This shouldnt be an issue at all ragequitters are in all games infact THEY ARE EVERYWHERE even in real life You dont punish them you find better ways to deal with them LIKE MAYBE MAKING A DECENT AI? Lolz.But really there should be a way of telling disconnects from ragequits im fairly sure there is and if there is there should be an option to record quits say its like this you make a game its called RQ ON AUSTRALIA 3v3 or something like that and say that whenever you enter a game people can view the amount of times you quit aposed to the amount of games you have joined lets be fair if you quit 1 game out of 5  that really isnt that bad some people have busy lives and cant always hold down a hour long game but if you have more then that its the hosts decision to keep the leaver in game i think this would be the fairest way to go about it any thoughts? (Wile i actually play the game and try to find an aussy host)

But people will put down names for different reasons which is why it gets fucked in other games when they atempt banlists.

They did it in dow and it fucked the game online.for me anyway..

Dow was too stat based anyway everyone thought they were top shit if they had X amount of wins.

But this isnt dow and instead of showing wins and losses and judging people on that show there quits and their joins

I'd disagree with you on that point.

1. A personal banlist can have people on it for any reason at all and is not linked to any factual evidence past "I put him on my list"
   
2. The onus on maintaining a personal banlist is on each individual.  I rarely take the effort to record the name of some guy who's just dropped from my game (although if he did it a few times in a row I'd probably take note)
3. EVERYONE gets to see someone's play record, so their liklihood of premature disconnection is not matter of here-say but a FACT based on their past performance

That'd be because he edited it.

I lol'd.  And I agree.

As far as banlists, I understand some of the points against a personal banlist, and they may be valid, but most people use banlists to enjoy a higher quality of games, not to abuse power and "witch hunt"

It would take a LOT to get on my banlist, you would have to;

• leave games multiple times
• talk smack all game and purposely try to make our team lose
• be a mouthy racist
• have terrible sim speed

I could go on, but I think you can see my point.

I would rather see an in-game system, handled by stardock, but if it does not come to fruition, banlists will serve as a last resort.

I have to disagree with you. From all the patches since release I have played, I only get 3 disconnect due to CTD or lost connection. With current patch, I get two disconnect that look like ragequit, but it is not. Someone on my team or the other side quit and I get disconnect too. Until the multiplayer code is mature enough and reset of stat, the current stat is not that accurate. I have not play many games in current patch with quitters to know if I will always be disconnect too when someone does, but right now it seem like it. 

Does anyone experience this too? Maybe I am just lucky.

You forget freedom of choice.

Some of us wants to play with good players who dont leave after being killed for the second time.

Sure it will split the community but both sides will be more happy. On one hand people wiht banlist playing games to the end, on the other hand players who like doing 5 min games after 5 min games.

Give us an official bantool please, it s easier than each of us having our own one.

K

I'm not a fan of quote wars(people tend to get embroiled in arguing single points and lose sight of the big picture), but I'm not really feeling much choice in the matter :/.

You clearly either did not read or did not understand my argument and on top of that, you quoted me out of context.  Here is the full context of what I said:

If you read this carefully, you will see that my point has nothing to do with whether or not doing something in your own interest at the expense of others is actually bad(I could go on at length about this, but that would be a digression from the topic).  I have simply pointed out that this is the premise of your argument and that in the course of your argument you are violating your own premise.  You just reaffirmed your support of the premise so that actually helps my argument.

Several things:

1.  You are just as out for yourself as they are.  If you were truly altruistic, you wouldn't spend time playing video games, you'd spend time helping people who are less fortunate than you are.  Also supported by the fact that you are demanding people spend additional time with you despite the fact that they are not interested in spending that time.

2.  If you play the game, you are a part of the community.  In fact you contribute to the community simply by providing yourself as an additional player.  The quality of a habitual ragequitter's contribution to the community may be low, but it is still higher than the quality of contribution from someone who simply does not play the game.  This is my opinion, but you do not share it hence the need for point 3.

3.  Even by your standards of the community, your proposed response to ragequitters is wasting potential members of the community.  Again, not everyone shares your moralized view of the subject but people will generally adapt to the conventions of a community because getting along with others is in their own interest.  If you can convince people not to ragequit with a polite argument or request, then your actions have helped the community gain a member(under your definition of community, not mine); if you ban them, you have instead deprived the community of someone who could potentially contribute because you decided you'd rather be petty and vengeful(suits your name actually).  Diplomacy first, guns later.  This is not even addressing the reality that banlists are always abused to satisfy personal vendettas.

Some multiplayer games that I have played in which this culture does not exist:

Impossible Creatures

Rise of Legends

Dawn of War 2

Company of Heroes

Baboviolent2

Gate88

Universe at War

Age of Empires 3

Of these, Dawn of War 2, Company of Heroes, and Age of Empires 3 are all major publications that I'm sure you've heard of.

The response is dead simple but it doesn't relate to my primary argument(which I've noticed you are now ignoring).  If you really want to see how it's wrong though, I'm happy to oblige.  If you're a baseball player in that scenario, it's your job to play the game.  You have a contract to play and you are getting paid for it.  Demigod, even competitive demigod is recreational.  If you think hitting a ready button is comparable to an employment contract, then your analogy may work for you, but it won't work for many others.

Incidentally, none of these games replace people who leave with bots that actively work 'against' the team.

Here again, I think people are getting way too caught up in swatting at symptoms (i.e. banning rage-quitters) rather than addressing the actual problems - game mechanics that encourage rage-quitting, AI players that feed the opponent, opponents having to finish a game against AI's to collect the win when they signed up to fight human players. 

I...yeah...uh...I'll be on the first plane to Africa....

Listen, when you start a multiplayer game with *other people* you are commiting enough time to finish the game with *other people*.  Hey, what are all those asterisks for?  Oh, right, emphasizing the *other people*

If you quit in a 1v1 game the other person immediately gets a win.  That's great!  You didn't want to waste any more time so you didn't.  Good for you.

If you quit in a 4v4 game you just ruined the game for at least 3 other people, especially if the game was not truly lost.  You may have even ruined the game for all 7 other people because the winning people wanted to actually earn their win instead of one person rolling over and dooming the rest.

And a drug dealer on the corner is part of the community too, while the quality of his contribution to the community may be low, it is still higher than someone who doesn't even live there.

Coincidentally you'd find most people don't want the drug dealer in their community.  TOO BAD.  He has a RIGHT to be there, eh?  Leavers are the drug dealers of Demigod.

You are assuming that leavers can be turned from the dark side.  In my experience this is a complete pipe dream.  In my many many years of Dota play I amassed innumerable names on my banlist.  Whenever someone would come into the game who was on it I would post the ban (it contained the date of the ban as well).  Anyone who acknowledged that it occured and/or apologized for their leaving in the previous instance I would grant a second chance, and if they did not leave that game I would remove them from the list.  Needless to say, this almost never happened.  Usually people would deny it or immediately start swearing at me.  That's when I'd kick.

These people are not potential valued members of the community because you shouldn't need to "teach" them that what they are doing is wrong - it is common sense.  People without that common sense I don't want anything to do with.

Fine, 3 on 3 pickup basketball.  Other team goes up 15-5, one of your teammates just walks off the court without a word and never returns.  His right.  Don't get mad at him.  Perfectly normal.  Valued member of the 3 on 3 basketball community.

Nonsense.  Don't convolute the issue ("they have a contract!").  It's jackassery in real life and online and no one should tolerate it.

If I play a game of chess with you I assume you made the same commitment I did not to steal your pieces off the board when your back is turned. 

It's called sportsmanship.

Chess is a single player game, and I assume forfeiting field games would be a team decision.

Also, it is obvious when someone quits because they were killed and when they quit because of connectivity problems. I doubt anyone here blames a player for quitting when there are giants around the corner from his citadel, we blame them when they quit in the first 5 minutes because he was killed.

Due to the lack of team play options it is difficult to play with people you know. So you don't have much of a choice in playing with random people.

When I said single player game, I meant that it's not a team game(only 2 people), so quitting in chess isn't a big issue because you're not hurting someone else. I was unclear, that was my fault.

I would prefer a friends list rather than a banlist as well. Banlist are almost always abused and are generally unreliable( a personal one would be better). Actually, Impulse already has a friends list, just not a Demigod specific one.