multi techpoint & concede

DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Posts: 4,381 Advanced user
This topic is aimed at pug play.
Usually at kharaa side.


I am of opinion that if you hold 2 tech points there is no need to concede. Even if your team is losing badly.
While more rare and rare, wins by some coordination are possible. (Rushing a main for example)

Yet I see a increased urge for players to simply concede on 2+ techpoints because they had a bad start.
I would disagree. If your 2 tech point situation is so bad, they will crush you soon regardless. Let them have the fun of it while you try to use your 2 techpoints to some advantage.


So what do you lot think? Is multi techpoint concede a good point? Or do you think like me, that its not over untill the 2nd hive says buhbye.
NS2
Old/resigned Dutch Translation Lead. Give feedback about the translation, or help improve by clicking: Current NS2 Dutch translation project. Dutch players apply!
NS2 Server Maintenance Manual
WorkshopBackup Manual (WSB Server)
Ingame: DCDarkling
'DCDs Steam Workshop', for your NS2 X-Hairs and Viewmodel Weapon mods
Viewmodels are the ones you hold in your hand, not the one shown in the world!

Old NS2 Stuff:
Marine Commander Guide NS2
Alien Commander Guide NS2
NS2 Mentor Program
Old NS1 stuff:
'Infested Pack v0.6' for models & props
Darklings Guide to Commanding Version 1.001
«1

Comments

  • TheriusTherius Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter Join Date: 2009-03-06 Member: 66642Posts: 750 Advanced user
    You can't take things out of context. 2-tech-point aliens might be winning or they might be getting destroyed. It depends on map control, harvesters, enemy tech, the amount of lifeforms you have/are capable of replacing etc. An alien team full of skulks with 0-10 pres, and marines holding all but the two hive-room RTs, having all upgrades and jetpacks: yes I would concede before the 2nd hive goes down.
    ChuckECheese
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    I think it is important to determine exactly what it is that you think concede accomplishes, or what you want it to accomplish.

    In my specific case, the number of NS2 players is very low in my geographical area, and their desire to play NS2 is tenuous at the best of times. Therefore, I view concede as a tool for preventing players from leaving the server due to frustration.

    In my experience with this kind of thing (which is extensive, trust me) a player who does not want to play the current round, but cannot concede, is more likely to leave the server than a player who does want to play the round, but whose game is cut short by a concede. Because of this, It is my opinion that, whenever a large portion of the players on a server (40% if I'm not mistaken) no longer wish to play out the round, and they voice this opinion by conceding, the game should immediately end.
    BestProfileNameCrazyEddieVonGerstenberg
  • KhazeKhaze Members Join Date: 2006-12-12 Member: 59031Posts: 270 Advanced user
    Key is frustration. I don't mind fighting a losing battle as long as I'm still having fun, but if you're locked down in to your hive as a Skulk with shotgun jetpackers waiting at every exit, there's nobody who would find that fun. That's when I concede.
  • DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Posts: 4,381 Advanced user
    Im more inclined to agree with khaze, although I can see the others there point.

    But I do not find a low rt situation with 2 tech points a reason to concede just yet. it is still doable.
    Like I said.. if it is TRULY that bad.. they will steamroll you and there is no need to concede anyway.
    NS2
    Old/resigned Dutch Translation Lead. Give feedback about the translation, or help improve by clicking: Current NS2 Dutch translation project. Dutch players apply!
    NS2 Server Maintenance Manual
    WorkshopBackup Manual (WSB Server)
    Ingame: DCDarkling
    'DCDs Steam Workshop', for your NS2 X-Hairs and Viewmodel Weapon mods
    Viewmodels are the ones you hold in your hand, not the one shown in the world!

    Old NS2 Stuff:
    Marine Commander Guide NS2
    Alien Commander Guide NS2
    NS2 Mentor Program
    Old NS1 stuff:
    'Infested Pack v0.6' for models & props
    Darklings Guide to Commanding Version 1.001
    chikoto
  • Ra1nRa1n Members Join Date: 2004-02-22 Member: 26798Posts: 33
    with 2 tech points rines are at their highest possible tier given time, aliens should be combat ready at that point but that's it. not really the same imo.
  • DaxxDaxx Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2002-04-16 Member: 460Posts: 1,606 Fully active user
    Im more inclined to agree with khaze, although I can see the others there point.

    But I do not find a low rt situation with 2 tech points a reason to concede just yet. it is still doable.
    Like I said.. if it is TRULY that bad.. they will steamroll you and there is no need to concede anyway.

    Unfortunately not always the case. I've had the displeasure of being in a couple of games where the above situation was reached, and the marine team proceeded to camp the hive exits complete with sentry farms. In such cases, I'm grateful for concede.

    While I generally agree that conceding with two tech points is premature, like any instance of concede its contingent on many different factors, not just the fact you have two hive.
  • chikotochikoto Members Join Date: 2013-02-15 Member: 183078Posts: 18
    edited March 2013
    I played in the game with OP, on Veil.

    2 hives wasn't enough to balance for our complete lack of map control, res towers (we didn't even have nanogrid), team work and upgrades (no leap at 10m, and I don't recall it ever arriving).

    The marine team were pumping out an army of EXOs, ARCs, MACs from their double robotics, with support from welder-wielding shotgun-shooting jet-packers, which I'm sure was great fun for them stomping our team of mute skulks, but for some of us the 20+ minute pain-train was less than fun.

    They had ample time to waltz in and end it, but they were doing it in the most painful, fully-upgraded and lengthy way possible. They even typed to all halfway through the game, gloating that they were swimming in res. The reason for the lengthy game wasn't because we were doing so well at holding out.

    It was time to move on to the next map.
    Post edited by chikoto on
    eliotmat
  • VayVay Members Join Date: 2013-03-14 Member: 183959Posts: 51
    Unfortunately, it isn't that easy to see who is winning. Tech points aren't as important as res, but res isn't easy to track either. 2 hive 3 res aliens aren't going to win in a pub often. They would have a chance if they keep Marine res down, but its too complex for the game too decide if they have that chance or not. Its best to just let the players decide when they don't want to play that round anymore. Forcing them to F4 and find a new server wont fix anything.
  • TinkerTinker Members Join Date: 2003-03-11 Member: 14395Posts: 275
    I usually vote concede when we hit 1 Tech 1 RT in mid to late. Of the games that drag out from that maybe 5-10% are fun from my experience and I only have a limited time to spend on games.
  • Ghosthree3Ghosthree3 Members, Reinforced - Supporter Join Date: 2010-02-13 Member: 70557Posts: 3,432 Advanced user
    There are some games, where even if you have two tech points, you're screwed.

    For example, the enemy has been raping your RT's all game.
    76561197996992409.png
  • ScardyBobScardyBob ScardyBob Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow Join Date: 2009-11-25 Member: 69528Posts: 4,983 mod
    Vay wrote: »
    Tech points aren't as important as res, but res isn't easy to track either.
    Its all about the economy, where tech nodes captured is a decent, but not perfect, proxy of your res flow.

    However, I feel you should let people concede whenever they want to. Preventing them will just cause them to f4 or leave the server instead.
    Vay
  • SidderSidder Members Join Date: 2012-12-23 Member: 176034Posts: 35
    Ghosthree3 wrote: »
    There are some games, where even if you have two tech points, you're screwed.

    For example, the enemy has been raping your RT's all game.

    Think if you lose yer close 2 rt as alien in pub its usually already an indicator of where the game will be going ..(higher playing agressive marines / no deffing skulks or just being shot down by the assualting marines)

  • hakenspithakenspit Members Join Date: 2010-11-26 Member: 75300Posts: 944
    This topic is aimed at pug play.
    Usually at kharaa side.


    I am of opinion that if you hold 2 tech points there is no need to concede. Even if your team is losing badly.
    While more rare and rare, wins by some coordination are possible. (Rushing a main for example)

    Yet I see a increased urge for players to simply concede on 2+ techpoints because they had a bad start.
    I would disagree. If your 2 tech point situation is so bad, they will crush you soon regardless. Let them have the fun of it while you try to use your 2 techpoints to some advantage.


    So what do you lot think? Is multi techpoint concede a good point? Or do you think like me, that its not over untill the 2nd hive says buhbye.
    Too simplistic and overlooks potential scenarios.

    2 tech points, 2 res nodes, 1 upgrade, no leap and no p-res in the team...have seen it hapen a few times...still had to wait 5 min past this point to concede.
    Tech point limits only server to allow marines to concede when aliens cant (marines can already recycle) as marines need 2 tech points almost as much as aliens need 3.
  • SeahuntsSeahunts Members Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151973Posts: 262
    Let them have the fun of it...

    Can we interpret this as "I want to have fun with my advantage against disadvantaged opponents who are no longer able to fight back"
    That is usually what it comes down to when people are against concede.

    But yes the 2 tech point concede is a tricky one. It could mean aliens are saving up for and about to unleash an avalanche of crag/shift upgraded onos/gorge bile/fades, or it could be a team of skulks with shade/shift, no pres and no chance of a comeback.
    I don't think I have ever seen a team concede with 2 points anyway.
    MMZ_Torak
  • Madd0gMadd0g Members Join Date: 2012-12-24 Member: 176116Posts: 91 Fully active user
    Conceding while on 2 tech points and 3 extractors shouldnt even be allowed in my opinion.
    Ingame nickname:Delta34
    MMZ_Torak
  • xen32xen32 Members, Reinforced - Supporter Join Date: 2012-10-18 Member: 162676Posts: 1,011 Advanced user
    2 tech points, 2 res nodes, 1 upgrade, no leap and no p-res in the team...have seen it hapen a few times...still had to wait 5 min
    No leap at 5 minutes, what a crap comm you had.
  • DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Posts: 4,381 Advanced user
    I have seen plenty 2 tech point concedes, hence I am asking what your folk opinion is.
    And no, I did infact mean that if I am on the losing side, and we are getting crushed.. I generally try to let them have the kill unless it takes eons.
    NS2
    Old/resigned Dutch Translation Lead. Give feedback about the translation, or help improve by clicking: Current NS2 Dutch translation project. Dutch players apply!
    NS2 Server Maintenance Manual
    WorkshopBackup Manual (WSB Server)
    Ingame: DCDarkling
    'DCDs Steam Workshop', for your NS2 X-Hairs and Viewmodel Weapon mods
    Viewmodels are the ones you hold in your hand, not the one shown in the world!

    Old NS2 Stuff:
    Marine Commander Guide NS2
    Alien Commander Guide NS2
    NS2 Mentor Program
    Old NS1 stuff:
    'Infested Pack v0.6' for models & props
    Darklings Guide to Commanding Version 1.001
  • bERt0rbERt0r Members Join Date: 2005-03-23 Member: 46181Posts: 611 Fully active user
    Concede is just plain bad. If you want to give up a round, stop attacking the enemy and hide.
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    bERt0r wrote: »
    Concede is just plain bad. If you want to give up a round, stop attacking the enemy and hide.

    How is that better?

    Vay
  • bERt0rbERt0r Members Join Date: 2005-03-23 Member: 46181Posts: 611 Fully active user
  • SeeVeeSeeVee Members Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165206Posts: 425 Advanced user
    edited March 2013
    concede should be turned off if a team has two or more tech points. reason being that if you have more than one you still just may have a chance to turn things around however small it is... much better situation than having on CP. I don't think I have ever seen anyone come back from one CP although I'm sure it has happened but very frequently.
    Post edited by SeeVee on
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    bERt0r wrote: »
    It is more fun.

    In a reduced form, this is essentially the theory that is in question.

    Is it more fun?

  • bERt0rbERt0r Members Join Date: 2005-03-23 Member: 46181Posts: 611 Fully active user
    edited March 2013
    Yes.

    Seriously, as long as the marines in their last base keep shooting, they did not give up the game yet. As long as the skulks keep trying to bite the exos, they have not given up yet. They vote concede because of rage qq while they are waiting for respawn. I think someone had an idea about not being able to vote concede while dead to prevent that.

    Concede was introduced to help end games fast, because people were qqing about losing being painful. Concede makes losing somewhat less painful but it also makes winning less joyful. It is a crutch mechanic to ease problems deeper in the game. I think for example, that the amount of one hit kills coupled with the delay of the lagcompensation creates this QQ rage. It creates situations where you can't figure out how you just died and what you could have done to prevent it. In that aspect, for example killcams of some sort could help somewhat (they dont have to show the enemy players vision, just your scene of death).
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    bERt0r wrote: »
    Yes.

    Seriously, as long as the marines in their last base keep shooting, they did not give up the game yet. As long as the skulks keep trying to bite the exos, they have not given up yet. They vote concede because of rage qq while they are waiting for respawn. I think someone had an idea about not being able to vote concede while dead to prevent that.

    Concede was introduced to help end games fast, because people were qqing about losing being painful. Concede makes losing somewhat less painful but it also makes winning less joyful. It is a crutch mechanic to ease problems deeper in the game. I think for example, that the amount of one hit kills coupled with the delay of the lagcompensation creates this QQ rage. It creates situations where you can't figure out how you just died and what you could have done to prevent it. In that aspect, for example killcams of some sort could help somewhat (they dont have to show the enemy players vision, just your scene of death).

    That begs the question; who is having less fun?
    The marine who doesn't get to one shot the skulk, or the skulk who is dead 80% of the time and doesn't actually get to play?

    The thing people need to think about is the possibility that concede is not about winning or losing, its about having fun. A good example of this is the marine turtle.
    In my experience (+-900 hours) marines are far less likely to concede a game that they have conclusively lost than aliens are. In addition to this, experienced players are more likely to concede as marines than inexperienced players are.
    It is my opinion that this is due entirely to the fact that turtling as marines against 3 hive aliens is fun. Its actually an enjoyable part of the game. I've seen 20 minute+ turtles where the server actually fills up because players like the desperate turtle. Sure, you die a lot to fades and Onos, but its really fun to kill attacker after attacker. The fact that you have almost zero prospect of winning the game means nothing. So long as people are still having fun, players will not concede.
    Experienced players know that the round is decided and are typically more likely to concede because their fun is in the struggle to win a round, not in mindlessly shooting oncoming hordes of aliens.

    For aliens, this same situation does not exist. As aliens you have no way of increasing spawn rate. You are hopelessly outgunned as the base unit. You don't get a chance to feel like you are actually playing a game, or doing anything useful. Which is why aliens will concede so quickly at the prospect of being overpowered.

    The important thing to take from this is that victory doesn't matter. So many people say that you shouldn't concede because you can still potentially win. It doesn't matter. I've conceded as aliens when we had 4 hives, simply because the 10th minute of trying to kill turtling marines was no longer fun. I didn't concede because I thought that the game was stupid and that it should end the second I wanted it to, I conceded because I wanted to show everyone else that I was no longer enjoying the current state of the round. I wanted everyone else to assess their current mood with regards to the game, and if they found that they too were not having fun, to voice that opinion by conceding as well. If we found that, in fact, most people were not having fun, then I think it would be a good idea to stop not having fun, and start a new round so that we could, instead, have fun.

    One potential flaw with the system is that it isn't the majority of the server that is involved. Its typically only 40% of the server. I think it would be preferable if a concede required the majority of the server to vote in favour of it, with no less than 30% and no more than 85% of the votes coming from one team.

    For example:
    In a 12 man game (6v6), 7 votes would be required to end the game, with no more than 5 votes being counted from one team, and at least 2 members of the other team voting to concede as well.
    In a 16 man game (8v8), 9 votes would be required to end the game, with no more than 6 votes being counted from one team, and at least 3 members of the other team voting to concede as well.
    In a 24 man game (12v12), 13 votes would be required to end the game, with no more than 10 votes being counted from one team, and at least 4 members of the other team voting to concede as well.

    This means the following:
    1. Even if 100% of the players in a team vote to concede, the game will not end until the required number of people in the opposing team vote to allow the concede.
    2. If, somehow, 50% of one team vote to concede, and 51% of the other team also vote to concede, the game will end, with whichever team had the higher percentage of concede votes declared as the losers.

  • Ra1nRa1n Members Join Date: 2004-02-22 Member: 26798Posts: 33
    okay lets play this through, one team wants to concede but needs votes from the other team to do so? votes are most likely not happening on the winning team, players from the losing team go afk, f4 or leave the server. pointless imo.
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    Ra1n wrote: »
    okay lets play this through, one team wants to concede but needs votes from the other team to do so? votes are most likely not happening on the winning team, players from the losing team go afk, f4 or leave the server. pointless imo.

    You're attempting to apply my solution to a scenario which has no solution. If there are players who will go AFK or F4 simply because the game does not end when they want it to, then no amount of diplomacy will correct the situation. There is simply nothing that can be done then.

    However, in a scenario where respectable players are involved, who will play on if the majority of players present desire to, then the solution works.

  • gnoarchgnoarch Members, Reinforced - Gold Join Date: 2012-08-29 Member: 156802Posts: 259 Advanced user
    wtf is wrong with concede?
    Sometimes if concede is not allowed becuase of time, I alt+tab out and read the news until we finally lost.
    I dont play the game if it's no fun and if you remove concede I will jsut leave or go idle.

    Why the hell do people don'T get that you cant force people to "play" these shitty games? People already stop to play NS2 because of this and you want to make it worse?
    Why?!?!?!?
    Seahunts
  • Ra1nRa1n Members Join Date: 2004-02-22 Member: 26798Posts: 33
    |strofix| wrote: »

    You're attempting to apply my solution to a scenario which has no solution.

    you mean which already has a solution.
  • Apreche2Apreche2 Members Join Date: 2012-08-06 Member: 154849Posts: 79
    I was playing a game last night were us aliens made a huge coordinated push at a phase gate. It was like, 8 aliens all going in together. We got eviscerated. Yeah, we had two hives, but that didn't matter. The other team had pro players. Real pros, as in I have seen some of their names while watching NSL. We of regular skill level can't win even with excellent teamwork because one of their players is enough to take out a whole bunch of ours.

    Here's my suggestion, that I have suggested before. Make NS2Stats a part of the standard server package. All servers should have it. Then all servers should default to random teams, and there should be votes only to disable random.

    The random should not be entirely random. The random should use NS2Stats to try to create the most even teams possible. If there are pros, they should be evenly divided between the teams. If there are an odd number of pro players, then that team with one extra should get a bunch of weak/rookie players to balance it out. After creating two teams as evenly as possible, it should randomly assign the teams to alien/marine.

    This prevention of team stacking will make it so these bad concedes don't happen in the first place on well populated servers.
    bERt0r
  • |strofix||strofix| Members Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Posts: 1,028 Fully active user
    Ra1n wrote: »
    |strofix| wrote: »

    You're attempting to apply my solution to a scenario which has no solution.

    you mean which already has a solution.

    What solution is that?
    What if 70% of the team votes to concede while using your already existing solution? How much better does it do?
    What if the full 40% of the server required to end the game vote to do so, and the other 60% of the server simply leave. How well has your existing solution done then?

Sign In or Register to comment.