How DC (disconnects) are treated?

For DC I mean someone that disconnects (unplugging the cable, killing the .EXE etc) while in a multiplayer match.

I hope that when someone DC it will be considered a loss by PA. I say this because I was one of the Red Alert 3 Pros, and in that community a lot of people just DCed when they were losing a match because on RA3 a DC wasn't a loss.

Please make DC = loss in PA. (In starcraft 2 it's like this for a reason.)

If someone disconnects the server keeps going and their units keep running. They can then reconnect and continue to the game. So basically there is no excuse and people can't disconnect to kill a match.

in ladder games there should be an automatic pause for 30 sec or 60s

Wait, I am talking about 1v1 games. 90% of the Pros are interested only about 1v1 games (look starcraft 2 for example)

In 1v1 games if someone DCs what happens?

probably he will get the chance to reconnect for 1-2 minutes, after that the one who still has connection to the server gets a win. Actually, for ladder a server system is much better than p2p.

I'd guess that the game continues without that 1 player (ie; his units follow their last orders) until he logs back in. If he doesn't come back; it should be a pretty easy win.

i hope there will be a mandatory pause of 30-60 seconds, so that a disconnect does not mean a insta-loss.

Yes of course 30 secs of pause is enough (for temporarily connection-pc freeze).

Of course those 30 secs shouldn't be resetted after each pause. (IE. you can't freeze your pc for 20 sec each minutes )

This is stuff we can test in the alpha/beta and Uber can adjust it if necessary. Talking about specific time spans seems a bit too early since nobody knows how long it will take to relaunch and reconnect atm.

I'm unclear why we would want to pause the game when there is a disconnect. I suppose maybe in 1v1 matches that are extremely high level but otherwise it seems heavy handed to me. Oh, I need some time to think I should pull my plug from the wall... vs **** if I disconnect the other guy is going to be able to take advantage. Do disconnects really happen so often that this is an issue? Most disconnects are griefing of one kind or another imo.

No disconnects dont happen often. But they really ruin the day if they happen in the deciding minutes of an intense 1v1. In that kind of situation it is really necessary to pause the game, cause 30s is a long time in those games. Another example is a disconnect within the first few minutes of the game. It would basically set you 30s behind, which can quickly snowball resulting in a game that is basically lost the moment the disconnect occured.

So yeah, pausing really should be the norm, just show a "trying to reconnect" screen for 45s or so.

Yes that's basically what every other famous multiplayer rts does (I suggest 30secs, 45 too long).

But at the end of this time if it was a 1v1 match, the one who DCed get a loss.


And replying @neutrino. DC happened a lot in Red alert 3.

That is most likely an issue with their netcode/server stability and whatnot. During 1500 matches of SMNC I had maybe 5 or 6 disconnects and was able to rejoin all but one of those matches. Like neutrino said, most d/cs will be due to QQs, kicking out the cable by accident or trying to grief. If Uber decides to add a 30 second break on d/c it should be limited to one or two times per match.

Just think about it how one player could grief a 40 player match otherwise. I'd rather take my chances with the d/c gods.

Yes, I can see people disconnecting and reconnecting on purpose to pause the game every times and make the other player life miserable to avoid a loss.

@col: No, people DCed in red alert 3 when they were losing a 1v1 beacuse it was not considered a loss by the system

I'd not pause anything but 1v1. In a multiplayer match, your allies can take over for a few seconds while you reconnect. And even in 1v1, only ranked matches.

Pausing 1v1, allowing teamcontrol in larger games sounds great as a standard setting.
All in all i'd make it configurable. Hate the pause? Play on a hardcore-no-pause server. Fear the disco? play on a cozy 5-minute-pause-server!
That way griefing or poor connections can be treated when they cause trouble.

I don't like this solution. The server should be centralized not server with their own configuration. Starcraft 2 is centralized

But anyway we are going a little OT. I am not talking about pauses. I am talking about how DC are treated at the end of the game.

I mean 1v1 game, one DCes, the game wait 20-30secs then the other wins the match.

aside from being a bit early to tell what time spans are useful,
even with some measurable data from test runs in alpha/beta the chosen number is still somewhat arbitrary (depending on game/session loading speed on that pc, time to reconnect,..).

I think that solution is the easiest and in most cases the best.
you could add a general timer (a bit longer e.g. 5min, without pause) until the player either has to rejoin to avoid loosing (e.g. in a 1vs1 case) or an allied player assumes command of those forces in some way (team situation).
You could even make a deactivated commander "captuarable" so that an enemy side could take over the whole unit force.

i still prefer the mavor-solution where units follow their last orders and the game goes on. If you can't beat the enemys headless units running patrols a dc should not give a win! Play it out, get the satisfaction of smashing the other players units!
On "centralized": i don't see how different settings for treating dcs affect centralism. I may have suggested that with " a ... server", what i meant was "a hosted game with the setting ...". Sorry.