DUST Search - Leaving the game and K/D

Prius Vecht wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Dusters Blog wrote:

the general disorganized nature of battles shows how necessary some kind of platoon chat is. we would also like to see employment record affected when mercs leave battles after they start. cowards should be exposed. it might make sense to see a small SP penalty as well. -50 SP wouldnt cripple players but would provide a necessary deterrent to leaving battles. whether being employed by an npc corp or not, a merc that signs up to fight should fulfill his contract or suffer consequences.

We're not national soldiers, we're capitalists. If we see that a battle is hopeless and we leave, that's just a cost-benefit analysis; makes more sense to cut your losses then to keep spending time and money fighting.
The lack of pay, and the fittings you used and lost is consequence enough.

ur not thinking big picture. people will always rationalize a reason to quit gms.

youll complain when matches are finished as 4 v 4 because everyone left.

in a gm this persistent it shouldnt even go on employment record? even Socom 4 had that. I dont agree with a sp penalty but you cant go awol every other match because you didnt hit your k/d without consequences.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3182	Posted - 2013.03.17 13:47:00 - [1] - Quote Dusters Blog wrote: the general disorganized nature of battles shows how necessary some kind of platoon chat is. we would also like to see employment record affected when mercs leave battles after they start. cowards should be exposed. it might make sense to see a small SP penalty as well. -50 SP wouldnt cripple players but would provide a necessary deterrent to leaving battles. whether being employed by an npc corp or not, a merc that signs up to fight should fulfill his contract or suffer consequences. We're not national soldiers, we're capitalists. If we see that a battle is hopeless and we leave, that's just a cost-benefit analysis; makes more sense to cut your losses then to keep spending time and money fighting. The lack of pay, and the fittings you used and lost is consequence enough.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3190	Posted - 2013.03.17 23:35:00 - [2] - Quote Prius Vecht wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Dusters Blog wrote: the general disorganized nature of battles shows how necessary some kind of platoon chat is. we would also like to see employment record affected when mercs leave battles after they start. cowards should be exposed. it might make sense to see a small SP penalty as well. -50 SP wouldnt cripple players but would provide a necessary deterrent to leaving battles. whether being employed by an npc corp or not, a merc that signs up to fight should fulfill his contract or suffer consequences. We're not national soldiers, we're capitalists. If we see that a battle is hopeless and we leave, that's just a cost-benefit analysis; makes more sense to cut your losses then to keep spending time and money fighting. The lack of pay, and the fittings you used and lost is consequence enough. ur not thinking big picture. people will always rationalize a reason to quit gms. youll complain when matches are finished as 4 v 4 because everyone left. in a gm this persistent it shouldnt even go on employment record? even Socom 4 had that. I dont agree with a sp penalty but you cant go awol every other match because you didnt hit your k/d without consequences. Actually, you're not the one thinking of the big picture; you're exagerating, this problem isn't very widespread at all, and it will never happen on such a scale that battles will conclude as 4 v 4, especially since matchmaking adds new players. You're treating this as if its purely just some regular shooter, and not looking at the cost-benefit economic side of it. You don't lose your stuff when you die in Socom 4, there is no economic side of Socom 4, so that is completely irrelevant. I don't think people should be using dishonest means to maintain a high stats, but I also don't really care if they do since their stats don't affect me or my enjoyment of the game; I don't give a kitten if someone has 1,000 K/D from quitting games. I also don't see why anyone else would really care so much about the integrity of some stat either. In the process of trying to protect the integrity and value of some stat, you will end up penalizing players who are smart enough to know when cut their losses and surrender instead of throwing away money at a lost cause. Like I said before, our stuff costs money, quitting is cheaper than to continue to fight a battle you're going to lose anyway. A deserter stat can't take into account why someone left; whether if its K/D padding, or if if its a tactical retreat for Economics, players will be marked just the same. Marking K/D padders at the cost of harming economic freedom of players is not worth it in my opinion. Besides cutting losses, there are tons of other reasons why a player might leave; real life responsibilities,disconnections, or just plain not having fun anymore (games are suppose to be fun, why keep playing if you're no longer having fun?) A deserter stat won't even fix the problem, instead of quitting, a KDR padder may just retreat back into the redzone, and hide for the rest of the battle and not get any deaths. In cases of planetary conquest, if a merc you hired is just quitting to pad his stats, or some other unacceptable reason, then don't hire him again. Also, spread to the word to your alliance not to hire him also, and you won't have to deal with him.