@Administrator so if a player has only played 1 game and finished it, he is as "reliable" as someone who has played 100 games and finished all of them? And 1 player who has only played and finished 1 game is more reliable than someone who has played 100 games and quit in 1? How does that make sense?
A quitter could make a new player, finish one game and then be placed in a game with players who have played 100 games and who never quit. And then he can quit and ruin the game experience for the reliable players.
Shouldn't reliable players be in a higher-valued group than players who haven't even played the full 100 games yet? It seems unfair that by completing 1 game you gain max karma. Please think this through again. Currently you have not solved the quitters problem, just hidden it behind more and more punitive measures which do not solve the problems. And with the new timer you are actually forcing people to quit if they run out of time. Again, ruins the gaming experience.
I think the default karma should be at 2 or 3 for all players in the beginning. If you quit, you go down in karma. As you play and finish all games, you gain more karma. To get 5 karma, you should consistently play games and finish them all. Playing only 1 game should not boost your karma up to 5, it should happen over maybe 10-50 games. This way the more reliable players will have a possibility to play with ACTUALLY more reliable players consistently.
How do you calculate the influence of "the latest games you finished or not"? Some kind of weight based on game order?
Too long and too true post... Ignored by Admins