@Genghis Not to say I agree with booting you, but you have to understand that when people have been waiting in the lobby for awhile they're pretty antsy and eager to start playing. To avoid this myself I make sure I leave a lobby if I'm going to leave the computer. Though that exact thing has happened to me, I make sure it's a pretty rare occurrence.

Edited 8/14/2015 06:07:55

+1 to Ebin.

+1 to Master Ree for the idea on surrender+boot combos...
it should at least be an option.

+1 to Latnox with the caveat that even in FFA Games,

having people surrender / get booted is often a royal pain in the arse for at least one person who still has / did have a decent chance of winning... and I'm not sure how best to address it... :(

By the way, could someone explain to a noob how someone gets booted from a lobby,

and what the effects are of booting on that person's account?

Edited 8/14/2015 06:24:47

I think he meant he joins a lobby, leaves the computer to go do something, then by the time he's back the game has already started and the clock has run out.

No effects as far as I'm aware besides having a higher boot % displayed on your account and you might get filtered from certain games if the host decides to only allow people who have a low enough boot rate.

Oh, I see.

Yes, I can see how that would be an issue.

And I added tons of good info to my third post, my last post on page one.

I hope people find it useful. :)

Edited 8/14/2015 06:31:48

Finishes 5 Straight Games without a Boot

This "carrot" will really encorage noobs.

get to wear a Golden Boot next to their name

Good "stick" thing.

i was in a Team torneymentand the other guy got boot. i was anyod yes the cost of booting should go up

Simple idea: create an option that would let game creators make it impossible to boot players with an unaccepted surrender. That way all active players have to accept the surrender for the game to move on, and inactives get booted before those who've surrendered. One way this could go wrong is if two players who don't accept each other's surrender have both surrendered and then gone afk, but that could be solved by re-enabling boots for cases like that.

So an option to make surrendering players unbootable until all other players have either taken their turn or been booted.

option that would let game creators make it impossible to boot players with an unaccepted surrender.

well, what's the point then? i can't surrender until everyone else accept this, but as they are forced to do it, this is effectively the same situtation as 'surrender happens instantly'

^ Not quite. They just have to boot all inactive non-surrendered players before they boot surrendered ones. This is because often the unaccepted surrenders occur because of inactives not accepting them and as booting them solves the problem without having to boot the surrendered players. This is mostly to make it easier to boot in the proper order because most people seem to miss that concept.

So if the surrender was just not accepted by an inactive, you can more easily move on while keeping the surrendered player still in the game (useful for FFAs where losing a player would imbalance the game).

The idea still needs refinement though because as of now it just adds convenience and keeps surrendered players bootable. Maybe combine it with the one to count boots of surrendered players as surrenders.

Edited 8/14/2015 07:27:22

when people have been waiting in the lobby for awhile they're pretty antsy and eager to start playing.

That's even another reason for not booting someone 1 minute after game had started.
"Well, I've waited 30 min for this game to start, but I can't wait 3 min more to actually start playing. Instead, I'll ruin the game for everyone who waited along with me."
Sounds legit.

Also I like Knyte idea. And regarding Krzychu's comment, it's not exacly the same as "surrender happens instantly". The difference is, that if your teammate wants to surrender, you can still try to talk to him. While if he rage quit, it's game over.

Edited 8/14/2015 07:25:14

Finishes 5 Straight Games without a Boot


This "carrot" will really encorage noobs.

get to wear a Golden Boot next to their name


Good "stick" thing.
======================================================





Lets say at around 50% boot that people get this golden boot, and to top it all off everyone gets an achievement for finishing 5 games w/o getting booted. Regardless of what happens, there should be an inbetween. Automatically accepting surrender and all players need to isn't working in some cases.

Also I like Knyte idea. And regarding Krzychu's comment, it's not exacly the same as "surrender happens instantly". The difference is, that if your teammate surrender, you can still try to talk to him. While if he rage quit, it's game over.

Ok, what about this situation:
my teammate surrender and leave. my opponents accept surrender. i don't acccept it, just commiting my orders. And make them an offer they can't refuse - vote to end or the game won't proceed:) (they cannot boot me or him, and he won't do his move)

^ surrendered players will be bootable if no other players are

They just boot your teammate.

Edited 8/14/2015 07:41:13

urrendered players will be bootable if no other players are

They just boot your teammate.

so it's the same situation as now - my teammate will be booted when time is up(assuming i don't accept his surrender)
what you will gain here is that inactives get booted first, surrendered players after them. How much time they will gain? None with autoboot, few seconds if someone is going to boot player manually.

Another layer: you can't boot a surrendered player if you haven't personally accepted their surrender

This is just all to help in bigger games where unaccepted surrenders are more of a problem.

Then again, all this could be handled on the game creator's end by making surrenders instant in larger games and being selective about invites to smaller games.

Another layer: you can't boot a surrendered player if you haven't personally accepted their surrender

Stil not big difference - if i want him gone - i'll accept surrender (and boot him). Otherwise (i'm not accepting surrender as i want to keep him in the game) - i wouldn't boot him anyway, no need to prevent me from doing that. Also if i'm not accepting because i'm afk or just don't pay attention preventing me from booting him also make no sense.

This is just all to help in bigger games where unaccepted surrenders are more of a problem.

Still can't see any scenario where it would make a real diffrence.