Forums / Games / Halo: The Master Chief Collection (Xbox)

3 words... idle player boot

OP timestep

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
So I'm seeing A LOT of idle players in social slayer specifically. Why can't we boot them after they have been idle for a few kills?
Because it would get abused unless it was very specific on when someone could be booted. Hopefully, they'll implement an automatic boot system in the future.
The game could automatically boot a player if there has been no controller input from them during a match for more than two minutes. Or it could be three, or three and a half. 343 would have to determine the exact amount of time, since it's better to have an AFK player rejoin later in a match than be gone for the entire match, but you get the general idea.

There could then be a temporary ban if this happens multiple times within a certain span of time.
Those "players" are really annoying, they ruin the whole match. I really don't know why they are online if they won't play.
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
Why isn't this being discussed more? It would solve so many problems in social matchmaking if implemented correctly.
How about this just ban them if they idle for more then 30 seconds or idle players only match idle players :)
timestep wrote:
So I'm seeing A LOT of idle players in social slayer specifically. Why can't we boot them after they have been idle for a few kills?
It's social, what do you expect? No one takes it seriously. There are plenty of players in the game, that are just as good/bad as an AFK player. Does it really matter if they are running around or standing still when they die 20 times without getting a kill? Either way the game is ruined. Or should those kind of players be booted too?
EU Tripper wrote:
How about this just ban them if they idle for more then 30 seconds or idle players only match idle players :)
Agreed. 30 seconds is plenty of leeway.
Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
Why isn't this being discussed more? It would solve so many problems in social matchmaking if implemented correctly.
For sure. If JIP is implemented, I think it needs to be a limited JIP. For example - you shouldn’t be joining into a game that has a score like.... 60-15.
LUKEPOWA wrote:
Because it would get abused unless it was very specific on when someone could be booted. Hopefully, they'll implement an automatic boot system in the future.
I certainly hope so because it is becoming a real problem.

Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
And yes, I'm surprised a "JIP" system hasn't already been added.
Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
I like this, if it’s implement correctly it can be a great addition to MCC
Yoddha900 wrote:
Those "players" are really annoying, they ruin the whole match. I really don't know why they are online if they won't play.
Especially considering most of them are smurf accounts or, my guess, bots lol. The type of gamertags that have 15 gamerscore, all MCC related and message you with "Hola"...
All you can do at this point is report them. I don't know if it even does anything, but I report people all the time. Betraying teammates, being AFK all game, or even having offensive gamertags/clan names, whatever.
Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
This would definitely be a great addition if they could implement it in properly. H4 used to have a join in progress game system and was a great addition in my mind so teams weren't unbalanced all the time if someone rage quit, booted, etc.
Im actually having a lot of issues with idle players atm, I often jump into 8v8 and yesterday at one point I had 4-5 players just idle, which ok makes it more challenging but at the time same, really frustrating.
This is what happens when you implement auto queue in Halo. It doesn't work. Why it was ever added I have no idea. All it did was cause problems.
Volize wrote:
Booting idle players + implementing a join in progress (JIP) system would definitely be a great addition to MCC in a future update.
Why isn't this being discussed more? It would solve so many problems in social matchmaking if implemented correctly.
Why would anyone want to join in mid game onto a team down by 20 points because some bad player decided to quit on his team after going 0-20?

A JIP system is a horrible idea. People would just quit right back out if they joined a game that was half way through.

The better fix is to just boot idle players by running a check sum at the start of the match. If the player is idle, it boots them and finds another player before starting the match.
The idle player gets a 10 minute ban.
OS Wargod wrote:
A JIP system is a horrible idea. People would just quit right back out if they joined a game that was half way through.
H5 has shown that isn't always the case. An idle boot system would be the best way to do things, but adding a limited window for JIP could also work.
OS Wargod wrote:
A JIP system is a horrible idea. People would just quit right back out if they joined a game that was half way through.

The better fix is to just boot idle players by running a check sum at the start of the match. If the player is idle, it boots them and finds another player before starting the match.
The idle player gets a 10 minute ban.
Neither JIP nor idle boot fixes an issue like quitters. They simply mitigate it, so it is best to combine those solutions rather than seeing them as something you need to choose between. JIP can actually be a great system, it just requires some intelligent implementation.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2