PDA

View Full Version : MISC. Suggestion for second round.



Khalith
12th Mar 2014, 03:03
So after a string of really bad losses a thought occurred to me today. If your team loses badly in the first round (i.e. 15+ or more) it means you pretty much lose either way, it makes me feel as though the second round is entirely pointless. I feel as though we should have an option to concede the game at that point as playing a second losing round lead to some really toxic behavior from some butthurt folks that can't handle losing. I won't ragequit a losing match, but I do like having the option to just concede to make it go by faster and get in to a new lobby.

I know it won't be a popular suggestion but I think losing badly in the first round rendering the second round pointless is a legit issue. I'm not talking about being down a few points either, losing by 5 or less or even 7 is no guarantee of a loss. But 15+ or less? There is little to no chance at all at coming back from that.

HereticSage
12th Mar 2014, 05:47
I have a simpler solution, and I was going to suggest it today anyway. As soon as the game becomes literally unwinnable, it should end. So if you lose by 17 first round, the enemy team should only have to get 13 more to win since you'd have to win by more than 17 anyway. I don't really enjoy prolonged losses, myself.

Khalith
12th Mar 2014, 07:30
I have a simpler solution, and I was going to suggest it today anyway. As soon as the game becomes literally unwinnable, it should end. So if you lose by 17 first round, the enemy team should only have to get 13 more to win since you'd have to win by more than 17 anyway. I don't really enjoy prolonged losses, myself.

This idea could work well actually to, I really like it.

Ygdrasel
12th Mar 2014, 08:00
it makes me feel as though the second round is entirely pointless.

The point is to play and enjoy the game. If you can only do that by winning then I humbly suggest a different hobby.

Perhaps you should try the long-beloved pastime of sitting above a ground-level basketball hoop and repeatedly dropping the ball through it. It's impossible not to score, ergo you'll never ever lose so it won't become pointless.

:rolleyes: Honestly, competitive play is one thing but I seriously have to wonder why you types ("It's pointless if I can't WIN! What, having fun despite not winning? HERESY!") even do anything ever, seeing as literally everything in life poses a risk of loss...

Mockery and (somewhat) sarcasm aside, if such a thing as this were implemented, it would be a bother for those of us who aren't quite so obsessive about wins...So maybe have it as a separate lobby type or something.

WhiteFlameKyo
12th Mar 2014, 09:39
I'm against just finishing matches early but I also understand the issue. Maybe if a team is losing with a difference of 15 points or more, there should be a slight handicap or something in the second round?

Well, I suppose if there's literally no chance of winning (30:10 in first round and it's already 11:10 in the second one for example), there could be a way of conceding if at least 3 of the losing players agree with the decision.

HereticSage
12th Mar 2014, 10:18
:rolleyes: Honestly, competitive play is one thing but I seriously have to wonder why you types ("It's pointless if I can't WIN! What, having fun despite not winning? HERESY!") even do anything ever, seeing as literally everything in life poses a risk of loss...
People like me don't have to win, but the point of what we do is that we try to win against other people. I like trying to solve the situation and overcome it. If I know the ultimate outcome, there's no, or at least less, incentive. If I weren't competitive, I would play PvE games.

ZProtoss
12th Mar 2014, 13:07
Part of the problem with ending a game early is that the game is going to have a large portion of people who really favor one side over another. If a player loves playing vampires but hates playing humans, it's going to frustrate that player significantly if they can't play a full vampire round because they got rocked in the human round. If you're a casual gamer with time for only 1-2 full matches a day, and you get denied the ability to play a full round of your favorite side, how is that going to make you feel?

Honestly, I think the solution to this is in matchmaking rather than any sort of premature game ending. Solid matchmaking with a larger player base would minimize a great deal of round one victories to begin with.

edit: As a compromise solution, I think it'd be better if the end of match reward was based on round victories rather than overall victory. Break the overall win bonus into two pieces, and award one piece per round victory. You can still note which team won overall, but you still leave a strong incentive to try to win in round two - no matter what happened in round one.

Oroibahazopi
12th Mar 2014, 18:14
It's even worse than you imagine actually. If you get ahead in points on the human round, the first round, you can just hide for the duration of round 2.

If you want to keep the match going after it's mathematically impossible to win then remove any afk timer because I'll be alt tabbing.

HereticSage
12th Mar 2014, 19:35
Part of the problem with ending a game early is that the game is going to have a large portion of people who really favor one side over another. If a player loves playing vampires but hates playing humans, it's going to frustrate that player significantly if they can't play a full vampire round because they got rocked in the human round. If you're a casual gamer with time for only 1-2 full matches a day, and you get denied the ability to play a full round of your favorite side, how is that going to make you feel?
Wouldn't they get an extra round out of it if they play for less time?


edit: As a compromise solution, I think it'd be better if the end of match reward was based on round victories rather than overall victory. Break the overall win bonus into two pieces, and award one piece per round victory. You can still note which team won overall, but you still leave a strong incentive to try to win in round two - no matter what happened in round one.
This isn't terrible, but the rewards aren't really the point.

Khalith
12th Mar 2014, 20:12
Wouldn't they get an extra round out of it if they play for less time?


This isn't terrible, but the rewards aren't really the point.

Pretty much this. Ending the match early allows them to get in to the next game quicker and is a more efficient use of time. Even if they don't add a concede option, once the score reaches the point where it becomes unwinnable I think the match really should end not to mention you also have to look at it as it gives people the chance to play the side they don't like more depending on which team they're on. If my team is vamp in the first round, the less time I have to play as human the better, it's the least fun part of the game for me, the sooner the human rounds end the better!

Now if I'm human first and the second round as vamp ends up being shorter that's fine with me also, if only because playing in a game you have no chance of winning isn't really fun at all. I also really like the idea of having the win/loss for each round be considered separate.

ZProtoss
13th Mar 2014, 16:55
This isn't terrible, but the rewards aren't really the point.

The point is that some people are going to favor playing one side over another, and not really care about the overall outcome of the match. If I'm a casual player who's only playing nosgoth because I enjoy a particular side, I'm going to be upset if my time playing that side is artificially cut short due to performance on the other side.

cmstache
13th Mar 2014, 17:47
I've e-mail this as a suggestion in before, but I'd at least like a marker showing "needed kills for victory" or some such, for the team who won round 1. Give both teams info on what they are fighting for.

Ygdrasel
14th Mar 2014, 01:49
playing in a game you have no chance of winning isn't really fun at all.

This would make sense if "fun" and "winning" were synonymous...But they kind of aren't. Honestly, if you're competitive, you wouldn't want to bail early just because you can't win anyway. That'd be being a lousy team player and a terrible sport besides. Like a guy who flips the board when he's about to be beaten at Checkers. That's basically what this is, just ragequitting formalized into a system that still rewards you. Instead of fussing for an early end because you can't stand the thought of losing, at that point, you should just focus on narrowing the gap as much as possible prior to the end. Get your team to play better and all.



[Paraphrase: I don't HAVE to win but there's no incentive if I can't win!]

Uh...Yeah...Gonna go ahead and point to the previous response. If your team is sucking so royally that victory becomes impossible, rather than ragequitting (and this is essentially a form of that), use the remaining time to figure out why your team sucked so bad, correct the flaw, and close the score gap as much as you can. Then that team will work better in subsequent matches. You say you like solving and overcoming a problem, well, that'll do it better than an early bail.


All of this, however, could be solved simply by having separate lobbies. One for super-competitive types (which would implement this) and one for people who don't need to win to enjoy something. Other games have systems like that and it works well enough.

Or, the more simple option stated earlier, a concede vote. Say you reach a point where victory is impossible, a vote comes up. Four votes (minimum) to concede, match ends early.

Khalith
14th Mar 2014, 02:01
This would make sense if "fun" and "winning" were synonymous...But they kind of aren't. Honestly, if you're competitive, you wouldn't want to bail just because you can't win anyway. That'd be being a lousy team player and a terrible sport besides. Like a guy who flips the board when he's about to be beaten at Checkers. At that point, you should just focus on narrowing the gap as much as possible prior to the end.

I've already said in my OP, I don't ragequit even when I know I've lost, I just give a resigned sigh and do my best anyway. I don't have to win to have fun, but knowing that I have no chance of winning however remote isn't really that fun either, I can't understand how anyone can enjoy a dragged out protracted loss.