Jump to content


Verified members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

87 profile views
  1. Bumping this - mostly hoping to get the attention of someone on staff to determine if this is feasible and could be a part of future plans, though I'm aware discussions on upcoming patch notes are also taking place atm.
  2. I agree - with a dwindling playerbase that still suffers from smurf and griefer issues, this problem with high-ranked leavers is at least something that can be more readily addressed with the direct benefit of improving the quality of games in Gold and beyond, which still comprises a sizable chunk of the playerbase. These penalties would also have trickle down benefits such that a Gold or a Diamond in a Silver game would also be disincentivized for leaving in spite of having a +0.5/-0.5 MMR status during the picking phase (though this is far less common).
  3. This is the bug I had assumed as well, and fixing this definitely helps. Still, I'm of the mind that MMR matters more to high-ranked players, especially as many of the remaining players in the game have amassed hundreds if not thousands of games already and it takes a significant number of games to actually affect their leave%. Thus, I am still advocating for fairer MMR penalties for leavers, even if their initial MMR gain/loss is minimal. Like, a flat 5MMR loss minimum for leaving a game would imo be a good deterrence for Legendary/Immortal players from leaving the game since MMR gains b
  4. Currently, the -0.5MMR loss makes it such that higher-ranked players e.g. Legendary/Immortal can leave games whenever they choose with minimal consequence. T This is arguably the biggest issue plaguing Diamond-Immortal games, and it can be resolved simply by a mandated minimum MMR loss whenever solo q e.g. at least base -3MMR, which would double to -6MMR if the player leaves, even if they're an Immortal in a Diamond/Legendary game. Doing so should significantly reduce the number of games where higher-ranked players would leave the game at the first instance of discontent and drastic
  5. Currently, ban pick allows banning up to 6x heroes. My argument is that this is too large a number, and results in more frequent cases of frustration for players when heroes they want to play gets banned. I can't afford to play more than 2-3 games daily, so when each game the heroes I want to play are banned, it's a poor quality of life for the player. Moreover, the way players typically select the heroes they want to ban is based on the top-2 most-played heroes of enemy players (usually blue/pink) - hardly any strategy involved. Reducing the number of heroes banned in a game from 6x heroes to
  6. [Nvm 4 weeks of flash sales already passed] Great selections in the flash sales but sad to see the Savior alts not get love
  • Create New...