start making suggestions on how the game can be changed so that people aren't supposed to stand around like target dummies while the other team gets around to finishing it.
Make balance better and allow for better comeback mechanisms. Right now it's incredibly easy to tell in the first 5 minutes which side will win a game. Frequent conceding is a symptom, not a problem in itself.
For the record: concede was actually changed in Gorgeous to be more restrictive and to provide better feedback in this patch. It now requires 75% of the players to vote for a concede, and can only occur after ten minutes have passed in the game. The feedback changes are self-explanatory.
Any chance they have considered adding a timeout? So if X minutes have passed since the concede vote started it resets to 0?
There is a time out though it does not tell you once this has happened (not that I have noticed anyway).
But I have started votes...that did not go through and a few minutes later another votes come up and I could vote again (you can tell as your name comes up on teh screen).
Also I did not notice them increasing to 75%...I swear I saw votes for 50%....
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
I liked it better when conceding was private. It had a nice feel of "Make your peace with god and choose your own time to go. Nobody else can tell you when to do it." If everyone agreed individually to give up then the game is definitely already over, but I don't like how the current mechanism can break the resolve of an otherwise enthusiastic team.
I agree, the silent concede vote was sort of nice. It forces people to use their words and get the team to agree to conceding, rather than just one guy starting the vote and everybody else assuming it's over because they saw the vote pop up. The inconvenience helped to mitigate overuse of the feature.
I liked it better when conceding was private. It had a nice feel of "Make your peace with god and choose your own time to go. Nobody else can tell you when to do it."
Yes, I don't understand why they decided it was necessary to broadcast people conceding. They definitely needed to add a message to the chat box to show the person that conceded that they successfully did so, but no need to tell everyone. It only promotes conceding, like how "rtv" does in CS.
Conceders are a drain on the team to those that wish to play out the game.
You think you saw a loss before everyone else? No you didn't, you prob thought you did, and unconsciously helped the other team because you already gave up and your ego hurted.
People talking about playing the game enough.? I see players with more than 500 hours making false cases for concede. Don't have at least 500 hours played yet? Then maybe stop acting like you have some above and beyond understanding of the game. The depth of the meta game is not so simple.
But seriously, it sounds like new players bitching about a game they haven't really played yet.
Perhaps. (2 minutes was an arbitrary number, I really hope that mod was longer than 2 minutes). The main thing I heard pushed around was that the concede was "unfulfilling," ending games too quickly and bland. The argument was that this way you get to actually kill the aliens and make it feel like a "victory" in some sorts while making the enemy team fight to defend their "victory" condition. That way the game ends with a bang instead of just seeing a victory picture or having the defenders die endlessly waiting for that final Onos train.
Of course, the attacking team's advantage would have to be big to compensate for the timelimit. I dunno. It was just an idea to be thrown around.
TacticalGamer has a winorlose option:
The team must vote overwhelmingly for this option, and it is only available with one chair or hive.
If the vote passes, the other team is notified that they have 2 minutes to win, or the losing team will win by default.
The defending team is not allowed to attack, so that the other team can make it to the last location and finish them off.
Two minutes is plenty of time for a team to reach anywhere on the map and finish things off.
Basically, it is a 'you win, please finish us off' feature that has a far better reception from the players than the game suddenly ending while the winning team is pushing on the last location or camping eggs.
Concede is a great feature, but can sometimes be overused. Let us put our minds together and think about ways we can reduce unnecessary conceding! How about not allowing a team to concede if they have more than one base?
Here's what some people don't understand about changing concede.
If you don't let a person quit with concede, then they can quit with their disconnect button. You can't FORCE a person to play a game that they are having no fun playing.
That's what this is about, fun. If people were having fun - even when losing - they would play. Since they're not, they want it to end. So we can either allow concede, or people will quit, the round will end, and because so many people left the server you'll end up with small teams in the next game, and then everyone else will quit to find a higher populated server. Now you have an empty server.
Is that a better option?
If people don't like concede, then the answer is to either be more aggressive if you are on the winning team, or start making suggestions on how the game can be changed so that people aren't supposed to stand around like target dummies while the other team gets around to finishing it.
Completely agree. What's better, to let a vote concede or to play 4v8 for the last 5 minutes of the game as people have quit? This happened to me recently, where players couldn't get the majority needed to concede, so they just quit. I think that's worse - it leaves the losing team still down 1 player and still way behind in tech/resources, and it prevents the winning team from spawning. Less fun for all. Concede exists in all games - it's just usually called quitting. NS2 formalizes it a bit so that there is a difference between rage quitting, and acknowledging one team has won.
Concede is a great feature, but can sometimes be overused. Let us put our minds together and think about ways we can reduce unnecessary conceding! How about not allowing a team to concede if they have more than one base?
Here's what some people don't understand about changing concede.
If you don't let a person quit with concede, then they can quit with their disconnect button. You can't FORCE a person to play a game that they are having no fun playing.
That's what this is about, fun. If people were having fun - even when losing - they would play. Since they're not, they want it to end. So we can either allow concede, or people will quit, the round will end, and because so many people left the server you'll end up with small teams in the next game, and then everyone else will quit to find a higher populated server. Now you have an empty server.
Is that a better option?
If people don't like concede, then the answer is to either be more aggressive if you are on the winning team, or start making suggestions on how the game can be changed so that people aren't supposed to stand around like target dummies while the other team gets around to finishing it.
Completely agree. What's better, to let a vote concede or to play 4v8 for the last 5 minutes of the game as people have quit? This happened to me recently, where players couldn't get the majority needed to concede, so they just quit. I think that's worse - it leaves the losing team still down 1 player and still way behind in tech/resources, and it prevents the winning team from spawning. Less fun for all. Concede exists in all games - it's just usually called quitting. NS2 formalizes it a bit so that there is a difference between rage quitting, and acknowledging one team has won.
With the influx of new players I'm seeing a lot of teams just quitting the game when they start losing (I'm guessing they don't know about concede? Maybe it should be called surrender). It just means one team slowly loses players (no one wants to switch teams cause the winners can see they'll just get crushed, they'd rather watch their team win), the losers continue to lose players till the game auto concedes because of player balance... now the server is half empty and so everyone else leaves rather than play 5v5.
Concede is MUCH better than that, the games ends you get into a new one straight away with all the players still engaged.
As a side note: they should really rename "concede" to "surrender". My English isn't bad, but I didn't know what concede meant before this game, so it may not be obvious to new players. I don't know why they thought another word for surrender was necessary, although it should really be "Concede Defeat".
Well one thing is for sure, changing concede availability to the ten minute mark has made mass F4 a thing again. It really should go back to 6 minutes or even 5.
Well one thing is for sure, changing concede availability to the ten minute mark has made mass F4 a thing again. It really should go back to 6 minutes or even 5.
I believe you can not vote eject in the first few minutes either, so if you get a troll comm you just have to deal with it or leave the server.
Comments
These things
But I have started votes...that did not go through and a few minutes later another votes come up and I could vote again (you can tell as your name comes up on teh screen).
Also I did not notice them increasing to 75%...I swear I saw votes for 50%....
That was surprisingly poetic.
Conceders are a drain on the team to those that wish to play out the game.
You think you saw a loss before everyone else? No you didn't, you prob thought you did, and unconsciously helped the other team because you already gave up and your ego hurted.
People talking about playing the game enough.? I see players with more than 500 hours making false cases for concede. Don't have at least 500 hours played yet? Then maybe stop acting like you have some above and beyond understanding of the game. The depth of the meta game is not so simple.
But seriously, it sounds like new players bitching about a game they haven't really played yet.
The team must vote overwhelmingly for this option, and it is only available with one chair or hive.
If the vote passes, the other team is notified that they have 2 minutes to win, or the losing team will win by default.
The defending team is not allowed to attack, so that the other team can make it to the last location and finish them off.
Two minutes is plenty of time for a team to reach anywhere on the map and finish things off.
Basically, it is a 'you win, please finish us off' feature that has a far better reception from the players than the game suddenly ending while the winning team is pushing on the last location or camping eggs.
Completely agree. What's better, to let a vote concede or to play 4v8 for the last 5 minutes of the game as people have quit? This happened to me recently, where players couldn't get the majority needed to concede, so they just quit. I think that's worse - it leaves the losing team still down 1 player and still way behind in tech/resources, and it prevents the winning team from spawning. Less fun for all. Concede exists in all games - it's just usually called quitting. NS2 formalizes it a bit so that there is a difference between rage quitting, and acknowledging one team has won.
With the influx of new players I'm seeing a lot of teams just quitting the game when they start losing (I'm guessing they don't know about concede? Maybe it should be called surrender). It just means one team slowly loses players (no one wants to switch teams cause the winners can see they'll just get crushed, they'd rather watch their team win), the losers continue to lose players till the game auto concedes because of player balance... now the server is half empty and so everyone else leaves rather than play 5v5.
Concede is MUCH better than that, the games ends you get into a new one straight away with all the players still engaged.
stacked teams = fail