Should individual player choice be taken into consideration?

white_jaguarwhite_jaguar Join Date: 2010-04-17 Member: 71439Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold Posts: 13 Fully active user
Hey Everyone!
I have played NS2 for quite some time now, and have had the opportunity to play on many different servers. A couple of the servers I've played on more recently have some pretty strict rules along with some admins who tend to follow the letter of the law instead of the spirit of it. One of the rules I have recently had a run in with was a rule that no player may exit the match and move into a spectator slot while a game is in progress. Now I understand the spirit of the rule, but I wonder if this rule, when enforced too readily without taking into context the state of the game, is a bit too harsh. Consider the following scenario:
  • Your team is boxed into the last tech point on the map.
  • You have no gate/tunnel anywhere on the map.
  • You have no res towers except the one in your base.
  • Your opponents have all the other tech points and res towers built up along with defense positions and full upgrades.
  • You and some others on the team have voted to concede several times, but each time you are short by a couple of votes because there are those on the team that either want to make a last stand or don't know how to vote.
  • The opposing team is taking their time eliminating your last base. (in the magnitude of 5 - 20 minutes)

Should I, as a player who knows the inevitable outcome of such a situation, be allowed to resign/retreat from the match and observe my fellow teammates perform their "heroic" last stand? Or should I be forced to stand among them even though I find no enjoyment in fighting a losing battle?

My opinion, and may not be the same as everyone else, is that it should be on the onus of the other players on the team to convince me to stay and "fight to the last man" as it were. But if they cannot convince me to stay, I should be within my rights to abandon or retreat from the match and simply watch the last stand from the sidelines. It should not be incumbent on the server admin to force players to remain on the team and be killed over and over because other players have decided to do so. The danger of admins enforcing such a rule, without considering the situation, is that it can cause players to no longer want to play because they could end up getting stuck in a last stand scenario for 5-20 minutes. (Or choose to leave, be kicked, or be banned from the server)
However, I do understand the flip-side of that, where some people will abandon a match too readily and cause their fellow teammates to lose a game that could have still been won. Which is where I feel the spirit of the rule is correct, but the execution of that rule needs to take the state of the game into consideration. Thankfully I've only had a couple of run-ins with admins who enforced this rule ruthlessly, so I don't think this is a widespread problem. However, with the small size of the NS2 community, I am concerned that if enough servers take this rule as "golden", it has the potential to shrink our small community even further.

I am interested in hearing other peoples thoughts on this topic!

P.S. This may also be related to the whole topic in NS2 around how to stop the "last stand" scenario from happening in the first place.

Comments

  • SquishpokePOOPFACESquishpokePOOPFACE -21,248 posts (ignore below) Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165262Members, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 1,575 Advanced user
    Every server is a community and every community has different rules.

    There are many ways around this simple problem. Join a different server, or ask the admin to change their ways, make a forum post about it, ignore the problem entirely, out just make a new server. Many pros and cons of each, with varying degrees of effectiveness.

    For what it's worth, I personally would adopt a policy of malicious compliance: just play bad on purpose in the no-win, no-concede scenario. Game ends quicker because you are missing every shot and tapping blueprints, and hopefully nobody notices that you are essentially AFK
    To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to play Natural Selection 2. The gameplay is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of military strategy and advanced mathematics you won't even win a single game. Theres also the game's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the game. The maps and artwork draw heavily from Riddley Scott's Alien franchise, for instance. The players understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depth of the game, to realise that it's not just great, that it also says something about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Natural Selection 2 truly ARE idiots. of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in the Marines' existential catchphrase "how do I get to be so good", which itself is a cryptic reference to the high degree of intelligence required to play the game as intended. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion when spectating a game. What fools... how I pity them. And, yes, by the way, i DO have a Fade tatoo. And no, you cannot see it. it's for the ladies' eyes only, and even then they have to demonstrate that they are within 50 hive skill points of my own (preferable lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid.
    SantaClaws
Sign In or Register to comment.