Is destroying the last hive/cc really that important for obtaining some fulfilment, in that it actually negates any of the fun you had in obtaining such a superior position? Most of the satisfaction I get is from the course of the game, not the ending. And although I agree that killing a hive/cc to end it can be the icing on the cake, concede vote does more good than it does bad, thus warrants it's existence.
Also, try to look at it from the losing perspective. It isn't really fun to wait for the opposing team to finish a game. I'd rather gg/concede as soon as it's apparent the game is lost, and start a new game, than spend another 10 min getting slaughtered while waiting for the inevitable. (although I do enjoy a nice marine last stand now and again)
Winning is outplaying your opponent, the 10 minute grind on that last marine base, or struggling to kill the last hive because they have 1 fade left and your team is off staring at walls isn't winning, you already won. If you need to destroy your opponents base after you've won, you are not proving anything, you are not winning any more than you already have, you're just like any other CoD kid that needs visuals to acknowledge his success. RANK UP, YOU KILLED THE ENEMY CC.
I would imagine the problem with concede is that you can tell someone is going to win most likely, long before they actually do.
The problem with that is that you tend to find people conceding before the players get to really play the game.
Unlocking the fun techs, the jetpacks, the exosuits, the new guns and lifeforms, those are indications of winning, so you have people slogging through the crappy bits of the game to get to the fun stuff, and then as soon as they do the other team concedes and they don't get to use it.
Which is a problem, honestly, I want to do something other than skulk or use the rifle, but by the time I get to do so it's usually a one sided battle.
This topic has been argued to absolute death. Can we start getting locks on it, and refer people to the other 7 topics that occurred before?
I think you'll find that if there's 10,000 threads on this board, 8,000 are duplicates. That's just how forums work, you have MASSIVE threads dedicated to one topic everyone uses, one off topics that disappear, then the same topics that come around and around and around. You can't lock repeats just because they're repeats, maybe if they're are already copies of the thread still active within the last 2 days.
I can't help but LOL at the variety of the responses.
If people are bringing this up so much then obviously UWE need to look back at at its implementation and work out if it needs tweaking, removal or leave it as is. A few months back I made a few suggestions and I think even the addition of these minor changes would atleast make the game more enjoyable:
to the team that didnt concede and a 1 min count down timer until game ends. A kind of "Finish him!".
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.
Oh no, you didn't get to smear the enemies' entrails everywhere with W3A3 Dual Exos while they're on the last base? Your time has obviously been wasted because the enemy team gave up and they didn't let you win hard enough. How terrible. You poor poor souls, having to go to the next round for another game rather than staying in the same one where your team is winning all the time. Pfft, okay....
If you need to destroy your opponents base after you've won, you are not proving anything, you are not winning any more than you already have, you're just like any other CoD kid that needs visuals to acknowledge his success. RANK UP, YOU KILLED THE ENEMY CC.
Did you ever read the text that appears when you begin a round? Destroy the CC/hive. So yes its the whole point to the game to me, not for it to end half way through and be back in the ready room. I've never played a minute of COD, I've played NS for the last 10 or so years so I think I know a good game when I've playing one.
Mods close this off or do what ever you need to with the thread, obviously this is a very touchy subject for the community.
I don't get the mentality of someone who wants his opponents to sit around and get shot after it becomes unwinnable, your asking them to sit around and get curb stomped for your enjoyment. Talk about being an arsehole.
I agree however that there must be more ways for making true come-backs possible. Like in the days of NS1. Don't know why it's not possible anymore, probably it has something to do with lack of ninja-phase gates or limited building placement altogether, but then conceders would have no excuse to ever end the game prematurely.
I agree. I've played NS1 since 1.0x versions (TBH I don't remember much from 1.0x-2.0 since the life span of those versions were much shorter than 3.x and onwards), and there were many games where people made comebacks from behind.
In terms of aliens, the ability to drop a hive, then have all aliens (via using the hive or movement chamber) to teleport in to siege in was a huge part of the ability of alien's to make a comeback.
It wasn't like marines couldn't defend either (the best way to defend against this is to set up siege cannons and at least "two" phase gates). Despite that though, aliens could always inch a victory if there was a chance.
(This is in pub games of course. Obviously, competitive games 6v6, things play out differently but since the majority of both NS1 and NS2 players are just public server players, and since concede is meant for public play, then of course this will be from experiences regarding public play).
As for the marine side, we had phase gates (could be built anywhere and were easier to use IMO, since you could just press E to use it multiple times instead of having to walk back and forth) which was basically the same.
The lack of the above two really makes comebacks really hard in NS2.
Now, yes, NS2 is supposed to be different from NS1 but it can be different while still retaining things that made NS1 great.
The ability for ninja hive drops (with instant reinforcement from all alien players, since you can teleport to a hive) and ninja phase gates made much more dynamic and fun gameplay which involved a lot of team coordination (which existed in many public servers in NS1).
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
edited April 2013
You know there was this bug I was insistent upon being fixed, where winning the round made everything like the pre game again, unable to hurt one another. How did this display itself in a way that made it annoy me to no end? I couldn't kill the commander as the chair he was in exploded.
Drove me nuts.. Like he always got the last laugh. Same feeling from concedes that aren't from a game dragging on. Its like teams rush to voting now so to deny the enemy who is literally at their door from having their well earned 5 seconds of explosions.
I like watching the tf2 gold cart go in.
I like watching an onos explode from a railgun.
I like watching a base be BB'd or a hive screaming.
No I'm not part of any new generation, i played pac man Wolfenstein, serial port quake lan games, and descent 2 parties.
No I don't like rubbing anything in anyone's face.
But sometimes a handshake ending is anti climactic. Nothing personal. I thank teams that don't concede these days.
Problem now is people lose the 2nd CC/hive and concede instantly, regardless of how many higher life forms are out or how close people are to getting them out, the 2-3 exos on the map might be the only exos for the next 5 mins but 9/10 people don't care and want to quit instantly.
Regardless of how many wanna be esport nerds keep typing shit up about SC2, RTS, manner and other stupid wank I hadn't heard of until SC2 came out this isn't a fucking RTS it's a hybrid at worst or a FPS with RTS elements.
Im all for keeping the concede option. Reasons are some posts above. The game is most fun at early to midgame anyway for me. The most cases, where the endgame actually appears, are totally onesided.
Why dont we try to make totally fair teams? With fair teams we have the highest chance to have a long, fair and fun game where all (or most) players have the feeling of being an actual help cause there are always some players you can outplay or outsmart and have a great fight against. On the other side is the stacked team (mostly on rineside in my experience). Your whole team gets killed right at the start or at least at midgame. You cant hold the 2. hive. Why drag the game out? Cause those stacking guys can have the pleasure to kill you nonstop until your last hive/cc falls?
Luckily, theres concede for that.
Im all for keeping the concede option. Reasons are some posts above. The game is most fun at early to midgame anyway for me. The most cases, where the endgame actually appears, are totally onesided.
A good point to make, and I say is something that should be changed (so end game isn't as one sided)
In NS1, the game was fun all around (from early to late game). Like I said in my previous post, this has to do with the lack of ability to make comebacks.
NS1's end game was more dynamic and back and forth. It was fun and satisfying to finally break the marine defense and claim that third hive that was needed to win. Or on the marine side, it was possible to do a ninja phase gate and bust out all the heavies and JPs you have, and try to take out at least 1 or 2 hive before the aliens notice.
There was "occasional" F4ing problems in NS1, and NS1's end game wasn't always perfect (marines turtling on one base, then slowly getting a huge heavy train to win was somewhat common but that was partly due to RFK mechanic which basically made it possible to be rich on resources even on one base).
Overall though, there were few complaints on games being dragged too long and most games were played out to the fullest (a fun thing to do on both sides is to relocate/stall out the opposing team's win via going into a vent... I remember ns_tanith actually had a space in the vent large enough to hold a full marine base, and on the alien side defense chamber forts by gorges were common).
NS2 isn't NS1 but if there is something that isn't quite working as well in NS2 (that did in NS1), then an attempt at replicating it should be done (in this case, more comeback opportunities and more dynamic and back and forth games even at late game).
I don't feel like I won unless I own.
You know, you could as well gg before round start. Technically, the other team won, but hey, where is the fun?
Winning conditions are: all bases down or everyone dead and can't respawn. And games should end this way. Concede is only acceptable when you are turtling so hard the other team can't break you.
The real issue isn't concede (as much as i dislike it) it's that there must be something wrong with game play if people can't see the point in carrying on because the game is so unforgiving, fix that and we should see the use of concede drop.
I also think winning and losing could be more interesting and worthwhile, though how to go about it im not sure, perhaps stats and achievements, a cinematic or a short replay of game progress with highlights of what players did to win, simply ending isn't good enough really.
What we need is a concede button for forum topics about concede.
Yesterday evening, on a loosing alien side, as concede vote started (even the Khamm called for it) until 1 more was needed, I was able to gather some people (Khamm included) to try something stating that even if our situation was critical, there was still some chances providing we take some initiative.
And we did took down a rine techpoint , we were able to destabilise the rines for a moment and slow them down.
We lost, because the overall situation was really bad (ARCs,JPs and Exos already done and making their way) but maybe some people learned that should they not have lost heart earlier (i.e : BEFORE they start to concede), we had our chance.
I guess, well at least I hope this achived a lot more than all these words about concede, wich is a fine and mandatory feature imo.
Everything is about keeping the team on the move and keep initiative over the adversary.
Nothing is about the way the game end, be it a stand to the last man or a broken team fleeing away.
When a team start to be disheartened, It's a leadership challenge. Take it !
The real issue isn't concede (as much as i dislike it) it's that there must be something wrong with game play if people can't see the point in carrying on because the game is so unforgiving, fix that and we should see the use of concede drop.
I also think winning and losing could be more interesting and worthwhile, though how to go about it im not sure, perhaps stats and achievements, a cinematic or a short replay of game progress with highlights of what players did to win, simply ending isn't good enough really.
This right here.
Technically the game is ruining the game. :-O
Concede is only a symptom of the problem.
Concede needs to be in the game, but should not be used with the frequency we see now.
I wouldn't mind if concede simply stopped the conceding team from respawning rather than instantly ending the round.
Good Example: Marine IP recycle. Effective at ending a game. I like to call it sudden death mode when I do it. Just ask if anyone is opposed, if no complains just recycle the IPS and drop shotguns and flamethrowers for everyone. You can then armory the doors if you want. Last person alive wins.
Bad Example: Skulk egg locking. Its not fun to repeatedly spawn dead. It messes with your expectations. You spend the round ready to run off as soon as you spawn, but now you get that same expectation when the camera shifts, but no pay out. Or worse, being spawn camped so you die as soon as the egg hatches.
I dunno, I personally see an enemy concede as a sign of respect (at least as a commander). You're admitting you were beaten so bad that you don't see a way that you can win. As a victor to a concede, that team is acknowledging inferiority. Maybe it makes me a dick in a different kind of way (I don't want to just sit there and farm freshly spawned skulks), but I like making people feel inferior. Maybe I just feel differently from others. I don't need to see the CC explode or the Hive fall to know I just won. I'd rather get to the next attempt at making people feel inferior.
Last night as marine comm on Refinery, we had a good push going into Turbine hive (aliens' second) when they conceded. At the point they conceded, they had 2 hives and 5 RTs. We had phase gates in 2 tech points, and 5 RTs (and of course some upgrades and I just plonked the proto).
I think they just assumed that we'd be able to take turbine, and that they had no chance for recovery.
I don't mind taking the win like that - we'd done well enough to make them think they had no chance. In reality, if I was on the alien team, I'd be really annoyed that my team had decided to concede then. The marines HADN'T yet taken the second hive (it was still on almost full health, but we'd got the eggs down), and the aliens still had LOADS of RTs. They hadn't even got a fade out on the field, but they must have had players with 50 res by that point in the game.
The problem here isn't concede. It's not even wholly player attitudes that is the problem (because those have been moulded by the real problem). The real problem is that one small advantage at the beginning translates to a much larger advantage in the late game - snowballing, or the slippery slope.
I'd personally like to see a much shallower slope, by reducing the economic punishment afforded by destroying structures: nanites can recover some of the lost resources from broken down structures and feed them back into the grid over time (say 25-50% of the building cost recouped over 30 seconds). Equivalently on aliens, the structure gets broken down by bacteria and the resources fed back into the system in the same way.
Why? This means that damaging the opposition still harms their economy - you still gain an advantage which will snowball as the game goes on - but the effect is not so drastic as it currently is. Losing a 20res IP now means you have to spend another 20 res to replace it. If the effective loss is only 10 res (as 10 is fed back over 30 seconds after the nanites clear up the old one), then you're still down, but the damage isn't so severe.
This should make games a bit closer - especially in the early to mid games - but still allow the better team to gain an advantage and win the game.
You know there was this bug I was insistent upon being fixed, where winning the round made everything like the pre game again, unable to hurt one another. How did this display itself in a way that made it annoy me to no end? I couldn't kill the commander as the chair he was in exploded.
Drove me nuts.. Like he always got the last laugh. Same feeling from concedes that aren't from a game dragging on. Its like teams rush to voting now so to deny the enemy who is literally at their door from having their well earned 5 seconds of explosions.
I like watching the tf2 gold cart go in.
I like watching an onos explode from a railgun.
I like watching a base be BB'd or a hive screaming.
No I'm not part of any new generation, i played pac man Wolfenstein, serial port quake lan games, and descent 2 parties.
No I don't like rubbing anything in anyone's face.
But sometimes a handshake ending is anti climactic. Nothing personal. I thank teams that don't concede these days.
Couldn't agree more. Sometimes when you're losing a game, the only redeeming thing you get out of it is when you take down a few jetpacks with your no leap skulk or drop a greedy fade during the marine turtle.
On the other hand... you get games where some decent shots stack marines and intentionally hold out the game long enough to get exos. It's sort of a troll, and completely unfun for the aliens - usually just kills the server. It's times like these that I beg the team to concede - but you could always just get them to F4 instead.
Just had a round a short time ago where the other side conceded when:
1) They held two bases
2) Aliens held three
Thats still evenly matched in my opinion since that allows both teams to reach all their potential upgrades.
If we have teams conceding when they still have two bases then whats the point? It wasn't even like we were dominating - the teams were evenly matched.
Just had a round a short time ago where the other side conceded when:
1) They held two bases
2) Aliens held three
Thats still evenly matched in my opinion since that allows both teams to reach all their potential upgrades.
If we have teams conceding when they still have two bases then whats the point? It wasn't even like we were dominating - the teams were evenly matched.
Yeah, it seems like requiring the team to be down to 1 tech point to concede is a good starting point to improving it.
As I have posted elsewhere, vast majority of chess games end with resignation of one side, an actual checkmate is rarely seen on the board.
Yet nobody thinks "resigning ruins the game". Why push wood when both sides clearly see the mate is inevitable? End it and have another game or two, where both sides can actually win.
I don't mind when my team wants to concede because the other team owns the map, has much better tech, and has had a solid lead in resources for a long time so there is no chance at all of a comeback.
What annoys me is when the team wants to concede at a point in the game where I just consider winning a bigger challenge but still realistically achievable.
it is very rarely that you see exos and onos fight against each other with equal odds in a powerstruggle, most of the time they are just game ending tech that is maybe fun the first 50 times you see them faceroll through the enemy team. it's not rewarding to me on the winning side anymore and i honestly prefer a fresh game in those cases.
Comments
Also, try to look at it from the losing perspective. It isn't really fun to wait for the opposing team to finish a game. I'd rather gg/concede as soon as it's apparent the game is lost, and start a new game, than spend another 10 min getting slaughtered while waiting for the inevitable. (although I do enjoy a nice marine last stand now and again)
The problem with that is that you tend to find people conceding before the players get to really play the game.
Unlocking the fun techs, the jetpacks, the exosuits, the new guns and lifeforms, those are indications of winning, so you have people slogging through the crappy bits of the game to get to the fun stuff, and then as soon as they do the other team concedes and they don't get to use it.
Which is a problem, honestly, I want to do something other than skulk or use the rifle, but by the time I get to do so it's usually a one sided battle.
I think you'll find that if there's 10,000 threads on this board, 8,000 are duplicates. That's just how forums work, you have MASSIVE threads dedicated to one topic everyone uses, one off topics that disappear, then the same topics that come around and around and around. You can't lock repeats just because they're repeats, maybe if they're are already copies of the thread still active within the last 2 days.
If people are bringing this up so much then obviously UWE need to look back at at its implementation and work out if it needs tweaking, removal or leave it as is. A few months back I made a few suggestions and I think even the addition of these minor changes would atleast make the game more enjoyable:
Yes true, but F4 has been around since the very beginning and it never occurred anywhere as much as concede occurs.
bahahah oh wow you know me too well.
Did you ever read the text that appears when you begin a round? Destroy the CC/hive. So yes its the whole point to the game to me, not for it to end half way through and be back in the ready room. I've never played a minute of COD, I've played NS for the last 10 or so years so I think I know a good game when I've playing one.
Mods close this off or do what ever you need to with the thread, obviously this is a very touchy subject for the community.
I agree. I've played NS1 since 1.0x versions (TBH I don't remember much from 1.0x-2.0 since the life span of those versions were much shorter than 3.x and onwards), and there were many games where people made comebacks from behind.
In terms of aliens, the ability to drop a hive, then have all aliens (via using the hive or movement chamber) to teleport in to siege in was a huge part of the ability of alien's to make a comeback.
It wasn't like marines couldn't defend either (the best way to defend against this is to set up siege cannons and at least "two" phase gates). Despite that though, aliens could always inch a victory if there was a chance.
(This is in pub games of course. Obviously, competitive games 6v6, things play out differently but since the majority of both NS1 and NS2 players are just public server players, and since concede is meant for public play, then of course this will be from experiences regarding public play).
As for the marine side, we had phase gates (could be built anywhere and were easier to use IMO, since you could just press E to use it multiple times instead of having to walk back and forth) which was basically the same.
The lack of the above two really makes comebacks really hard in NS2.
Now, yes, NS2 is supposed to be different from NS1 but it can be different while still retaining things that made NS1 great.
The ability for ninja hive drops (with instant reinforcement from all alien players, since you can teleport to a hive) and ninja phase gates made much more dynamic and fun gameplay which involved a lot of team coordination (which existed in many public servers in NS1).
Drove me nuts.. Like he always got the last laugh. Same feeling from concedes that aren't from a game dragging on. Its like teams rush to voting now so to deny the enemy who is literally at their door from having their well earned 5 seconds of explosions.
I like watching the tf2 gold cart go in.
I like watching an onos explode from a railgun.
I like watching a base be BB'd or a hive screaming.
No I'm not part of any new generation, i played pac man Wolfenstein, serial port quake lan games, and descent 2 parties.
No I don't like rubbing anything in anyone's face.
But sometimes a handshake ending is anti climactic. Nothing personal. I thank teams that don't concede these days.
I love you.
Easily the worst post in this thread.
Why dont we try to make totally fair teams? With fair teams we have the highest chance to have a long, fair and fun game where all (or most) players have the feeling of being an actual help cause there are always some players you can outplay or outsmart and have a great fight against. On the other side is the stacked team (mostly on rineside in my experience). Your whole team gets killed right at the start or at least at midgame. You cant hold the 2. hive. Why drag the game out? Cause those stacking guys can have the pleasure to kill you nonstop until your last hive/cc falls?
Luckily, theres concede for that.
A good point to make, and I say is something that should be changed (so end game isn't as one sided)
In NS1, the game was fun all around (from early to late game). Like I said in my previous post, this has to do with the lack of ability to make comebacks.
NS1's end game was more dynamic and back and forth. It was fun and satisfying to finally break the marine defense and claim that third hive that was needed to win. Or on the marine side, it was possible to do a ninja phase gate and bust out all the heavies and JPs you have, and try to take out at least 1 or 2 hive before the aliens notice.
There was "occasional" F4ing problems in NS1, and NS1's end game wasn't always perfect (marines turtling on one base, then slowly getting a huge heavy train to win was somewhat common but that was partly due to RFK mechanic which basically made it possible to be rich on resources even on one base).
Overall though, there were few complaints on games being dragged too long and most games were played out to the fullest (a fun thing to do on both sides is to relocate/stall out the opposing team's win via going into a vent... I remember ns_tanith actually had a space in the vent large enough to hold a full marine base, and on the alien side defense chamber forts by gorges were common).
NS2 isn't NS1 but if there is something that isn't quite working as well in NS2 (that did in NS1), then an attempt at replicating it should be done (in this case, more comeback opportunities and more dynamic and back and forth games even at late game).
You know, you could as well gg before round start. Technically, the other team won, but hey, where is the fun?
Winning conditions are: all bases down or everyone dead and can't respawn. And games should end this way. Concede is only acceptable when you are turtling so hard the other team can't break you.
I also think winning and losing could be more interesting and worthwhile, though how to go about it im not sure, perhaps stats and achievements, a cinematic or a short replay of game progress with highlights of what players did to win, simply ending isn't good enough really.
Yesterday evening, on a loosing alien side, as concede vote started (even the Khamm called for it) until 1 more was needed, I was able to gather some people (Khamm included) to try something stating that even if our situation was critical, there was still some chances providing we take some initiative.
And we did took down a rine techpoint , we were able to destabilise the rines for a moment and slow them down.
We lost, because the overall situation was really bad (ARCs,JPs and Exos already done and making their way) but maybe some people learned that should they not have lost heart earlier (i.e : BEFORE they start to concede), we had our chance.
I guess, well at least I hope this achived a lot more than all these words about concede, wich is a fine and mandatory feature imo.
Everything is about keeping the team on the move and keep initiative over the adversary.
Nothing is about the way the game end, be it a stand to the last man or a broken team fleeing away.
When a team start to be disheartened, It's a leadership challenge. Take it !
We have a winner!
This right here.
Technically the game is ruining the game. :-O
Concede is only a symptom of the problem.
Concede needs to be in the game, but should not be used with the frequency we see now.
Good Example: Marine IP recycle. Effective at ending a game. I like to call it sudden death mode when I do it. Just ask if anyone is opposed, if no complains just recycle the IPS and drop shotguns and flamethrowers for everyone. You can then armory the doors if you want. Last person alive wins.
Bad Example: Skulk egg locking. Its not fun to repeatedly spawn dead. It messes with your expectations. You spend the round ready to run off as soon as you spawn, but now you get that same expectation when the camera shifts, but no pay out. Or worse, being spawn camped so you die as soon as the egg hatches.
+1. Winner winner chicken dinner
I think they just assumed that we'd be able to take turbine, and that they had no chance for recovery.
I don't mind taking the win like that - we'd done well enough to make them think they had no chance. In reality, if I was on the alien team, I'd be really annoyed that my team had decided to concede then. The marines HADN'T yet taken the second hive (it was still on almost full health, but we'd got the eggs down), and the aliens still had LOADS of RTs. They hadn't even got a fade out on the field, but they must have had players with 50 res by that point in the game.
The problem here isn't concede. It's not even wholly player attitudes that is the problem (because those have been moulded by the real problem). The real problem is that one small advantage at the beginning translates to a much larger advantage in the late game - snowballing, or the slippery slope.
I'd personally like to see a much shallower slope, by reducing the economic punishment afforded by destroying structures: nanites can recover some of the lost resources from broken down structures and feed them back into the grid over time (say 25-50% of the building cost recouped over 30 seconds). Equivalently on aliens, the structure gets broken down by bacteria and the resources fed back into the system in the same way.
Why? This means that damaging the opposition still harms their economy - you still gain an advantage which will snowball as the game goes on - but the effect is not so drastic as it currently is. Losing a 20res IP now means you have to spend another 20 res to replace it. If the effective loss is only 10 res (as 10 is fed back over 30 seconds after the nanites clear up the old one), then you're still down, but the damage isn't so severe.
This should make games a bit closer - especially in the early to mid games - but still allow the better team to gain an advantage and win the game.
I think...
Couldn't agree more. Sometimes when you're losing a game, the only redeeming thing you get out of it is when you take down a few jetpacks with your no leap skulk or drop a greedy fade during the marine turtle.
On the other hand... you get games where some decent shots stack marines and intentionally hold out the game long enough to get exos. It's sort of a troll, and completely unfun for the aliens - usually just kills the server. It's times like these that I beg the team to concede - but you could always just get them to F4 instead.
1) They held two bases
2) Aliens held three
Thats still evenly matched in my opinion since that allows both teams to reach all their potential upgrades.
If we have teams conceding when they still have two bases then whats the point? It wasn't even like we were dominating - the teams were evenly matched.
Yeah, it seems like requiring the team to be down to 1 tech point to concede is a good starting point to improving it.
Yet nobody thinks "resigning ruins the game". Why push wood when both sides clearly see the mate is inevitable? End it and have another game or two, where both sides can actually win.
Concede is fine and useful.
What annoys me is when the team wants to concede at a point in the game where I just consider winning a bigger challenge but still realistically achievable.