just the 2 things as they seem to be 2 of the very few things, which are actually relevant to the topic

""...a punishment and change of rewards isnt gona solve that"
How is banning of the quitters NOT going to remove the quitters? I don't get your logic. You know what a ban means, right?"

a 2 hour ban would prevent the exact same person from ending up in your match and quitting for 2 hours.
it could reduce the amount of people quitting in your matches, but it wouldnt completely remove them. how? any1 could leave in the middle of a match and believe it or not, even u might end up leaving in the middle of a match. i really doubt, that ther isnt a single circumstance in peoples real lives, that could cause random ppl, and i mean all ppl, not only ragequitters as u call em, to leave a game, which threatens to ban them for 2 hours from lockdown(lol..)

ther will always be ppl in ur life, who dont live up to ur expectations, u might end up finding urself in that group, too

i prefer a systematical solution
but a system should be flawless. if the flaws are obvious, then i dont put much hope into that system

i might be wrong and these ideas of urs could solve the problem, i cant predict the fictional future, that were talking about, im merely telling my opinion

1 thing i noticed is, that some people always seem to refer to quitters as persons, while i think of it as an activity, which can be done by any1

""...cover of fun and reveals the strive for victory, which every1 is after"
Yes, I like to win, I'm competitive, never said otherwise. What's wrong with that? Isn't "winning" also the basic idea behind PvP? And it's fun for me to win. Don't see anything wrong with that. But if the other team has three people less than my team, then it's not a satisfactory win, thus not that fun (though losing because of quitters is even worse).
Here's the order:
winning an equal game > losing an equal game > winning because of quitters >> losing because of quitters"

that order seems ok to me on 1st look, but the only criterias u use, r:
equal game - quitters
winning - losing

to me an equal game isnt the opposite of quitters, its a game, in which the chances of winning/losing seem to be unpredictable
an equal game can be with and without quitters

so, from my point of view, ur basically using 3 criterias
equal game
quitters
winning - losing

if we put it like this
winning a game with full teams > losing a game with full teams > winning because of quitters >> losing because of quitters

then i disagree to that order, the activity of quitting shouldnt carry half of the blame

i really enjoy the off topic mess i seem to have initiated, after all its a forum^^

trölöl

me, my name is Asteroia and the only things i get angry at in lockdown, are
-shock guns while im bombing
-having the best stats in a losing team, which has bad stats, if im trying to win

i dont hesitate to leave the match and dont recall having said anything bad about quitters, neither ingame nor in forums

"nope i prefer new stuff 1st"

Tranlation: Nope, I prefer tons of new, broken things that I will ragequit from, rather than a few fixed things that I don't have the excuse to ragequit from.

"the punishments, which dont prevent people from leaving teams"
it merely prevents people from leaving teams consecutively within 2hours

""1 thing i noticed is, that some people always seem to refer to quitters as persons, while i think of it as an activity, which can be done by any1"
... You'll have to explain that further. If you mean everyone has real life issues sometimes, then true. But the focus isn't to punish those people, it's to punish the recurring rage-quitters and bribe-prize-hunters, which do it all the time. But if someone has real life issues multiple times per hour, then he shouldn't be playing lockdown, either, but to get his act together first. Their drama doesn't concern us."

oh yea thats what all this is about, quitting people, just think about it

"It shouldn't carry over half of the blame, but it quite simply does."
lol

"And I usually prefer to use the term "deserters" over "rage-quitters", because "deserters" is more implicative."
i tend to say quitters, dont understand why ppl have different words for that..

LOL kally the only new thing broken in this game is Lockdown... its a piss poor attempt at what could of been a great pvp mode but didnt become what it should have. So yes i would rather see some new and likely better content released instead of messing around with and modifying that garbage.

@Overourlimit:

I think the Lockdown is very nice. PvP gives it an extra edge. Playing the Clockworks with a party is nice, but it adds a whole new layer of challenges when the opponent is just as versatile in its actions as you are (the clockwork monsters are quite predictable in their actions). Lag kind of harms the experience, but it's still playable. Deserters on the other hand, are annoying beyond reason.

True it may be good but its nowhere near where it should be, especially after all this time they were working on it... They should of did all this redesigning to it before it was released now while we are waiting for new content to be released basically they put that on hold to go back and fix what should of been done before they released it no thanks, whats done is done move on and give us our new stuff and stop messing with things that will be dead a few months after new clockworks stuff is out. Also why fix pvp when PVE is the main focus of this game?? PVE being a main part of this game shouldnt be shunted aside for any type of PVP regardless

^^^ thats all im saying

As a TF2 player with experience with both PVP styles, I understand (note: Understand) why anyone would potentially rage quit. I have seen steam rolls, and I have been on both sides of steam rolls. And it's never really fun for either team.
The reason why I dislike rage quitters in TF2 is that if one rage quits (or worse, rage spectate), then someone on the winning team may get transferred onto the loosing team, and I don't see that as fair if it's in the middle of the round, or near the end of the round. In SK, it's annoying because we loose a player to fight with, and it's difficult to fight and maneuver if you're missing even just one person.
I would rather fight with players willing to say through the entire match then deal with pvp rage quitters. And yes, I support temp. bans, or even perm. bans.

I agree with the idea of "leaver debuff". But the time is debatable. In 10 minutes, you'd miss one/two rounds. It'd become a skip-go-skip-go rountine. Not much discouragement if they're willing to lave a ton of matches because of bad bribes/teams anyway.

2 hours is rediculous. "Hey, you know how that fat kid tripped over your power cord and screwed everything up? Yeah. 2 HOURS IN THE CORNER FOR YOU".
I'd settle with 20 minutes. Not rediculous, but take down bribe-hoppers to only a few rounds an hour.

@Liveice:

Judging from your thread, it seems your computer doesn't fulfill the minimum requirements of the game. If you know this and still want to play and get errors, then I have no sympathy for you.

Or do you think the rest of the team should just "suck it up" because YOU have problems with your computer, and keep dropping out all the time?

Furthermore, like was said earlier (I even welcomed it), the dynamic ban time would be a solution for this. This would pretty much forgive the "first time offenders". But if you keep dropping out CONSTANTLY, then you shouldn't play it, because you're ruining the matches for others. Fix your computer first.

Also, most people leaving after gate drops are probably the bribe-prize-hunters. Either the prize doesn't please them, or the full bribe amount wasn't met at all. If they drop out earlier, it's usually because they estimate their team doesn't have enough good players to have a good chance of winning (or even worse, to carry them to victory). I've seen it few times that when a Top10 ranked (or otherwise highly esteemed) player appears on the opposing team, some people just say something like "aww man, PlayerX is here" and leave the match.

@Kally:
Well, the dynamic ban time would be a solution for your case, too. But personally, I wouldn't even think 2 hours is bad. If any random stuff like that happens to you ALL the time, then you should do something about it. Who knows, that fat kid might trip over that cord again after 30 minutes.

In short: I'd suggest first time offender gets at least 30 minute ban, and recurring offender gets 2 hours. And timer resets in 24 hours after the last offend (or maybe 12 is enough).

Just to clarify (I thought I've stated this so many times it should be clear by now):
- In my opinion, deserters ruin the game for the rest of the people
- I don't like deserters
- I don't think ANYBODY likes them
- I surely WOULD like them all gone
- I suggested a solution that would (drastically) reduce their numbers
- I don't think they will ever be gone TOTALLY

I think the reason for confusion here might be that either some of you guys are underestimating the amount of rage-quitters'/deserters' ratio to accidental drop-outs, or I'm overestimating it.

But looking at the amount of quitters, either the ratio really is in my favor, or too many people have something horribly wrong in their playing environment or computers. Because if the average match has 1-2 quitters vs 8-10 total players, that's on average a 17% drop-out rate. That would mean every player would have a chance of having problems (like computer crash) with every sixth game. If you're having your computer crash on average at least once per every active hour, I have no sympathy for you. You need to fix it (whatever "IT" is). If it's not fixable, then stay out of the Lockdown, your constant drop-outs are ruining the game for others.

If anyone disagrees with any of the points I've made here, please state the point you're disagreeing with, and the reason why. I'm open for discussion.

PS. Haven't yet checked the new accessory update (though hopefully will fairly soon), but I hope it will weed out the deserter-prone players out of the lockdown, and leave the serious players still playing...