Disadvantage of f4:
Can cause a game to end early due to increasingly imbalanced teams (in itself causes a snowball effect - 'why bother, it's 5 vs 8 now') - thus effectively a minority vote may only be required
Snowball effect due to number of votes being known
Uhhh, no? Unless the server has auto-balance disabled F4 doesn't do a damn thing to cause unbalanced teams, the overpopulated team will just spawn the same number of players as the team lacking players has.
So f4'ing does not contribute to an sides being uneven?
I want what you having!
F4 does unbalance teams...one has fewer players (which is normally how balanced teams are viewed).
Most servers have autobalance which draws a game out longer by trying to re-balance it (hint is in the name of "auto-balance").
You might want to educate yourself how auto-balance in this game works before you try to argue about it against others who do. The way auto-balance works in this game is when a threshold is reached, I believe default is when one team has 2 less players on it then the other, then the over-populated team will simply stop spawning players until both teams have the same number of players alive. As a player dies, then one of the guys waiting in queue will respawn, keeping the teams effectively balanced until more players join a team.
So no, auto-balance doesn't magically "re-balance it" it just makes it to where there's tons of players sitting there waiting to respawn and the game drags out just as it would, longer even, since there are less players active. So no, F4 does not work in ending games unless the ENTIRE team does it, this is an established, undebatable fact. That's one of the reasons they added concede into the game to achieve that purpose.
So in a 6 v 6 game (which everyone seems to love) if 1 person f4's your down 16% of the available numbers but this does not have any impact?
Even on a 24 player server its 8% fewer people on the ground.
Being on a team that has even 1 person raging and f4'ing does impact the team.
Concede needs work, but its head and shoulders above f4 and the auto-balance (which relied on players on other team dieing.)
I always felt auto-balance was simply a place-holder for a concede option to try to get over the issues that f4'ing brought about (where you would have multiple people raging).
I think concede is only half and should trigger some sort of end mini game (even if that mission is to try to hold a location for 2 min with 0 respawning (to protect targeting device for a big nuke)).
Marines could view it as somewhat of an honourable loss (if they could not repel the aliens they nuked em) and for aliens it could be time to launch a some globs (that will terraform where they land into a new hive and the alien infestation is not totally wiped out).
What? Most people enjoy 6 v 6!? At a quick glance on the server browser I saw 5 12 player servers, none populated (granted it's morning in the US). I still have no idea what point you're driving at, but I do love how you're trying to use percentages to avoid saying that with autobalance, at worse, you're down just 1 person in real terms, no matter how many people F4, lol.
Wrong your normally down at least 2 people..until someone on the winning side dies....this could take 30 seconds or 5 minutes.
! person down is still 8% on a 12 v 12 server...so it DOES impact balance as 1 side has fewer players (be it 1 or 3).
You're absolutely grasping at straws and nothing more, as is anyone arguing against concede in this thread.
Again, it's a feature that's 100% player controlled. If a concede vote goes through it basically means more people disagree with the idea that it's not a good feature. Yes, it can suck when people don't see things as you do, but that's life. As to needing tweaking, I'm really not sure why "concede" needs to be changed to "we give up, but in a few minutes" in order for people to get some sense of accomplishment as opposed to just starting another round right away that might go better for all parties.
Not grasping at straws...indicating facts that your overlooking.
Autobalance does not kick in if your 1 player down...only 2 or more.
f4'ing hurts the team, if your down 1 player of 4 you are down players and as such will be at a massive disadvantage.
Concede vote never takes someone out of the game...they are still on the field.
The fact that concede comes instantly with no warning to the other side makes it feel like the game ends too abruptly.
I have been in many games where I was surprised that the other team conceded.
No one wants to draw games out meaninglessly (other than the joy of the turtle) and this finds a way to do just that.
Your conceding that you have lost...but want to try to play to avoid conceding a "bonus point".
Your belief that anyone who thinks concede is a whining little suck shows how little you appreciate other peoples opinions.
Where it not for people asking that we change from simply using f4 we would not have seen autobalance be built in...nor would we have had concede put in place.
It was through people putting up suggestions to improve how the end game mechanic works that has led us to the situation we have now.
Concede is better than the old f4 system no doubt...but to say you cant improve on it is ignorant.
There are multiple suggestions all extremely valid and would address some major issue people have.
Ideas like it triggering a seperate end game scenario or simply putting up a message letting both sides know once a vote has been started and what % of each team has supported it.
"If a concede vote goes through it basically means more people disagree with the idea that it's not a good feature."
-> You need 6 votes to concede on a 24 player server, right? That means only 25% of all players can force their will on the rest. If it would be such a good feature and everyone but a small amount of players would love it to the ground, then make it a democratic decision where at least 51% of all players have to vote for it to end a vote. If you are so sure that almost everyone likes it you could even go with 60 or 90%, but I bet this will never happen, because then rounds would be played till the end. Why? Because you will never gather 60% or even 51% of all votes if the round is not 500% one-sided.
Think about it, 25% decide about a concede vote. And 75% of all players are not even asked if they like it or not. There is no way to stop it for the other side. This is not a good base for a decision or argumentations.
Sorry but 50% of a side should be able to end the game..this stops a winning team refusing to vote and the game being a spawn camp-athon with people leaving the server raging.
Being one player down on a 24 player server means next to nothing honestly. I don't know how badly it impacts smaller servers and frankly I don't care because I don't play them. And after being one player down and auto-balance kicks in, you're still pretty much dead even. The argument about "well only until someone dies", well sorry, if nobody on the marine team is dying, then the game is pretty much over anyway, that's just ludicrous.
It's not a fact that I'm overlooking, it's an opinion of yours that I'm overlooking. And yes, I find it hard to lend credence to opinions that buck against the pretty outspoken, overwhelming majority that pleaded for the concede option, and rightfully got it.
Sorry but 1 team having 11 active players...the other only 10 does have an impact on 24 player servers (assuming equal skills), you may believe thats opinion all you want.
This is pretty black and white...11 is more than 10 so the side that has 11 has an advantage.
I suggest you stop and look at what people are suggesting as not all change is bad, in fact I believe hugh has mentioned a few times he would like to somehow work a nuke into the game (this could be a way for that to happen).
Concede has its faults...same way autobalance has its faults. You can try and deny these facts but your only fooling yourself.
We need to improve on how concede is as it currently does not feel right, having it trigger a short term minigame would be a good solution.
Not really, no. Again, you're telling me I'm debating "facts" when I'm in fact just debating your opinion. In MY opinion concede is perfectly fine as is and does not have these "faults" that you keep mentioning.
Sorry but being down 1 or more players does give the other side an advantage, thats not opinion its fact.
You claim the concede is fine as is ignores the large number of people who are wanting to tweak it so its not such a surprise when it happens.
I have been on alien teams and have had the team talking about concede...only minutes later the other team conceded and left us all scratching our heads in the RR.
There are many options and ways with which concede could be improved to better integrate and avoid a lot of the aspects that people are criticizing.
There's no "large number of people" wanting to tweak it. It's maybe 20, at tops and probably overguestimated because I don't care to go back through and count, people on these forums saying that MAYBE it could be better a certain way. This is out of the couple thousand that actually play the game. That's it. Just because it's YOUR opinion doesn't make it the majority opinion.
Then we shall have differing opinions, I know there are more than 20 people who think concede could be improved.
I dont think anyone would object to the server putting a message up letting your team and the other team know if your teams strating to concede.
After all that will only help in having the concede vote succesful and less of a surprise.
I was and still am an advocate of concede, doesn't mean I dont believe it needs work and is far from smooth.
@Mr.Pink, I would prefer to just let both sides know a concede vote has started at the very least.
The mini end game could be annoying but if it goes for only ~2-5 minutes its not a huge amount of time and should not be too arduos for the losing side...especially as they have a way to pull out an honourable defeat.
Everytime I've been on a team that's failed miserably and down to one hive/base and locked into that solidly I'll just announce it over voice coms that I'm conceding. That, to me, is plenty enough warning on what's going on and achieves the same thing. Not really worried about the other team knowing as they probably already know they've won anyway.
Lev SteelJoin Date: 2012-10-13Member: 162274Members, Reinforced - Shadow
Concede destroys the public game a bit. People, especially new ones, always give up too fast. Just yesterday "they" cancelled a game, where the aliens did not even had fades yet. They just said "omg, alien stack again, concede!" right from the start.
The intention of concede is (i think), that you have a way to start over faster and don't have to wait for a long painfull loss. That would be just fine if people used it responsible.
But since we have huge waves of new players which don't have a clue how to play the game, not using team communications (talking nor listen to advanced players), it is miss-used a lot.
So concede itself is not the big problem, it's more the player whielding it. Maybe the ratio for the vote needs a fix, since it seems so be very low.
"Guns don't kill people"
Concede destroys the public game a bit. People, especially new ones, always give up too fast. Just yesterday "they" cancelled a game, where the aliens did not even had fades yet. They just said "omg, alien stack again, concede!" right from the start.
That's not possible. Concede isn't available to use as an option until 5 minutes into the game.
Everytime I've been on a team that's failed miserably and down to one hive/base and locked into that solidly I'll just announce it over voice coms that I'm conceding. That, to me, is plenty enough warning on what's going on and achieves the same thing. Not really worried about the other team knowing as they probably already know they've won anyway.
From my experience communication of a concede does not not always take place and you can be caught out by a pessimistic team.
I am also worried about the other team...as I have all too often had a "WTF...they conceded?" moment.
I know I am not alone with that criticism of the current mechanic, it can easily catch both sides by surprise.
Concede ruins the game. Unfortunately we had to try it for a few months to believe it. Now we know.
The main problems
1. It encourages short, reckless games (risk/reward) and when it doesn't work out, you just concede. ie: 3 phase gates, no mines or upgrades and when you keep losing phase gates you give up.
2. Nobody ever wins, the other team always concedes. It's bad sportsmanship.
3. Often I hear somebody say "we should just concede" when we lose ONE of our THREE tech points (either team). It's bananas.
Concede ruins the game. Unfortunately we had to try it for a few months to believe it. Now we know.
The main problems
1. It encourages short, reckless games (risk/reward) and when it doesn't work out, you just concede. ie: 3 phase gates, no mines or upgrades and when you keep losing phase gates you give up.
2. Nobody ever wins, the other team always concedes. It's bad sportsmanship.
3. Often I hear somebody say "we should just concede" when we lose ONE of our THREE tech points (either team). It's bananas.
The existence of F4 or the ability for the marine comm to recycle everything brought those strategies to the field.
All concede did was allows the alien team to concede if one of their strats failed, marines have always had a pseudo concede system available.
Yeah i also want no concede. Thats just an stupid option. Now games sometimes end without a reason. UWE should stick with F4, not with that damn vote concede option. -.-
I played a game yesterday where we had three hives and suddenly someone voted to concede. I asked him why he would do that, everything looks fine and he said: "I lost my 50 res Fade and was angry, that is why I voted". That is not meant to complain about him, but it shows that there are many reasons to vote concede. It just needs more regulation to work more reliable...
It's just another thing added to the game without one iota of thought or design put into it. It wouldn't be hard to put a message saying "X voted to concede (1/5)" like the old mods did.
The auto-lose when your team members also hasn't been thought through. As aliens we had 3 hives and were winning, one person leaves, leaving us 3 or 4 players down and it forces a loss on us. If there is team balance, then why does it auto-lose? And why doesn't it check to see if you have 3 hives?
That feel when:
>Biling power at main base while they do 4 exo push
>No IPs aywhere else
>Power down
>Your team concedes one second after
Tho concede is much better alternative to F4, it needs some small tweaks, like bigger % or (let's dream here) smart system that measures overall team 'strength' check, i.e. if you had 3 hives, one got killed, you still got 2 and all upgrades, vote percentage should be higher. Yes, marines are very good, they are doing jp+exo+arc push, but you still got a chance to turn the situation your way, it usually take 1-2 aliens to sabotage their plans.
On the other hand, if it's 20+ minute match and you are on one hive, vote % should be just like it is now.
Of course, it will be very hard to balance such smart system, assuming it should evaluate time, tech points, res and upgrades, so difference between % states should not be big (from 50% to like 70%).
The existence of F4 or the ability for the marine comm to recycle everything brought those strategies to the field.
All concede did was allows the alien team to concede if one of their strats failed, marines have always had a pseudo concede system available.
I agree, and those are problems too but concede has eclipsed them in frequency. If the old ways were so similar, why is concede now so much more frequent? I guess there is one small difference between the old ways and concede - concede democratises the process, which dangerously empowers sheeple (hehe). It's kind of like the vocal minority instigate conceding and most people just go along with it. At least with the old ways only the comm can recycle, and only an individual marine can f4 (importantly the game goes on unless it's unanimous, which means sheeple are reluctant to do it in case the game carries on without them).
There are slight mechanical differences which lead to significantly different social behaviour.
The existence of F4 or the ability for the marine comm to recycle everything brought those strategies to the field.
All concede did was allows the alien team to concede if one of their strats failed, marines have always had a pseudo concede system available.
I agree, and those are problems too but concede has eclipsed them in frequency. If the old ways were so similar, why is concede now so much more frequent? I guess there is one small difference between the old ways and concede - concede democratises the process, which dangerously empowers sheeple (hehe). It's kind of like the vocal minority instigate conceding and most people just go along with it. At least with the old ways only the comm can recycle, and only an individual marine can f4 (importantly the game goes on unless it's unanimous, which means sheeple are reluctant to do it in case the game carries on without them).
There are slight mechanical differences which lead to significantly different social behaviour.
So you would rather a system that only worked for 1 side, that was recycle for marines. Aliens could not do anything to stop a roflstomp wait lets get exo's marine attack/turtle.
Lets remember the way autoblance was set up it viewed people who had f4'd as no longer being part of the team...which resulted in the winning team being stuck in autobalance.
This just simply resulted in the game going on longer.
You where better to go to toilet and leave yourself idle.
I suggested on many occasions a solution to this (count those in RR as still being on team they last left) so that f4 could be used as an unofficial concede option.
Concede is a formalized f4 process that is effective for BOTH sides.
Its not without need for improvement but heads and shoulders above the other options (f4 or play fodder).
I have seen many more games ruined by people f4'ing or comms recycling than I have seen games end incorrectly prematurely through concede votes.
I fail to see how if half of the other team feels the game is over and concedes that this is an issue, people defended till the cows come home the marines comms right to recycle everything (dictatorship is apparently preferable to democracy), but this was simply 1 persons view and took no consideration for the rest of the team.
People f4 and dont care if the game goes on around them...this is part of the reason why we had autobalance brought in...to try to stop one person raging stuffing up everyone elses game.
Concede has not brought anything to NS2 or NS that was not present before, all it has done is allowed the alien team the ability to surrender and not just sit and wait till the marines walk through and shoot everything.
So you would rather a system that only worked for 1 side, that was recycle for marines...
No. I'm open to a better implementation of concede. Perhaps something based a ratio of economics between the two teams. Still a vote based thing but removing the option until one team has a significant economic lead over the other. On the other hand I think it's that same old problem of trying to get a technological solution to a social problem. Ragers gunna ragequit. What do?
Lets remember the way autoblance was set up it viewed people who had f4'd as no longer being part of the team...which resulted in the winning team being stuck in autobalance.
This just simply resulted in the game going on longer.
Right. How about this: Change the concede option to move you to the ready room but still count you for the purposes of auto-balance.
I enjoyed the sieges that happened near the end of the game, now the majority of the games end before the winning team even manages to scratch the last base of the opposing team.
Concede is just making this game more boring for me, but maybe I'm in a minority.
dePARAJoin Date: 2011-04-29Member: 96321Members, Squad Five Blue
There people liking endless posts (A) and there people trying to fix things via server-mods (B)
The sad thing is: the server from A is full most of the time (cause A is soooooo cool), B has a hard time cause noone like yellow flagged servers.
Anyway.
in the time you discuss here, i play on my server where you need 65% to concede and getiing a text like this: someone wants to concede .%more votes needed.
So you would rather a system that only worked for 1 side, that was recycle for marines...
No. I'm open to a better implementation of concede. Perhaps something based a ratio of economics between the two teams. Still a vote based thing but removing the option until one team has a significant economic lead over the other. On the other hand I think it's that same old problem of trying to get a technological solution to a social problem. Ragers gunna ragequit. What do?
Lets remember the way autoblance was set up it viewed people who had f4'd as no longer being part of the team...which resulted in the winning team being stuck in autobalance.
This just simply resulted in the game going on longer.
Right. How about this: Change the concede option to move you to the ready room but still count you for the purposes of auto-balance.
Thats not too different to what I suggested they look at for f4 (when you f4 you still show as being on the team you left....so autobalance wont kick in...but if you leave the server it will).
Concede works, all it does is allows the majority of the alien team to do what 1 marine comm has always been able to do.
I actually think concedes are less common than marine IP recycling used to be....once you factor in only 1 side could perform an ip recycle.
Concede does need more work done to so it doesn't feel so abrupt when it ends, sure the conceding team might be talking about it...doesn't stop the winning team getting a sudden shock win.
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
Concede seems a bit dumb. I don't actually really like it that much. I think I mostly dislike it because it doesn't inform anybody of what the current status towards conceding is, as in - how many more votes it needs for it to happen.
Usually I'm just playing, we're losing - but it's not like we can't somehow return from it in some way and then suddenly we lose.
Or even vice versa. It almost steals the whole gratification of winning, which is not getting to destroy their base.
It's just very ambiguous about why the game is ending. It can be really confusing to new players too on why the game just suddenly ended while their base looks perfectly fine.
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
Imagine being the girl and realizing the pity sex just wasn't worth the lack of enjoyment :P
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
You'd rather she stick around and fake an orgasm?
An oddly apt analogy derived from a wildly inaccurate one.
What I could never understand is why the winning team gets all bent out of shape over winning the game via concede. I mean seriously, you won - they lost. You were the better team. It's over. Why complain?
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
Ahh yes. Sex. That most adversarial of altercations. Really?
A more apt analogy would be 'tapping out' in Judo. Say you're in a stranglehold, you have the choice if you cannot break out of it (which obviously you try first), to tap out or pass out through lack of oxygen.
While you could argue that tapping out may be considered the wussy option, you'll struggle to convince many people that it wouldn't be their preferred option.
If you have sex like I just described the judo above, then people quitting NS2 games is the least of your worries!
Didn't we have this whole discussion a couple of months earlier? People argueing wheter or not to F4, since giving up in a teamgame is selfish? The judo analogy does not fit because judo is not a teamsport. There is no tapping out in teamsports and before you come up with competetive players conceding or mercy ruling in highschool sports, that does not apply to pub gaming. These teams have a captain/coach who decides to throw the game or there is some ruling that above a certain score, the match is over.
Games are being conceded quite a lot, sometimes it's for a good reason but often not, it even happens when games are close to ending anyway which prevents a proper win, it should only be in situations when a game is dragged on beyond reason or if one team gets trolled by a bad commander, a poor start isn't an excuse though.
F4 and team balance is still an annoyance though, should only happen when a team is three players down and even then it shouldn't make you wait so long.
Comments
Then we shall have differing opinions, I know there are more than 20 people who think concede could be improved.
I dont think anyone would object to the server putting a message up letting your team and the other team know if your teams strating to concede.
After all that will only help in having the concede vote succesful and less of a surprise.
I was and still am an advocate of concede, doesn't mean I dont believe it needs work and is far from smooth.
@Mr.Pink, I would prefer to just let both sides know a concede vote has started at the very least.
The mini end game could be annoying but if it goes for only ~2-5 minutes its not a huge amount of time and should not be too arduos for the losing side...especially as they have a way to pull out an honourable defeat.
The intention of concede is (i think), that you have a way to start over faster and don't have to wait for a long painfull loss. That would be just fine if people used it responsible.
But since we have huge waves of new players which don't have a clue how to play the game, not using team communications (talking nor listen to advanced players), it is miss-used a lot.
So concede itself is not the big problem, it's more the player whielding it. Maybe the ratio for the vote needs a fix, since it seems so be very low.
"Guns don't kill people"
I am also worried about the other team...as I have all too often had a "WTF...they conceded?" moment.
I know I am not alone with that criticism of the current mechanic, it can easily catch both sides by surprise.
The main problems
1. It encourages short, reckless games (risk/reward) and when it doesn't work out, you just concede. ie: 3 phase gates, no mines or upgrades and when you keep losing phase gates you give up.
2. Nobody ever wins, the other team always concedes. It's bad sportsmanship.
3. Often I hear somebody say "we should just concede" when we lose ONE of our THREE tech points (either team). It's bananas.
The existence of F4 or the ability for the marine comm to recycle everything brought those strategies to the field.
All concede did was allows the alien team to concede if one of their strats failed, marines have always had a pseudo concede system available.
The auto-lose when your team members also hasn't been thought through. As aliens we had 3 hives and were winning, one person leaves, leaving us 3 or 4 players down and it forces a loss on us. If there is team balance, then why does it auto-lose? And why doesn't it check to see if you have 3 hives?
They need fixed.
>Biling power at main base while they do 4 exo push
>No IPs aywhere else
>Power down
>Your team concedes one second after
Tho concede is much better alternative to F4, it needs some small tweaks, like bigger % or (let's dream here) smart system that measures overall team 'strength' check, i.e. if you had 3 hives, one got killed, you still got 2 and all upgrades, vote percentage should be higher. Yes, marines are very good, they are doing jp+exo+arc push, but you still got a chance to turn the situation your way, it usually take 1-2 aliens to sabotage their plans.
On the other hand, if it's 20+ minute match and you are on one hive, vote % should be just like it is now.
Of course, it will be very hard to balance such smart system, assuming it should evaluate time, tech points, res and upgrades, so difference between % states should not be big (from 50% to like 70%).
It doesn't help that most Marines expect Alien beatdowns these days.
There are slight mechanical differences which lead to significantly different social behaviour.
So you would rather a system that only worked for 1 side, that was recycle for marines. Aliens could not do anything to stop a roflstomp wait lets get exo's marine attack/turtle.
Lets remember the way autoblance was set up it viewed people who had f4'd as no longer being part of the team...which resulted in the winning team being stuck in autobalance.
This just simply resulted in the game going on longer.
You where better to go to toilet and leave yourself idle.
I suggested on many occasions a solution to this (count those in RR as still being on team they last left) so that f4 could be used as an unofficial concede option.
Concede is a formalized f4 process that is effective for BOTH sides.
Its not without need for improvement but heads and shoulders above the other options (f4 or play fodder).
I have seen many more games ruined by people f4'ing or comms recycling than I have seen games end incorrectly prematurely through concede votes.
I fail to see how if half of the other team feels the game is over and concedes that this is an issue, people defended till the cows come home the marines comms right to recycle everything (dictatorship is apparently preferable to democracy), but this was simply 1 persons view and took no consideration for the rest of the team.
People f4 and dont care if the game goes on around them...this is part of the reason why we had autobalance brought in...to try to stop one person raging stuffing up everyone elses game.
Concede has not brought anything to NS2 or NS that was not present before, all it has done is allowed the alien team the ability to surrender and not just sit and wait till the marines walk through and shoot everything.
Right. How about this: Change the concede option to move you to the ready room but still count you for the purposes of auto-balance.
Concede is just making this game more boring for me, but maybe I'm in a minority.
The sad thing is: the server from A is full most of the time (cause A is soooooo cool), B has a hard time cause noone like yellow flagged servers.
Anyway.
in the time you discuss here, i play on my server where you need 65% to concede and getiing a text like this: someone wants to concede .%more votes needed.
Thats not too different to what I suggested they look at for f4 (when you f4 you still show as being on the team you left....so autobalance wont kick in...but if you leave the server it will).
Concede works, all it does is allows the majority of the alien team to do what 1 marine comm has always been able to do.
I actually think concedes are less common than marine IP recycling used to be....once you factor in only 1 side could perform an ip recycle.
Concede does need more work done to so it doesn't feel so abrupt when it ends, sure the conceding team might be talking about it...doesn't stop the winning team getting a sudden shock win.
Imagine having a sex and all of a sudden, she gets up and walks away.
Usually I'm just playing, we're losing - but it's not like we can't somehow return from it in some way and then suddenly we lose.
Or even vice versa. It almost steals the whole gratification of winning, which is not getting to destroy their base.
It's just very ambiguous about why the game is ending. It can be really confusing to new players too on why the game just suddenly ended while their base looks perfectly fine.
Imagine being the girl and realizing the pity sex just wasn't worth the lack of enjoyment :P
An oddly apt analogy derived from a wildly inaccurate one.
Ahh yes. Sex. That most adversarial of altercations. Really?
A more apt analogy would be 'tapping out' in Judo. Say you're in a stranglehold, you have the choice if you cannot break out of it (which obviously you try first), to tap out or pass out through lack of oxygen.
While you could argue that tapping out may be considered the wussy option, you'll struggle to convince many people that it wouldn't be their preferred option.
If you have sex like I just described the judo above, then people quitting NS2 games is the least of your worries!
F4 and team balance is still an annoyance though, should only happen when a team is three players down and even then it shouldn't make you wait so long.