Anyways, back on topic, how about whenever enough concede votes would normally trigger a loss, let the players on the conceding team who did not vote concede, vote on whether they will allow it. Maybe a 10 second event, and if an equal number of people vote to continue playing, the concede is canceled.
Anyways, back on topic, how about whenever enough concede votes would normally trigger a loss, let the players on the conceding team who did not vote concede, vote on whether they will allow it. Maybe a 10 second event, and if an equal number of people vote to continue playing, the concede is canceled.
This way the non-conceders have a say as well.
Non-votes do nothing
They are already in the minority of their side so why would we allow the votes of say 3 to outweigh the votes of 9?
Anyways, back on topic, how about whenever enough concede votes would normally trigger a loss, let the players on the conceding team who did not vote concede, vote on whether they will allow it. Maybe a 10 second event, and if an equal number of people vote to continue playing, the concede is canceled.
This way the non-conceders have a say as well.
Non-votes do nothing
They are already in the minority of their side so why would we allow the votes of say 3 to outweigh the votes of 9?
I though it took less than half the team? What are concede conditions?
If yout think all people are strifing for when playing NS2 is winning games, you are wrong. The win does not mean shit if you dont have things like ranks, statistics, leagues or a tournament going on. People play to have fun. If all you care about is winning, click here, as many times as you want. Instant gratification for you, no need to play ns2.
There is no point in winning if it isnt hard earned. There is also no point in winning games against people who give up right away. This is all about sportsmanship. I love it when people bring up analogies with one man sports where conceding is normal. NS2 is a team game, team sports dont have concede.
Anyways, back on topic, how about whenever enough concede votes would normally trigger a loss, let the players on the conceding team who did not vote concede, vote on whether they will allow it. Maybe a 10 second event, and if an equal number of people vote to continue playing, the concede is canceled.
This way the non-conceders have a say as well.
Non-votes do nothing
They are already in the minority of their side so why would we allow the votes of say 3 to outweigh the votes of 9?
I though it took less than half the team? What are concede conditions?
I think you will find its 50% vote on the losing side....its not like 2 people can concede a game in a team of 12 (that was the commander eject bug/feature for a while).
What ever you do with concede, you still can't force people to be defenceless targets if they don't want to be, they will still just F4 as they did before concede and it will still kill servers just as before there was concede.
Also, if you think everyone will be happy sitting there watching a 2 minute game of hide and seek you've got another thing coming. If I can't spawn, I fire up the server browser straight away.
The only suggestion I would agree with is limiting the vote to owning only 1 hive or com chair. Not that I have ever seen a concede from a team that had 2.
Also, any kind of time limit on finishing the enemy off should only be applicable when you have a mature Hive on every other tech point. I could see it being abused for easy marine "wins" other wise. Say it was 2 hives vs 2 comm chairs, then aliens just took a tech point but lost an onos 2 in the process, if the marines voted some end game timer, the aliens would still be 2 hive abilities and not be in a great position to finish it. The rines could still have an exo in base a pile of jet packs on the ground or anything.
You are suggesting you would leave a game with less than 2 minutes to go in order to try to join a different game. There may or may not be an open server for you to join at all and once you find one the game may or may not be in exactly the same state or any number of bad ways that you might not want to stay on it either. If you just wait the two minutes, you get a guranteed fresh start on a server that's already acceptable.
I can understand alt-F4ing though. It's certainly not worth swapping servers over 2 minutes but if you don't really want a fresh game anyway it's worth quitting.
I don't mind concede because I only do it when in certain moods. One thing that boils my blood is not being able to spawn on the winning team. This also causes problems if you were commander and jumped out to defend the base in a 1v1 situation and die only to be greeted by a message telling you to switch teams.
That's a problem with the autobalance, not concede. I still think the autobalance is the best system it could possibly be. It's not perfect, but there is no way to improve it. The closest alternative would be to turn it into a lobby based system where games only start balanced and leaving midgame is a capital offense. Like DoTA.
We had this discussion about mercy rule at least 3 times in other threads. It is only used in the USA and it is well defined when it triggers. There are no votes going on in the middle of a sports event, usually someone in charge throws the towel. It is not used in competetive sports and I know some of low league football (soccer) games to end 10-0 and higher on a rate of more than once per season. Players play it out because they owe it to their team and their fans to do the best they can and sometimes they can even turn it around.
If people dont want to play, you cant force them and they may leave a game whenever they want. But making it too easy to give up drives people towards this defeatist attitude, blaming their team/commander, start a new game and try to be on the stacked team. If not and you get owned again, concede asap and repeat. The game should be about playing, not about winning. The winning team will always have more fun than the losers in the end, this is the whole point why you play. Making a loss as painless as possible is like playing poker with play money.
If people dont want to play, you cant force them and they may leave a game whenever they want. But making it too easy to give up drives people towards this defeatist attitude, blaming their team/commander, start a new game and try to be on the stacked team
This demographic is the only reason I have an issue with concede.
i´ve never understud the practice of leaving a match because you are loosing and i sure as hell have no idea why 9outof10 games apruptly end in a concede.
there is no difference between winning and loosing, when you win you run around shooting aliens, when you loose you run around shooting aliens. <-- someone tell me the difference.(btw. same thing with aliens, just change up aliens with marines and shooting with biting)
people just play to win and not just to enjoy playing.
did someone else ever notice that loosing is more fun because you usualy have less downtime bevor your next engagement?
but to get on topic:
i strongly support putting in a regulation that games can only be conceded on 1techpoint. if you have 2techpoints and are loosing so hard that you absolutely must leave the game because.... *insert coment about mental defizit* it cant take long to lose 1 of them.
i also like the idea that some sort of mini"endgame" starts after the concede vote gets through. may be as simple as 1 last respawn for everyone.(the wining team should be notified that this is happening)
We still have no notification the other side has started a concede vote...still think that would be a good change and a way to remove some of the surprise).
i´ve never understud the practice of leaving a match because you are loosing and i sure as hell have no idea why 9outof10 games apruptly end in a concede.
there is no difference between winning and loosing, when you win you run around shooting aliens, when you loose you run around shooting aliens. <-- someone tell me the difference.(btw. same thing with aliens, just change up aliens with marines and shooting with biting)
people just play to win and not just to enjoy playing.
did someone else ever notice that loosing is more fun because you usualy have less downtime bevor your next engagement?
but to get on topic:
i strongly support putting in a regulation that games can only be conceded on 1techpoint. if you have 2techpoints and are loosing so hard that you absolutely must leave the game because.... *insert coment about mental defizit* it cant take long to lose 1 of them.
i also like the idea that some sort of mini"endgame" starts after the concede vote gets through. may be as simple as 1 last respawn for everyone.(the wining team should be notified that this is happening)
Because it's not much fun dying over and over again while doing no damage to the other side. This is worse for aliens than marines. I've seen games where one side can hardly move out of spawn, while the other side claims the whole map. If at 5 minutes in the other team are on 6 RTs and your on 1 you've lost, you may as well restart the game rather than wait 10 minutes for them to deal the killing blow.
Comments
This way the non-conceders have a say as well.
Non-votes do nothing
They are already in the minority of their side so why would we allow the votes of say 3 to outweigh the votes of 9?
I though it took less than half the team? What are concede conditions?
There is no point in winning if it isnt hard earned. There is also no point in winning games against people who give up right away. This is all about sportsmanship. I love it when people bring up analogies with one man sports where conceding is normal. NS2 is a team game, team sports dont have concede.
I think you will find its 50% vote on the losing side....its not like 2 people can concede a game in a team of 12 (that was the commander eject bug/feature for a while).
You are suggesting you would leave a game with less than 2 minutes to go in order to try to join a different game. There may or may not be an open server for you to join at all and once you find one the game may or may not be in exactly the same state or any number of bad ways that you might not want to stay on it either. If you just wait the two minutes, you get a guranteed fresh start on a server that's already acceptable.
I can understand alt-F4ing though. It's certainly not worth swapping servers over 2 minutes but if you don't really want a fresh game anyway it's worth quitting.
That's a problem with the autobalance, not concede. I still think the autobalance is the best system it could possibly be. It's not perfect, but there is no way to improve it. The closest alternative would be to turn it into a lobby based system where games only start balanced and leaving midgame is a capital offense. Like DoTA.
Ahem.
If people dont want to play, you cant force them and they may leave a game whenever they want. But making it too easy to give up drives people towards this defeatist attitude, blaming their team/commander, start a new game and try to be on the stacked team. If not and you get owned again, concede asap and repeat. The game should be about playing, not about winning. The winning team will always have more fun than the losers in the end, this is the whole point why you play. Making a loss as painless as possible is like playing poker with play money.
This demographic is the only reason I have an issue with concede.
there is no difference between winning and loosing, when you win you run around shooting aliens, when you loose you run around shooting aliens. <-- someone tell me the difference.(btw. same thing with aliens, just change up aliens with marines and shooting with biting)
people just play to win and not just to enjoy playing.
did someone else ever notice that loosing is more fun because you usualy have less downtime bevor your next engagement?
but to get on topic:
i strongly support putting in a regulation that games can only be conceded on 1techpoint. if you have 2techpoints and are loosing so hard that you absolutely must leave the game because.... *insert coment about mental defizit* it cant take long to lose 1 of them.
i also like the idea that some sort of mini"endgame" starts after the concede vote gets through. may be as simple as 1 last respawn for everyone.(the wining team should be notified that this is happening)
Because it's not much fun dying over and over again while doing no damage to the other side. This is worse for aliens than marines. I've seen games where one side can hardly move out of spawn, while the other side claims the whole map. If at 5 minutes in the other team are on 6 RTs and your on 1 you've lost, you may as well restart the game rather than wait 10 minutes for them to deal the killing blow.