Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bad game starts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Bad game starts

    If the whole team did agree, which is very rare, it would be different in that you've now got to educate the other team about the intricacies of what made that F4 acceptable while their F4, tomorrow afternoon, still won't be acceptable. Also, the other team loses the razing satisfaction that our concede implementation provides.

    Our even having WinOrLose lays plain our simple claim that it and watching the entire team F4 (or other insta-concede variants) are not the identical experiences.

    If the whole team didn't agree, as is more common, then you've spent a lot of time, energy, and voicecomm that the still-trying teammates are damn near entitled to your spending as a reliable teammate. Worse yet (and, again, more common) is that only a few of you have "voted" with the F4 button, which is an unmitigated disaster.

    Play the game to the 10 minute mark, and then use WinOrLose. If doing so is that much of a problem that often, then getting 10 people to say so in this thread should be Natural Selection cake.

    Note: not this cake.

    Steam Community? Add me. | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

    Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Zephyr: Apophis is clearly a highly sophisticated self-aware AI construct that runs on a highly modified toaster oven in Wyzcrak's basement.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Bad game starts

      I don't really care too much about having to wait 10 minutes instead of another arbitrary number of minutes to vote winorlose. Although it can be frustrating to know you are going to lose via reasons such as uneven players or having all the rookies on one team, I just use the time to practice shooting or skulking.

      Wyz, while you're in a democratic mood, could we revisit this thread? ;)
      aka Roland tHTG

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Bad game starts

        Originally posted by Yellow-Asterisk View Post
        This was also the though behind the f4 rule. We want to avoid the situation where concede happens at the first hint of defeat. Games like this can be frustrating and i certainly understand that. But, i don't think they happen often. How often do we see games like this? This is the first time i have seen the 10 minute minimum for the vote concede function.
        As you were there would you have conceded with the rest of us if we were able to? If not and with the high pass requirement, this whole thread is a moot point.

        I completely agree with your point, though in very very rare occasions, we do have issues like we did the other day.
        Lights Out!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Bad game starts

          i like the 10 min rule, would not want it shorter
          Kalost_tpf/twitch.tv

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Bad game starts

            I like the win or lose to get people together on things, but here is how I see it. If your team really wants to end it, they can end it without win or lose, provided that the other team is trying to win.

            Stop attacking things. Go stack yourself in some random room. Soon enough a single marine or alien will realize it and walk in and destroy the command structure.

            I certainly like the idea of win or lose, as it does give a way to force the game to end sooner. But I often find a lot of players are complaining that it not ending as they are busy killing everyone that is trying to do just what they want. To end the game. Every kill you see is a vote to not end it now.
            Current game name : Lost, Phantom Thief

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Bad game starts

              Originally posted by solarity View Post
              As you were there would you have conceded with the rest of us if we were able to? If not and with the high pass requirement, this whole thread is a moot point.

              I completely agree with your point, though in very very rare occasions, we do have issues like we did the other day.
              I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. It sounds like you want to know if i would have conceded were it not for the timer. but, that my vote would not have mattered since there still would not be enough votes to pass.
              At the 5 minute mark. No, still too early. But, i was rapidly losing hope. By the 10 minute mark. Absolutely.

              Yes, that round was very frustrating. But, my personal opinion about this particular game is irrelevant. It's not my call to restart a round just because i'm not currently having fun. That ruins the fun of everyone else. Including the people on my own team that are still trying. "f4"ing isn't fun for either team and is something i don't want to start a example for.

              This specific round is a distraction to the discussion we should be having. Is the lower bound time limit too long? That is the question. Based on the lack of outcry calling for a change. My guess is that it's fine where it is.
              "The electric Yellow's got me by the brain banana!"

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Bad game starts

                Perhaps the issue here is a behavioural one; is there a reason no one on the other team is switching to even it up?

                If admin's have an announce chat of some kind, we could start using that would show a little more insistence on making the teams even earlier on, it might help.

                I would argue that even at the 5 minute mark, while your team has had the disadvantage thus far, getting having the teams balanced at that time could be enough for an epic come back!

                I would think that if the short staffed team is ready to give up, and the other team refuses to part with a player, there should be some kind of system to abort the game or speed up it's conclusion.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Bad game starts

                  I don't think that we need to make a change to the time limit of WoL, if the time limit is pushed too early it (possibly) could be used as a crutch and some of the longer matches we've had on this server never would have taken place. WoL is just a way to have the game end when the other team is stalling. Tonight I played 2 matches where the opposing team dominated from the first encounter.

                  A supporting member said they were worried about new people not wanting to come back and join a server where that was their experience.

                  I think that more than anything if you have signed the Primer. Especially if you're a supporting member that its how you handle those losses that will keep new people coming back to the server. The entire reason I became a supporting member wasn't because I dominated every game I played, but because the people I played with didn't freak out and destroy their keyboards or insult my mother. Its the reason I still keep playing, even if its a horribly one sided game, you know at the most it'll be 10 minutes or much less and you can try again soon.

                  If you do decide to change the WinOrLose plugin I would vote to upping the amount of votes to 100% before 10 minutes, then back to what ever its set up at now afterwards. This way, if you have someone who does want to keep trying you can still keep going, personally I think its perfect the way it is.
                  DO AS I COMMAND - Megatron possibly the hardest working commander ever known.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Bad game starts

                    The thing about a "bad" game, as it relates to this thread, is that it needs to be bad for the whole server. Yes, your team is getting stomped into pudding, but the winning team may not see that nearly as quickly.

                    The easiest course of action is to leave WinOrLose status quo, but an interesting solution would be for the winning team to somehow call for the vote (not necessarily to have the say, or even the majority of it), maybe limited to minutes 6-10 or something. We all know that losing can be a drag; if WINNING is turning into a chore, then a way to move on to the next map might be welcome.
                    [volun2]
                    NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
                    Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
                    <anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
                    <LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash

                    Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

                    Comment

                    Connect

                    Collapse

                    TeamSpeak 3 Server

                    Collapse

                    Twitter Feed

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X