I’m only replying because I misread.
I thought you said QP threw you into weeklies.
Now I see what you said, my point still stands. Don’t join games you won’t finish. Simple as that.
So then why are you even replying in this thread.
If you have not read my post then you are trying to defend something without any context and that you clearly have no understanding of?
Now you are just being rude and clearly trolling. Maybe you are scared of such a penalty system because you know it will filter you out? Anyway, blocked and reported. Goodbye.
I appreciate anyone else who is genuinly willing to share their thoughts. Even though I personally struggle to see why you wouldn’t want one, maybe there are some points that will help others see why it would/wouldn’t be a good idea. I think both sides are interesting. Plus sharing your thoughts down here would hopefully help bring it to the attention of the developers.
whats wrong with sitting on a fence , you dont know how many hours ive played, you could look at my profile on the forums and put in a bit of effort before having a discussion with me. I see you’ve only been here for a month and have 500 hours in vermintide.
Because i can. I can also leave after joining if I want too.
I disagree with your suggestion and want to hear alternative solutions for leavers.
if you say so..
Wait whut? I’m pretty sure I’ve QP into weeklies, and twitch too.
Good to know! I wasn’t sure. thanks!
Neither’s happened to me in the past few hundred hours of gameplay. I have to specifically target a weekly in its tab to queue into it, and I can’t queue into Twitch mode either. Is there some secret setting you have to toggle?
I’ve queued into “fake” lobbies that end up doing Deeds instead before.
I don’t think you can queue into Twitch mode. Whenever I host a Twitch lobby it will automatically check the ‘private’ box and greys it out so I can’t unselect it. Same for deeds I think.
Sometimes people want to play deeds but we do not have enough players. Other times it could just be me whos in the mood but if people reject it than I will just continue on with normal games. Sometimes I come across Catacylsm players who are just so good they make it look easy, so I might try and tempt them in with a deed.
A couple of times I had some good matches with people but I had to make the next one short, so I thought I’d make it a bit fun by throwing in a deed that increases specials and doubles the HP of elites on a map like Hunger in the Dark. Always manged to get some good reactions out of those.
And if you block them, than that filters them out for good out from your games.
Not liking a map is a perfectly fine reason, especially considering that such a leave occurs the moment I join the game and I am able to press the quit button. Why should I be forced to play a map I don’t enjoy in a non-competitive video game that is supposed to be enjoyable?
Sure, the whole team can play the exact same role, but there is little fun to be found when you want to play as a ranged special sniper and there is no frontline and everybody is starting to compete for the same kills, being able to leave and potentially rejoin with a different build/have some other player join is a much better experience for everyone.
And in general, if I don’t enjoy a game, than it will make everyone else in the lobby enjoy it less as well, since I wouldn’t put in 100% of my performance into it, so it’d be better for them to have a new player join in who’ll be happy to put in his 100%.
Why? This is a pretty casual game with realistically nothing on the line to lose, never mind the fact that going in three people for a few minutes really isn’t that big of a deal.
How would that make any sense? Those gamemodes are particularly difficult, and deeds underway cannot be joined without using a bug. I mean, it doesn’t make sense to have a penalty in any circumstance but if anywhere, it’d make sense for deeds.
And what I find to be rare is a player leaving mid-game causing a loss.
And what if they are hosting and you join them? You either have to adapt to a playstyle you don’t enjoy or incur a penalty. Why?
Why? It’s a pretty casual game, with the only thing to lose being a ~4% chance to get a useful item from a box at the end. Never mind everyone who already got their items, and just play to enjoy the game.
Which also means you can be unjustly kicked out, building up your penalty.
Bad behaviour is intentional sabotage, and it can manifest in many different ways, even in just intentionally playing badly to end the game, such as using up supplies randomly, passing monster triggers early, occasional FF, etc.
It doesn’t go beyond sabotaging a game, but discerning between a lower skill player and intentional sabotage may not be easy, and I’d prefer to just have people who don’t feel skilled enough or don’t enjoy the game for some reason to be free to leave and let someone better join.
Sure, and yet I don’t see it happening, which I suppose happens because people have no need to be malicious - if they are upset or don’t enjoy something, they can just leave and play what they enjoy.
And no one is hurt by that. If they join, see that the game is far from over, they leave, and I get to have a player who wants to play join after them. If the game is about to finish, then it doesn’t matter.
And? In the best case scenario, I have a low-skill player leave, making place for a higher skill player to join, instead of me being stuck with them. In the worst case, I get a bot for the rest of the game, which I prefer to a player who’d leave on their first death.
And if they leave because they don’t like the pace the game is going at, I prefer that to them trying to impose their tempo on everyone else.
That is a good point.
And? It’s not some competitve game with leaderboards and such so as long as everyone in the lobby is fine with it, why not? If the host doesn’t want to see it happen they can just block the player or ask them to stop.
Which would make people feel anxious about trying out higher difficulties since they’d want to avoid building up a penalty.
What also removes such players quickly is a simple vote kick that has no further penalties.
The consequence is that they will have fewer and fewer people to play with because everybody they encounter will be blocking them. It’s a pretty big deal in such a niche game.
I’m talking specifically about Versus mode, and this is not what I’m proposing. Currently, if the host shuts down the game everybody gets kicked out to the lobby. What I suggest is that the host is simply switched over to a different player - this is what usually happens in Chaos Wastes.
I have not seen many people asking for it, but the ‘who cares’ statement in that paragraph was specifically related to Versus Mode, which very few people still play, and most of the community seems to not care about.
You can address me directly instead of meandering with your attacks like that.
Isn’t that exactly what you’re doing?
If you aren’t playing to win, then why would you care about people leaving your game?
You wrote about low levels joining games and people leaving during a clutch, presumably both resulting in making it more difficult to win, but why would that matter if not because you play to win?
Bruh it’s a GAME, not a work contract 
Forcing players to stay in games they don’t want to be in would be a net loss for everyone involved.
My advice: See leaving players as just another challenge factor. That guy ran off alone and got murdered? He’s dead-dead now, have to carry on without him 
Care to explain how this is different than your mindset? Because your whole point seems to be that when people ragequit your game, you’re stuck with the bots, thus making it harder to win. As you said:
Let people play however they want and try not to base your own enjoyment on their choices 
There should be a penalty system that prevents them from existing in the first place. A pentalty system can filter out players like that so they do not ruin other peoples games.
It is not a good reason at all. The party expected you to be there but you leave after starting the game. It causes inconvenience for everyone else, and wastes peoples time. It can also ruin games for players.
It ruins it for everyone else.
Sometimes it can take over an hour for another player to join.
It makes perfect sense.
Those gamemodes set the lobby to private and you cannot change it. Private sessions should not invoke a penalty when leaving. Players cannot matchmake into them. Instead the host has to wait for players on a standard game mode, and then switch to a deed. Players do not voluntarily queue up for deeds or Twitch mode in this game. Therefore the penalty system shouldn’t apply. Twitch mode and deeds are more acade-like game modes anyway imho.
My best guess is that you don’t host very much. If you are a leaver then how would you know if your actions caused a team to lose or not?
It is not about losing anyway. It is about people who leave games nonchalantly causing an inconvienience to everyone else, and in some cases ruin the game.
The penalty system I suggested would only incurre a timeout on repeated leaves.
I can’t imagine you will end up with a host like that several times in a row. That would be really unlikely. You could leave that one time and be ok.
Because it ruins it for everyone else imho.
How many lobbies will you join in a row where everyone is trolling and kicks you to cause your penalty? I think it would be rare.
Making out whether a player is just bad or is trolling can be difficult, I agree. But the vote kick system exists so you can get rid of them if you feel like they are trolling. If they are a bad player they can just play a lower difficulty.
As a host, I can confirm it does indeed happen, although it is rare.
Depends. If they join, run off and die, then it may have caused a team wipe. I’d also rather not have reward fishers hopping around the game. I’d rather they just be banned or filtered out by the system. I don’t think there is any reason to keep ‘reward fishers’ around. A penalty system would deal with them efficiently.
It ruins it for everyone else imho.
I think leavers bother a lot of people tbh.
If they can actually play higher difficulties I don’t think they should have any issues. They can always set up their own lobbies as well since the host can’t be kicked.
Yeah but then they will join other peoples games and do the same thing. A penalty system would prevent such abuse in the first place.
I don’t think blocking players on Steam is the correct solution. There should be a system in the game that filters out these sort of players in the first place.
Oh ok. I don’t usually play versus, I just assumed that is already what happened. A penalty system would prevent that from happening though. I can’t even imagine how many players quit just because they’re losing.
I think it sound awful. I bet there are loads of players fustrated by it.
Well I was talking to the other user, and your statement was pretty toxic imho:
Your statement was pretty toxic imho. Idk what a lingering flames Sienna is but if people are good at playing at whatever that is then what is the problem? Why do you think it gives you the right to leave and let your team down?
I don’t think that is what I am doing?
I enjoy the game whether I win or lose, but what irritates me is leavers that ruin the game during a ‘clutch’ for everyone, potentially causing a team wipe. It feels like the game has been ‘thrown’ and is quite jarring. It does not feel fair at all, and it is not fun.
Leavers are ruining games for other players. I think a penalty system would be good to filter out players like this.
If people say “I have to drop out in 40 minutes” in the lobby before starting, then it is ok because the party will expect to be a team member down at one point. It then saves them time because they might wait for a fourth player before starting, be more decisive in their class and weapons selection, or whatever else they feel confortable with. I still think a penalty system should apply to the leaver though to prevent this being so common.
However, if you join a game, push the host to start immediately when it’s just two of you, and then drop out 20 minutes in, you are selfish. Same if there is three of you and you decide to do the same thing. You should be met with a timeout. Simple as imho. Those are not nice players.
If they don’t want to be in the game then they should not join. They should wait until they are interested in playing?
I like the mindset but bots are often not sufficient enough alone.
When hosting I don’t really start the match unless I have three or more players. If the third player leaves without warning it could end the game pretty quickly.
There is a handful of players I know to be really good, and I’m ok to go ahead with them because I know we stand a good chance together, and I have been around them enough I trust them not to leave.
I will copy/paste what I said to the other person as it is the same answer:
I know I was specific about a ‘clutch’ moment there, but it applies in other situations too. It’s just ver jarring when people leave and it can make the game less enjoyable for everyone else.
Their choices are ruining the game for other people though. It is not something you just pretend doesn’t.
Overall, I don’t think it is that big of a deal to implement a penatly system. It filters out players who ruin games for other people. I know I said before, but Dead by Daylight uses pretty much this exact system and it works really well.
Speak for yourself. The majority of the responses have been against a penalty system.
The game has been released for 7 years, I don’t think FS is breaking any new bread about punishing those who stuck around for that long.
Yup! Carry on
I think we’re missing the rich tapestry that is a world wide player base. I really like Trail Of Treachery and A Parting of the Waves maps. I know people who loathe them for their lengthy and quite savage finale. Should people be force to play something on their leisure time that they don’t like? Of course not!
As for the lobby before launching, Often hosts will say “Im going to wait for full team” or “Fancy a crack with bots?” and I can choose. Even at Legend people say “No grims please” or “full books or DEATH” and I can choose to stay or go.
I’m Still against a penalty system and even though I really do happen to agree with OP that often dropping and joining, or die within 5 mins and dropping is annoying as I’d rather not do a Cata Duo Cheers Mate, - but I personally feel there’s already enough tools to make a hosts position clear in addition to the friend/block system. It’s quite a little gang playing CATA really, i’d rather not alienate people - especially those trying to move up to Cata and getting pasted quickly cos they’re not used to it.
Quite often I’ve seen players that pop in, die, leave, sometimes also get pissy and blame the team. I’d just rather they go honestly. Why hold some toxic player hostage in your lobby?
That said, a number of co-op games do penalize players for leaving a game early, especially if they do it often. I’m not against giving somebody a warning, and then cooldown before they can join another match if they died, and left like 3 games in a row. Might as well keep them from sabotaging multiple lobbies. Darktide has also had this issue come up often.
There’s not that many players left, and I would expect at this point, there’s not much that can be done for Vermintide 2 that will make a difference for people who just up and leave a lobby the first time they go down. In general, I don’t play quick play anymore, and I don’t really like to play with randos.
Anybody on Steam in North America, send me friend request here, and then invite me; when I’m available, I’ll join. I don’t really enjoy modded C3 DWONS and such anymore as the pacing is just too slow. I’ll do a few regular casual Cata games, Deeds, Weekly Events or Twitch in the evening or on weekends.
Vermintide 2, and Darktide are at a point where if my steam friends aren’t on, I’m not. For me, the fun of carrying newer players, helping them get the rewards I already have, and showing them the ropes was the main reason I played quick play. If you invite me to a lobby where everyone is already steamrolling through the mission, I’m gonna get bored and probably leave.
You can vote kick people like that. They’d get a penalty for their behaviour. Nobody would be held hostage.
That’s what I think should be in this game honestly.
A penalty system would make a difference. If they don’t add one in this game, then maybe they can add one in their next game, since it is a re-occuring request.
I like helping other players as well. I also like it when I’m placed with a competent team. It is satisfying when everyone is holding out really well against +hordes and bosses and whatever.
Just wanted to come back to this, because in another thread from 2018, Temporary punishment for leaving game, you stated the following:
I assume back then you didn’t have many hours in? You probably didn’t have all the red items or whatever either. So you found leavers to really inconvenience you at the time, and you targeted hosts specifically.
Now 8 years later, you probably have everything, so you play for fun.
What we can take from this is that when you are effected by leavers, it’s a big issue and you demand punishment. However as long as you get to have fun, it doesn’t matter that your actions ruins games for other people.
I think everybody can agree this is selfish.
This is why I can’t trust people who are against a penalty system. It’s all double standards from them.
In the same thread, another one from @Argonaut14:
Now he states the following:
Same exact thing? You got everything now, so it doesn’t matter that you ruin other peoples games as long as you get to have fun?
How many users who responded in this thread can other readers actually trust?
I think the developers really neet to consider a penalty system for this game, or at least implementing ones in their next game.
Because clearly more veteran players feel entitled, and there actions ruin it for new players. A penalty system will keep everyone on the same page regardless of whether they’ve played for a long time or not.
Really, I think part of this topic highlights the issue with peer to peer hosting. Server hosting gets rid of the issues with tyrannical hosts. It also would improve the game performance and reliability.
One of the reasons I don’t play is because the game has little to maintain cooperation when a player leaving mid-match can disrupt the experience. Temporary matchmaking bans discourage casual quitting. I think we want to promote commitment to completing matches and objectives.
Of course, penalties have to account for legitimate disconnects such as internet issues and life happening. As is, both Darktide and Vermintide 2 casual matchmaking is a mess; in large part, because people can leave a match and hop on a new one without any kind of cooldown period at all.
I think it might be too late to consider a penalty system for a game this well into it’s lifespan. I really do hope that whatever tide game they work on next, they provide dedicated servers, and better matchmaking services to include cooldown penalties for people who quit mid-match.
These games rely heavily on cooperation, it’s not entirely fair to those who stay in the match to allow players to rage quit and join a new match right away. Whether or not you don’t mind players leaving, because it disrupts the game, more often than not, it makes it more difficult for those who remain to succeed or enjoy the game, it’s not something we want.
I think, you leave a match, you get a warning; you leave again, you get a cooldown before you can join/host another match would be fine. If it truly is that you had to leave the match anyway, a cooldown is no issue; and if you’re just leaving because you died and rage quit or your short attention span doesn’t allow you to wait till you get revived, then that’s not fair to penalize the team by allowing that kind of behavior.
Definately. I used to play a lot of Left 4 Dead 2 and used hosting providers for a while, mainly because the performance was so much smoother. Many players who joined my lobbies commented on how smooth it was.
In terms of focusing on development plans or making changes to the game, possibly. But a penalty system itself can be applied whenever if the developers wanted to add one. I definately agree that their next game should include a timeout system.
This is a good solution, one that targets an abuser and doesn’t blanket the community. Great Idea!
I am still against penalties for leaving in general, a new player to the game getting a timeout because they are unsure how things works just doesnt feel right to me.
Greak link @LethargicSaga , The discuss 6 years ago had some great insight. Karma system!
Karma systems in general are ripe for abuse. I’ve never seen one implemented in a game in such a way that it didn’t get abused, and there are a few examples that come to mind, namely CS’ commendation system.
A warning for leaving a match early 1 or 2x, and then a cooldown before you can join a match is fine. I never leave matches early unless the host and company are griefing, or I simply have to leave, in which case, a cooldown is no issue.
