Should a drop give your partner a loss?

Ok guys; lets say there is a 2v2 game between two teams team Alpha, and team Beta. Player 1 in team Alpha has a bad connection so he lags out and and leaves (his ally) Player 2 fighting a 1v2 fight. Its not Player 2's fault that Player 1 has a crappy internet right? Lets say Player 2 fights through the game and loses, he should end the game and get a tie instead of a loss. I mean how would it be fair that he gets a loss in the game instead of tie when his ally dropped?

Hey lets say that Player 2 fights through the game and wins should that mean that he would get double the points for his account because he is good enough to use his and his ally's army to win a 1vs2 game.

Everybody who worry's about it being abusive should think this through; if somebody drops they would lose TWICE the amount of points they would if they would have lost, that way people would get discouraged about cable pulling and not do it, and yes disconnecting should count as a loss because many abuse it in starcraft 1.

 

seems like a pretty nice idea to me

 

Should the lagger get a loss no matter what, and the other team get a win if the lone wolf loses?

 

with that logic you can team up with somebody that doesn't care about 2v2, ask him to drop and then you can either

1) win
2) draw.

 

just let him take command of the units after the player drops. sure, his micro won't be as good as 2 players working together but at least he won't be behind in economy.

 

Stuff like this is always good for the game tbh

 

Too abusable. Life isn't fair. Get over it.

 

Enough said.

 

You can control the units of your teammate if he leaves/drop. So there's no point of doing something like that. And ppl might abuse of this anyway.

 

ok guys

Yes im aware that you can controll youre teammates stuff, but that isnt going to refuse the fact that its still unfair, the lone wolf would have to micro way too much and i know life isnt fair, but wake the heck up its a VIDEO GAME ITS SUPPOSE TO BE FAIR if it wasnt fair why would anybody play it?

 

Ok but if somebody drops they would lose TWICE the amount of points they would if they would have lost, that way people would get discouraged about cable pulling and not do it.

 

Duh, of course you dont want anymore cable pullers do you?

 

If a 2v1 resulted in the lone wolf not getting a loss even when losing, then I guarantee you people will abuse drop hacks to drop their ally and thus negating the chance to lose points. And by your example, the person who would get drop hacked would lose double the points, which would give a random hacker even more joy, since he knows he's screwing a person while at the same time negating any chance of him being screwed.

So yes it would keep people from dropping themselves, but it would encourage them to instead forcibly drop their allies.

The same dropping issues happened in SC1, but at least this time the one who is left gets the chance to keep the teammate base in operation, and in sc1 there was no option to negate loses from that. So that means that the one who is left already has an advantage compared to earlier games. Thus I see no reason to allow the lone wolf the ability to negate any point loss due to this issue.

 

Blizz should have included a tie option, even for 1v1.

I had a base race once at the beginning of a game,
I was using proxy warpgates and overrun his main with my zeals, but in the meantime he slipped photon cannons into my main and destroyed it.

So all our mains were gone, he had no units but 2 photon canons and I had 4 zeals.

He couldnt du anything and I for sure wouldnt run my zeals into his cannons.

We ended up with rock scicor paper ....

 

look at it this way: it may happen to u but it may also happen to ur opponent....so the day it happens u might get lucky or not

 

Play with a friend in 2v2.

If either of you DC you aren't good enough players as part of the skill of online play is maintaining your internetz no matter the cost!

Also it'd mess up win/lose ratios worldwide as a 1:1 ratio would be below average which is mine aplodingly disconcerting (come to think of it, if you DC and your partner wins do you win or lose?)

Also irposter don't quintuple post

 

because people only leave matches out of evilness and never have d/c's or neccesity?

 

Agreed. But the SC2 fanboys would winge about it. And Blizzard needs to keep the fanboys in check.
Maybe something like as soon as it becomes a 1v2 then each player on the 2 gets at that time only 50% of minerals gathered. As the workers only mine 50% of normal and drop off tht same 50%. And the player on the 1 team keeps his 100% rate.

That's an idea to even up the matchup if one person lags out to create a 1v2. Cause as said above, making it an instant win/draw if someone lags is too abusable.

 

That would cause a major resource issue since the lone player gains control of his dropped ally's base, and thus still has access to its resource gain, unit production, and tech. So if you dropped the other team's resource rate, they would both be getting 50% while the lone player has two different races/base groups operating at 100% resourcing.

Remember, unlike SC, you gain control of allied items when a player leaves. So it isn't really a 2v1 in the same sense as in sc1, it instead becomes 2 operating bases controlled by 2 players vs. 2 operating bases controlled by 1 player. So the only major penalty the lone player has is an increase in micro and macro management to keep the two bases operating and fighting effectively.

 

Well you should not get your allies stuff when he lags out. I am against that.

But at least we are all in agrement that somethnig needs to be done to make the 1v2 after one player lags out fair for both teams.