Mercy rule?

They won't release the RP calculations in fear it can be abused but from what I've seen, just molly whopping a team doesn't really add that many extra points - As a generally "better" player (if that means anything these days with how easily exploited the game is), I would only really be on board if it meant bonus points.

In 3v3 EASHL games, a 5 goal deficit is honestly doable so long as it happens fast - I would say 7 or more goals would be reasonable. You can probably keep the goal 5 limit for 6v6.

I don't believe there are any negative repercussions for outright quitting anyway (at least, not anything noticeable), so this would just be extra fluff that should take a back seat to proper QoL fixes

You don't get any progress towards that seasons/battle pass or in general for the casuals that don't play often, you don't get any xp for leveling your player to 50 to unlock the extra classes or coins for buying stuff in the store. For HUT, you do not get any progress towards the completion of the XP path AND any objective progress is lost.  

This is a decent idea.  Allows teams to move on from lopsided games more quickly and still retain the credit/xp/etc they would have gained by sticking to the end.

The only tweak I would make is that after a 5+ goal differential is reached, it would offer the losing team the option to concede the game.  In HUT its fairly straight forward.  In EASHL it should be put to a vote of the players on the losing team, majority wins the vote.

I disagree with the idea of voting. It only forces people on the winning side to have to sit through a game that is "essentially" a waste of their time while on the losing side, its forcing people to have to physically say "hey we can't beat these guys, so we are gonna have to give up everyone vote yes to giving up" vs a mercy rule of "okay I guess that game is over now it is time for the next one". There is a change in mental when you force the person to have to do it themselves then having the game do it for them.

Disagree-how about they fix their matchmaking mess and get players and teams matched up closer to each others rankings. No mercy rule needed. Pretty dumb for a team of bronze's to go up against fire badge and purple diamond players, and yet it happens at least 2-3 times a night when my club plays. Also, this will cause teams getting beat by 3 or 4 to just say, welp back out now, we're gonna be down by 5. Like i said, the Root of the entire problem is in a broken or non-existent match making system. For instance our very first game on 26 coming from 25, our club played 2 purple diamond players and a fire badge. Hadn't even played a game yet, and that was the matchup we got LOL.

Which is another reason why my system would give a better chance at making it somewhat better. You can't fix a matchmaking problem when the problem is based on the number of matches/players being played/playing. So if you put teams that are lopsided back in the queue, you only have semi fair games going the full 20 while others are getting back into the queue. More in the queue means a better chance of getting someone around your skill level vs someone who is way more skilled. It's not a guarantee of course but nothing is either.

Makes sense. Especially the part about freeing up queue times. Just one proposal. Perhaps implement it after the finish of the 2nd period. That way, the opposing team has a chance to try to get back.

The ranking system definitely has to be modified. The way it is now, is like their pack odds. Random.