ENT Gaming

I'm wondering about this: in 2v2 you get 18 ELO dc penalty if you disc.

There are games where you lose more than 20 ELO if you lose. PP is therefore better than losing. Just an example of this: https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=1626861

If drahque or beep PP'ed in this game, they would've lost less ELO than when they play it out.

So I think the ELO penalty should go up to something like 25 (at least for 2v2). Any thoughts?

(In the ideal world the draw rule would still be removed ofc)

If a player seems like he is intentionally pping he will get unvouched.

I keep getting mixed signals about the DC-penalty and I'm really not sure anymore what to think of it.

I asked the same question here: viewtopic.php?f=72&t=9683

The answer to my question here was (by iightfyre):

The DC penalty applies to all disconnects. [..] The idea was that if ALL DC's get punished by losing ELO then we could deter anyone from PP because there would be no investigation needed. It would be black and white "You DC, you lose ELO" - so the act of pulling the plug would actually cause a player to lose more ELO then merely losing the game. (-20 ELO vs -15 ELO). (My bold) Then, on top of this, anyone who was still attempting to PP and take the ELO loss would be investigated and potentially lose their right to play in the LIHL.

According to this answer the DC-penalty is there to deter anyone from PP-ing. If they still do it (for example, if a player fucks up and doesn't want his allies to lose ELO because of that) that will still be investigated.

Are you saying now that the DC-penalty is not there to deter anyone from PP-ing?? What is then the use of the DC-penalty?? And what has changed since iightfyre wrote down that it is?

The average elo loss is 15 elo. So the average DC elo loss is higher than a normal loss. 20+ elo games are not that common unless its 2v2 (in which the dc penalty is higher).

It is a deterrence and there was a noticeable decrease in PPs after the introduction of this rule.

I agree with all your points, but in some cases in 2v2 a player will benefit from a PP that can't be traced back. That is not only failing to deter PP, but even encouraging untraceable PP's by giving them less ELO loss than when they play out. So the entire concept of the dc-penalty, whose only raison d'être is to deter PP, is self-refuting in this way. In fact in some cases the reasoning goes like this:

DC-penalty is to deter PP -> we make the dc penalty 18 ELO -> some games you can lose as much as 23 ELO -> you win 5 ELO by PP -> PP is encouraged by dc-penalty in those cases.

This is the complete opposite of the intention of the rule. In other words the intention and reality of the rule are contradictory.

It also still wonder why we have the DC-penalty at all since there is another rule for PP (i.e. an investigation and possible unvouch). I have been reading back all arguments and the rule still seems extremely silly to me. The only reason that I can think of why we have DC-penalty rule is to please the remaining players to know a disconnect will be punished - but stopping a game is really a poor medicine for that.

If no one else has problems with it I'm fine with it. I guess I will never come to terms with illogical rules

Edited.

My vote no !DRAW
This has been my opinion from the beginning.

I think the dc elo penalty is fine.. maybe 18 isnt always enough.. but in most cases it is. Also a possible pp loses the chance to actually win the game.
We can talk about making a harder dc elo penalty for people not using gproxy/ent connect

Remember that we ran 2 polls to put this rule into place. This is the way that the community wanted DC's handled. Some of us still favor the no !draw rule but the majority of the community wanted the DC penalty. And so it is

@ iight, I am not questioning the rule itself, just how it works. The practice of the rule is that it sometimes does not deter PP, but encourages it.

The average elo loss is 15 elo. So the average DC elo loss is higher than a normal loss. 20+ elo games are not that common unless its 2v2 (in which the dc penalty is higher).

Supersexyy, are you saying the dc penalty gets higher once the ELO you would lose if you stay and lose is higher than the standard penalty? In that case my suggestion doesn't need to be implemented.

If you mean that in the 2v2 the dc-penalty is higher than 3v3 and 4v4 that is not true. In 3v3 you get -20, in 4v4 -21. It would make more sense to get -21 in 2v2 than in 4v4, because in 4v4 a game with 2 ELO difference is already seldom, while there are big differences possible in 2v2.

Good catch, I don't see why it shouldn't be lifted, will again clear all speculation of PPing.

In 2v2 elo is adjusted like this for example;

Adjusting stats for [iightfyre] by +6 (gid=1524102)
Adjusting stats for [realfurbolg] by +6 (gid=1524102)
Adjusting stats for [vigorousapathy] by -18 (gid=1524102)
Adjusting stats for [willie64] by +6 (gid=1524102)

Yes -20 games and above are fairly uncommon, it's not really a big issue but it is a tiny one

p.s goddamn i could of saved 4 elo!!! my precious.

Haha! I will bring back this topic should you lose the league by 3 ELO

Towards the end of the season games with differences bigger than 18 ELO become more common. Perhaps the same elo-penalty as in 4v4 could work?

Hmm well 4v4 DC penalty is -21 ELO and i lost -22 doesn't fix it fully