How to make concede better?
nsguy
Join Date: 2010-01-03 Member: 69869Members
Join Date: 2010-01-03 Member: 69869Members
Comments
Maybe, but I can still think of MANY situations that call for it.
Enlighten us!
-Being toyed with and camped by a sadistic team only to farm kills for their rank
-Being down upgrades, res, and map control to the point where winning is impossible
-Having a game that has been dragging on for WAY too long due to excessive turtling
-Getting off to a really bad start due to an idiot comm or trolls
-Team stacking
How about no?
That has never happened to me, ever. Not with more than one base.
If you have two bases you have all unlocks and 2 res nodes, and could turn the game around if your team works together. It's too early to tell with 2 bases.
You can't really turtle 2 bases very well. It doesn't last long to take one down.
That's just a submissive mentality. Just because you don't have a perfect start doesn't mean you can't turn the game around.
Those games don't last long enough to require a concede.
Play more maybe? :shrug: Happens quite a bit on stat servers.
Not when you've lost your upgrades and are down 200+ res. It's just a waste of time. I've played Natural Selection long enough to see a loss LONG before people seem to notice.
Happens all the time. Just played a game like that an hour or so ago.
Having your ip's recycled, then rebuilt, then destroyed because we had a slow start, then going to built res nodes only to find out the aliens have already claimed a huge chunk of the map. Then you are blessed with the fortune of having afkers and having to carry a team. Those types of games almost always result in a loss.
Yea, it happens all the time in pubs.
Sometimes, other times they just kill farm, or the losing team is really good at turtling.
The snowball effect is very pervasive in NS2. If one team gets a decent lead then it's often very hard to stop them from building on it. Not impossible, but if it came down to it most people's money would be on the snowballing team. Competitive might be different but on pubs, barring power node stealth kills, the team that snowballs will win.
I recall someone suggesting about a month ago an option where the enemy team has to hold out for 2 (or X) minutes. If they do, it's a "GAME END" instead of "MARINES/ALIENS WIN." I think, if the marines / aliens are down to certain conditions, they can hit concede and start these events, making the game's end more fun and interesting. Perhaps give the winning team a buff to win as well like instant respawn or something similar. What do you guys think about it?
Yeh it is often difficult, but is it worth conceding so early? People tend to enter a defeatist attitude right at the beginning and rather than try and win the game, they just vote concede as though there was no hope.
That's actually quite interesting - instant respawning that is. The consequences could be extended turtling but if the team works together, could result in a big push that could turn the game around. Perhaps there could be an "adrenaline phase" where the team gets instant respawn for a few minutes. If they fail to turn the game around in that time then it's over.
[/quote]
I played on a server with that mod on (I call it "come at me bro" mode), and I thought it was absolutely terrible.
It's like if you're playing chess and suddenly the guy you're playing against is like "bro, checkmate me in 3 moves or 2 minutes or 'game end' trolol." Anyway, it's probably one of the worst ideas that I've ever seen for this game. The fact that someone actually spent time coding a mod implementing it is quite appalling, but that's a whole another story.
As far as the snowball effect of NS2, agreed completely. I don't know of a RTS game where resource domination doesn't lead to snowballing though, so that's fine. However, on a pub, if the game is close, you can always hope that the bads on your team will leave - because that's pretty much the only way in this game to have something like a "comeback."
What servers do you play on? Stat servers use ns2stats. Ns2stats is not exactly reliable for ranking because it resets so often. It shows I have played a total of 49 minutes. So if players are farming kills, it is just plain stupid.
Again, what servers do you play on. I rarely ever see a pub with someone in game and afk.
Oh yea, it's incredibly stupid, never said it was smart.
I usually play on KingKahuna. There is usually an admin on, but occasionally late at night it can be a problem. I had 3 afkers in one game not too long ago, they were eventually kicked, but it was near the game end... Needless to say, we lost.
Perhaps. (2 minutes was an arbitrary number, I really hope that mod was longer than 2 minutes). The main thing I heard pushed around was that the concede was "unfulfilling," ending games too quickly and bland. The argument was that this way you get to actually kill the aliens and make it feel like a "victory" in some sorts while making the enemy team fight to defend their "victory" condition. That way the game ends with a bang instead of just seeing a victory picture or having the defenders die endlessly waiting for that final Onos train.
Of course, the attacking team's advantage would have to be big to compensate for the timelimit. I dunno. It was just an idea to be thrown around.
I'd rather have 4 quick 15-minute tight games with a clear winner and good teamwork than one bloated crappy no teamwork 60-minute spamfest.
Not that winning on a pub means much anyway, where the win is usually about the distribution of terribads on the teams, rather than feats of high individual skill.
By about 12:00-15:00 it's usually obvious which team will win, and conceding is an excellent option unless the game is somewhat close/playable, which is quite rare.
If you don't let a person quit with concede, then they can quit with their disconnect button. You can't FORCE a person to play a game that they are having no fun playing.
That's what this is about, fun. If people were having fun - even when losing - they would play. Since they're not, they want it to end. So we can either allow concede, or people will quit, the round will end, and because so many people left the server you'll end up with small teams in the next game, and then everyone else will quit to find a higher populated server. Now you have an empty server.
Is that a better option?
If people don't like concede, then the answer is to either be more aggressive if you are on the winning team, or start making suggestions on how the game can be changed so that people aren't supposed to stand around like target dummies while the other team gets around to finishing it.
I enjoy a good game but after playing a match and being smashed the entire time and waiting for a team to end it; personally I would rather just end it so we can start a fresh despite how annoying it is for the other team not to finish us off. I know that's a bad attitude to have but just having that easy option there makes me do it more i guess.
As for fixing it so it doesn't happen as much; unfortunately I don't have any suggestions apart from getting rid of it I guess?
Another idea is rather then just ending the game to give some big bonus (to hp/damage or something like that) to the team that didnt concede and a 1 min count down timer until game ends. A kind of "Finish him!".
Another option might be to increase the recycle amount on buildings. If you are behind, maybe recycling the less useful buildings for one last push would be used more. With a quick death if it doesnt work, more of a going out in a blaze of glory kind of thing. I wonder if there was some way to maybe integrate this into concede so rather then concede directly it increased the recycle amount of buildings (to say 100%), but had some big negative that would harm the team long term (maybe much slower respawn for the next x minutes, or 50% less new res for the next x minutes), something that pushed a team into having a kind of one last attempt to break out.
I like this idea but i think prevent the hive from laying new eggs and make the final moments a hunt for all remaining players would be a good end to a match. So atleast the winning team still gets that sense of finishing the game off with a win rather than it just ending.
its already atleast 50% of the side thats voting...so a majority of the players.
Sounds pretty damn democratic to me as is.
Thanks to UWE for adding in the little notification of a vote...nice touch, though perhaps a message if a vote fails (so you know you have to vote again).
Any extra objectives like draws, I don't see what it would add towards the game itself.
i usually disconnect from server whenever my awful team soft-loses at ~5 minutes. it's a waste of time having to wait 5 minutes to even vote concede and during that time i'd probably begin to harrass teammates over the mic for being shit...
note: i don't prematurely surrender... at 5 minutes when your team has lost 5 RT's and killed 0 enemy RT's, and your team is all 1:5 or 1:10 - wtf is the point?
Too many people wanted concede votes to show but NOBODY TOLD US WHY. UWE just implemented it "because they wanted it". There's NO REASON to show others you want to concede.
One easy improvement to concede: When concede goes thru, don't end the game, but stop enemy from spawning -> then the game ends when CC/hives die or all players die. MUCH more of an "ending", and only makes the losers play a minute or two longer.
EDIT: I've been whined at for conceding. Why the hell does concede need to show? Why does there need to be a reaction from your teammates to YOUR decision on how the game is going? All it does is demoralizes the team. Just because I decide to concede doesn't mean I stop playing, or that anyone should feel less about our chances of victory.
I see early conceding as a problem because it's the commander's duty to turn the game around - find a vulnerability in the enemy and exploit it. That's what I do, but one person on the team shouts "Concede!" and other people follow, or it completely demoralises the team. The best games are usually long ones, ones where the teams fight for a single area for tens of minutes.
Any chance they have considered adding a timeout? So if X minutes have passed since the concede vote started it resets to 0?