 

Or the faster alternative:

 

2 minerals every 4 seconds per player if 1 player leaves.

6 minerals every 3 seconds per player if 2 players leave.

6 minerals every 2 seconds per player if 3 players leave.

8 minerals every 1 seconds per player if 4 players leave.

 

The total for the entire team would always amount to 100 minerals in a 10 second period in each scenario. The intervals at which the minerals are reallocated changes based on the number of players but it does this so that there is no rounding up or down and the amount (100) is fixed.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Jessika

[Wrath]

If it is indeed 2 then the new mineral bonus changes to the following:

 

5 minerals every 10 seconds per player if 1 player leaves.

12 minerals every 9 seconds per player if 2 players leave.

18 minerals every 6 seconds per player if 3 players leave.

32 minerals every 4 seconds per player if 4 players leave.

 

The total for the entire team would always amount to 100 minerals in a 10 second period in each scenario. The intervals at which the minerals are reallocated changes based on the number of players but it does this so that there is no rounding up or down and the amount (100) is fixed.

 

The actual implementation need not be nearly so complicated. Round the amount down, then keep track of the amount that got rounded off, and simply distribute it when it is large enough.

[MOTHER]

Idk Wrath, you're better at this than me so I'll take your word for it. :) My point is though that a more fair mineral bonus like this is necessary for a moba pub experience in the SC2 arcade.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Jessika

[ANARCHY]

ive been saying this for the last year...

 

the problem with mineral bonus was always that it gave more than the total the other team could achieve

instead they removed it

 

good luck

[HarryHootie]

the passive income still works with ais gg

[John]

Even if you can win 2 vs 5, the game gets really boring if you are in the team of 5. And if you win you it only proves that you played against 5 idiots.

 

Personally I leave regardless if I'm in the team of 2 or the team of 5.

 

I'm not gonna waste my time playing a shapty game cause I'm up against 2 idiots turteling nor I'm I going to waste 5 others time if my team leaves the game even if I feel like I can win. It's just bm and boring depending if ur in the team of 2 or 5.

[MOTHER]

You are free to choose that John, but what does your choice have to do with mineral redistribution? It shouldn't bother you if it is reinstated or not then since you will leave either way.

 

I also feel you are taking a more extreme example of this, 2v5 is less common than 3v5 or 3v4 or 4v4 or 4v5. The latter scenarios can be salvaged and their experience experience improved for all players involved if the bonus was reinstated fairly.

[John]

^ Because it makes more idiots continue with 2 vs 5 games.

[NeVeRWiN]

Make automatic forfeit both teams if 1 side has less then 3 people, problem solved

[CoolNoob]

Make automatic forfeit both teams if 1 side has less then 3 people, problem solved

that is not the best solution... that would destroy pub scene. Edited April 14, 2014 by CoolBluE

[SmittyGFunk]

Jess, i didn't say it should be put into the game, just provided the numbers where i think it would be ok. Personally i dont like to quit regardless of the odds, but i do understand why some people would want this.

[MOTHER]

This is slightly related to some of the topics discussed in this thread, so I'll post it here.

 

There is little incentive to continue if 1 or 2 players leave (again no bonus), because of this I think the conditions of surrender should change. We should be allowed to initiate a surrender vote if 1 player leave/drops. Currently the conditions are 2 players (from your team) and/or the 20 minute mark if I'm not mistaken.

[MrGrim]

It goes back to the same argument, rankings have little meaning except those at the upper echelon with gm and masters ranks but this doesn't affect them. Surrender votes mean nothing since its possible to f10 quit with little to no consequences. I end up in pubs with people who never want to surrender or leave, far more easier to quit out and start another than surrender. Also makes it less of a chance I end up queing with them. I think the surrender option is better suited for ih.

[MOTHER]

The idea is if the option to surrender exists and it does, the conditions of the surrender need to be relative to the game currently. Since the removal of leaver bonus, the conditions are outdated and restrictive. I also prefer not to rage quit, unless the other players left me no choice and I don't have time. I prefer this not because of rating, but because I don't like it when people rage quit and I would rather not repeat and perpetuate the behaviors I hate in the world.