Does the concede function need revamping?
yuckfoo
Join Date: 2012-11-08 Member: 168216Members
Join Date: 2012-11-08 Member: 168216Members
I know this issue has been brought up a few times in the past and it certainly is on peoples minds.
Many games I have played lately end prematurely via the concede function. Am I the only one who thinks "criteria" or a better reason aside from "its been ten mins and I give up" is needed to really improve this feature? It is very rare to get a game anymore where the objective stated at the beginning of the game is even reached (being able to cleanse the intruders or kill the alien hive) before the game is ended by conceding.
Using concede to end a game which is grueling long (45 mins+) and team 1 is destroying team 2 in res but team 2 has "better," (more team oriented) players allowing them to fend off alien attacks (due to lack of coordination) being entrenched at their 2 tech points with 2 rts is totally understandable. Refinery really comes into mind (in this example) especially if marines have Turbine/Smelting and you're on an alien team full of "hero" onos running into smelting/turbine alone only to get cut down over and over again by camping 3/3 marines/exos.
Before concede was added to the game, what was the average game length? Since concede has been added, what is that length now? When the dev's added this to the game, was there a specific circumstance this was to be used in? Is it being used as intended? Is this the kind of non-competitive play we are to expect?
I believe that conceding most of the time just gives people an easy way out and really has devalued and ruined what it feels like to win a game.
You almost never get the come from behind win anymore since people are always conceding due to the mentality of "we lost all our initial res because we didn't defend our rts and we are so far behind compared to them better end it now"
I would like to see winning games of ns2 mean something again, instead of having the easy way out misused.
Many games I have played lately end prematurely via the concede function. Am I the only one who thinks "criteria" or a better reason aside from "its been ten mins and I give up" is needed to really improve this feature? It is very rare to get a game anymore where the objective stated at the beginning of the game is even reached (being able to cleanse the intruders or kill the alien hive) before the game is ended by conceding.
Using concede to end a game which is grueling long (45 mins+) and team 1 is destroying team 2 in res but team 2 has "better," (more team oriented) players allowing them to fend off alien attacks (due to lack of coordination) being entrenched at their 2 tech points with 2 rts is totally understandable. Refinery really comes into mind (in this example) especially if marines have Turbine/Smelting and you're on an alien team full of "hero" onos running into smelting/turbine alone only to get cut down over and over again by camping 3/3 marines/exos.
Before concede was added to the game, what was the average game length? Since concede has been added, what is that length now? When the dev's added this to the game, was there a specific circumstance this was to be used in? Is it being used as intended? Is this the kind of non-competitive play we are to expect?
I believe that conceding most of the time just gives people an easy way out and really has devalued and ruined what it feels like to win a game.
You almost never get the come from behind win anymore since people are always conceding due to the mentality of "we lost all our initial res because we didn't defend our rts and we are so far behind compared to them better end it now"
I would like to see winning games of ns2 mean something again, instead of having the easy way out misused.
Comments
This topic has already been discussed to absolute death. Please do not try to resurrect the putrid corpse of the horse by beating it with a stick.
You stated that you know this issue has been brought up before. I suggest you head to those threads and read them through, because there is absolutely nothing that can be said that isn't said already.
Your Opinion On Concede
Potential Concede Tweaks?
Establishing A Time Limit On Activating The Concede Option
Concede Challenge
Marine Base Recycling
An interesting question. You can probably figure it out by exploring NS2Stats. I believe concede was added to the game in Build 236 released on Jan 15 2013. There was a later change to the minimum time at which you can concede (raised from five minutes to the current ten minutes, I think?), but I'm not sure offhand which build that was done in.
I don't think UWE has made an official statement on concede other than "We've added it to the game". I don't even recall seeing an unofficial comment from any of the UWE staff or other insiders. So "being used as intended" is at this point a subjective opinion or guess on the part of the players, not the developers.
Again, at best, any answer here will be subjective.
No.
Both options work
Rarely see games finished through natural means. Lets face it the goal of the game is to destroy the enemies CCs or hives not just give up after 5 minutes. I have seen comments from new players recently say concede is really spoiling the game for them. One had put about 3 hours in and hadnt seen an Exo or tried Onos yet simply because people just give up too easily and as games dont last more than 10 minutes on average now.
I miss the epic long, back and forward games and comebacks.
There is never any back and forth in these games. They were broken from the start because of the teams. Forcing them to continue just drives players away. You want exos and onos? Then try making topics about fixing team stacking instead of concede. Stop complaining about the current treatment and start fixing the disease.
Soon UWE gonna get sued by protection of animals societies
Some would say that playing games, win or lose is a waste of time. I disagree though. Its no more a waste than reading a book or watching a film. Atm I play hoping to get one good game here and there. Unlike pre release and concede when games were mostly played out till that final hive or CC went down.
I think most people will agree with you here. Most people have fun playing games regardless of whether they win or lose.
:-D
I was just joking. (hence the smiley)
As long as it's friendly discourse, it can be a topic that's repeated daily for all i care
:-P
For one concede made the "barrier" at which an round ends way lower. Getting a whole team to F4, required a whole team to actually F4. Recycling required the comm to actually recycle.
But since concede got added, the majority of rounds don't even end in a proper way anymore. On most popular EU servers it usually goes like this: Marines get second tech point -> Marines lose second tech point -> Concede!
And that in situations where none of the two sides had any big advantage in terms of tech points or map control. Marines just need to lose their second CC (or simply the PG to a second CP) and they will gladly concede, even against a Kharaa team with 1 Hive and 2 RT's.
People don't even try to comeback anymore, the moment they realize they have to fight an uphill battle, as the enemy team got an temporary advantage due to an won encounter, they just throw it all down and go knee-jerk "Meeehh....no fair!".
I had tons of rounds where the one team conceded and the other team goes "Wtf? We've been losing the whole time and you just concede?!". It's like players suffer from a total lack of game-sense in terms of what's going on in the round, they are only focused on their end of the whole thing and assume "We are losing", but many many times both teams think exactly that, both teams believe they are losing, especially in those rounds that are not horribly stacked and both sides have to fight for every inch of mapcontrol. Often these end up with the team that's slower at "Concede voting" winning.
Personally i don't like this trend at all, the most memorable moments in NS had been those when you and your team came back from impossible odds. Yes those have been rare, but if they wouldn't be rare they wouldn't be special.
But concede in it's current form kills any and all motivation to keep fighting, it lowers the already very slim chance of combacks to basically zero. It also promotes this thinking along the lines of "playing a game where you lose at the end is wasted time" and that's an really dumb mindset because it's impossible for everybody to always win, so by that logic 50% of all people on any given round are just "wasting their time". It's like the CoD mentality of "If i can't get points, it's pointless!!".
Imho maybe the whole issue could have been solved by simply giving Kharaa a way to recycle their Hives to "give up", similar to how Marines have had the option to recycle when they are hopelessly bottled in. Yes that would offer a new angle for grieving and trolling, but current concede also does just that.
Often it's enough to have one vocal negative nanny on the team to convince a whole team into conceding. Negative nanny will say things like "Zomg comm sucks, we only have 1 CP and 2 RT's! This is going nowhere!" while ignoring that the other team might be also just at 1 CP and 2 RT's because it's an pretty even round. Having a lone vocal guy like that can demotivate a team in a matter of minutes, regardless of the true state of the game, into conceding.
I'd rather give that power back to the one person on the team who is actually supposed to lead and has the best overall perspective on the round: The Commanders
Part of the Commander's job is to motivate the team. He doesn't need a game-mechanical power to prevent conceding; he already has all the power he needs in the sound of his own voice. Leadership and other related social skills are important parts of the NS2 gameplay, especially for Commanders, and a com that can't keep his team from conceding a winnable game is a com that deserved to lose.