@carsono311 wrote:
@SANDM4N_1979There is no real point to adding a punishment. The stats from the game will stay with the player and auto-balancer will kick-in if the population gets out of whack.
There is though. If a sizable chunk of the losing team leaves as they are losing horribly that effects the gameplay negatively for both teams. For the losing side the loss becomes worse because their team no longer has the players to cap points and their score potential decreases as a result. In some examples they are pushed back to their base and are spawn killed and that provides a very negative experience for them. For the attacking team they no longer have an enemy team pushing them as hard for points or as many targets to shoot at which is also not a desirable outcome either - also effecting their score at the end of the game.
I've always been of the opinion if someone commits to playing a match they have an unspoken commitment to their team to finish the game. Obviously they can leave but I think a suitable punishment for that as OP put it would be to negate any XP gained in said match. This would disincentivize quitters and would keep teams more 'balanced' until the match ended.
@akula_rI agree with you about committing to the match, however the issues you are describing are better attributed to the match making system which has the correlating effect of causing players to leave, rather than the players leaving for no reason at all.
Also mentioned in a previous post, having a match preview, like what we have had in previous Battlefield server browsers, can help some players in deciding which game to join instead of wasting time.
Personally, I am the same as you... when I commit, I am all-in. Unless there is a cheater present, at which point I report, then leave.
