PDA

View Full Version : MISC. So was I in the wrong here?



Khalith
20th Mar 2014, 08:46
Earlier today in a deathmatch a situation occurred and it left me with a tough decision to make and I made the call.

I played as human in the first round, we managed to hold them off reasonably well, vampires won the round with a score of 27-24. Then the second round starts, after roughly nine minutes we were ahead 19-14 then with a minute left one of the members of our team suddenly disconnects leaving us with 3 against the 4 humans, rather than attack and risk losing though, I advised my team to hang back and run out the clock for the last minute. They were paying attention to what I said in chat and agreed to do it. The humans couldn't get to us from where we were in Provance since they were two alchemists and two hunters, leaving them unable to really snipe us for any good damage. We stayed away for the last minute and won the match 43-41, a few of the humans were unhappy with the results.

But given the situation, I think that running away to run out the clock for the last minute was the most tactically sound decision to make rather than attack them 3v4 and risk losing the match. I just wanted to ask what the thoughts of others were. I don't regret the decision mind, given the very specific situation (ahead by two, 3v4, and only one minute left in the round) I think retreating was the most strategic decision we could make.

Tureil
20th Mar 2014, 09:32
Personally, I don't agree with what you did. I woulda just said "Screw it" and kept attacking the humans, come what may.

I kinda feel that you boned the enemy out of a rightful win. you won by two through running away and setting a precedent for who you're with.

Tactically sound? Yeah. You were down a guy and that's never fun. But the gap was so close even with the four of you, the humans easily could've pulled ahead at any given moment -- Had you grit your teeth and continued.

But hey, in the grand scheme of things a win or loss doesnt really matter. I'm more uncomfortable with your conduct when things aren't going smoothly.

WhiteFlameKyo
20th Mar 2014, 09:43
And I do agree. The whole game is about tactics, not only good aiming. And this kind of decision brings some fresh air into the game. The goal changes, so that's at least something new.

In alpha I was once left alone against four humans for the last four or five minutes of a match. I started to run and hide, waiting for them to disperse in search, and even managed to get a kill. From what the others said after the match, it seemed all of us enjoyed that game of hide and seek.

PencileyePirate
20th Mar 2014, 10:12
I think that what you did was the best decision. It was tactically correct, and it would be silly to attack senselessly if you had the lead. It was the humans' fault for not having the foresight to bring a Scout.


And I do agree. The whole game is about tactics, not only good aiming. And this kind of decision brings some fresh air into the game. The goal changes, so that's at least something new.

^ this, 100%.

Shirokurou
20th Mar 2014, 10:38
If competitive fighting games consider running the clock and playing lame...I see no problem here.

It's not like you raqe-quit. So I salute you're tactical prowess.

TapxJames
20th Mar 2014, 15:35
Why would it have been any different to accept a loss due to losing a player? I think the other team would be huge hypocrites to complain seriously unless there was a compromise of opting a player out which I do see from time to time. It's cool your team actually listened and did it, that doesn't happen often.

RainaAudron
20th Mar 2014, 16:22
I don´t agree with such tactics - are we really going to win, no matter the cost? It´s not like one win/loss has any impact on anything. Going in carefully and waiting on teammates to spawn is one thing but purposefully holding back? I would never resort to such thing myself. Then we can all fully go out in the first minute and the just stand around for 9 mins and stare at the walls... I don´t see the point.

Omhxyz
20th Mar 2014, 17:13
While i agree with raina on that, if it is the LAST minute, 2nd round and you are barely winning and you are down to 3 people, i don't see much of a problem with that. It is not fun to do but nor jumping into certain loss from a "won" game just because someone DC'd. Anything more than a minute is just lame and soo boring for either teams tho.

Hugbringer
20th Mar 2014, 17:47
People leave matches for the opposite reason, impossible win equals 'why bother' and they leave. Some people see that as an 'okay' tactic as well. This is just a personal perspective and expectations issue

If they were playing reavers and instead of being aggressive just happen to use smoke and haze, attack super conservatively might have provoked a similar 'come at me' response. Instead of being conservative and working as a team, in this fashion being seen as a negative thing, it could be a good example of why In match changes of class would be a good idea for the opposite team.

I don't see this as a negative tactic, merely a good example of a limitation that if corrected presents more tactical opportunities for more diverse play.

Tube_Reaver
20th Mar 2014, 18:05
The following is my personal opinion on this

Even though you were one player down, I find the "tactic" to be very unsportsmanlike.

First of all while Nosgoth is a competitive game and the "must win at all costs" is a good thing, but this match was not a ranked match, and therefore the "tactic" you used was unnecessary and uncalled for.
You should play to have fun, and while losing is not always fun that doesn't mean you can take out the enjoyment of the match for both sides just to get that win.

Not everyone has so many hours a day or week to play, and if I were limited in time for a couple of matches a week, and I ended up in a such a game where I was denied a chance to win and have fun in a match simply because the opposing team felt they can't win and thus would resort to such "tactics" then I would be very annoyed.

If anything the encouragement that you are getting in this thread will just promote bad gameplay as others will follow suit and do the same, which will in-turn lead others to do it as well.
In the end it will ruin the experience for many many players, and push people away from the game, which is something none of us want, I am sure.

I hope that you are able to see my point of view on this matter.

Cheers.

Note: Just to add, Psyonix_Corey said that they do have measures to prevent vampires camping, but have had no reason to implement them just yet, I personally would prefer we keep it this way.

GenFeelGood
20th Mar 2014, 18:21
I will admit I am not fond of that strategy but it is sound.
Just remember that retreat is not the same as defeat.
Can't tell you how many matches I have been in where similar situations happen and I ponder such a choice.
Ultimately it comes down to what you want more, the win or the kills. I usually just choose to resort to more hit and run than straight assaults and I always hope the team does the same, but often don't.
Its not wrong to wanna win and this is certainly not the first video game or even sport, in general, where running down the clock was done to get the win and they never got the look of shame.

MarinePikachu
20th Mar 2014, 20:37
Here is a past post I did on the issue: http://forums.eu.square-enix.com/showthread.php?t=11205

I think it is a dumb tactic but honestly I would have done the same. Until they fix some things with it there isnt really a reason not to do it. I mean, you guys were winning until a dc occured and it isnt your fault that happened.

Tube_Reaver
20th Mar 2014, 20:44
Here is a past post I did on the issue: http://forums.eu.square-enix.com/showthread.php?t=11205

I think it is a dumb tactic but honestly I would have done the same. Until they fix some things with it there isnt really a reason not to do it. I mean, you guys were winning until a dc occured and it isnt your fault that happened.

Yeah, Corey did say in the thread they had measures against it, but why have them implemented if we can avoid it?

Also it wasn't the enemy team's fault that the player DC'd either.

Khalith
20th Mar 2014, 21:01
Here is a past post I did on the issue: http://forums.eu.square-enix.com/showthread.php?t=11205

I think it is a dumb tactic but honestly I would have done the same. Until they fix some things with it there isnt really a reason not to do it. I mean, you guys were winning until a dc occured and it isnt your fault that happened.

As I said, it was certainly the most sound decision to secure a victory, one thing I consider though, if there had been a scout or two on their team it might not have worked, a scout in the right place can pretty much nail any target on any map. There is only one map where you can legitimately hide as a vamp and be almost entirely immune to being hit. The little elevated stone area with the column above the pier in freeport. Anywhere else on any other map there is some vantage point where you can hit your targets.

Edit: Even that area isn't safe if the scout is using the grapple.

PencileyePirate
20th Mar 2014, 21:31
Even though you were one player down, I find the "tactic" to be very unsportsmanlike.

First of all while Nosgoth is a competitive game and the "must win at all costs" is a good thing, but this match was not a ranked match, and therefore the "tactic" you used was unnecessary and uncalled for. You should play to have fun, and while losing is not always fun that doesn't mean you can take out the enjoyment of the match for both sides just to get that win.

Regardless of disconnect(s) or player count, I'm surprised how many people think this is unfair. Honestly, I would be very disappointed with Psyonix if they removed the potential for this sort of play. It's exactly this sort of intelligent play that gives Nosgoth potential as a competitive game, and I think most of us enjoy friendly competition. Who doesn't love a close match?

Also, I'd like to point out that camping the entire match is one thing, but evasive and/or defensive team-play is another. If they remove potential for the latter, gameplay will degrade into nothing more than a frag-fest where twitch aim is the only skill (and there are plenty of other games like that already.)

On the other hand, I can think of a lot of great games that allow this type of behavior: popular sports like basketball and both American/European football; various online competitive shooters (e.g. UT, Quake, CS); and thinking games such as chess. All of these contain some notion of playing defensively to conserve a lead, and even reward doing so. When do we ever complain about these?

TLDR: If you call the behavior in question unfair, I think you're being a sore loser. Smart play a fun game does make.

Boreaquis
20th Mar 2014, 22:17
TLDR: If you call the behavior in question unfair, I think you're being a sore loser. Smart play a fun game does make.

Well, in the case a game in beta, the rules aren't even set in stone yet, so I don't think it's quite as easy to make the comparison. Hiding (as the vampires) isn't much of an interesting game as it is, though I suppose with the right map design it could be. However, I'm totally fine with it if the game is 3vs4, which isn't much fun either.

Tureil
20th Mar 2014, 22:38
It makes me terribly sad to see that people are okay with pussing out in the second round once they scratch ahead. Regardless of the situation, the fact that this is seen as "smart" makes me lose a lot of excitement towards the game. Now I'll never be sure if I'll be able to win a match unless someone has a Scout and a grappling hook to chase after frightened vampires who are terrified of marring their win ratio.

Good work, guys. Good ******* work.

Oroibahazopi
20th Mar 2014, 23:13
Regardless of disconnect(s) or player count, I'm surprised how many people think this is unfair. Honestly, I would be very disappointed with Psyonix if they removed the potential for this sort of play. It's exactly this sort of intelligent play that gives Nosgoth potential as a competitive game, and I think most of us enjoy friendly competition. Who doesn't love a close match?

Also, I'd like to point out that camping the entire match is one thing, but evasive and/or defensive team-play is another. If they remove potential for the latter, gameplay will degrade into nothing more than a frag-fest where twitch aim is the only skill (and there are plenty of other games like that already.)

On the other hand, I can think of a lot of great games that allow this type of behavior: popular sports like basketball and both American/European football; various online competitive shooters (e.g. UT, Quake, CS); and thinking games such as chess. All of these contain some notion of playing defensively to conserve a lead, and even reward doing so. When do we ever complain about these?

TLDR: If you call the behavior in question unfair, I think you're being a sore loser. Smart play a fun game does make.
The problem is if you are ahead entering your second round as the vampires there are some maps where you can hide the entire match without problems.

cmstache
20th Mar 2014, 23:42
I personally, have an issue with it, as it IS against the spirit of the game. At the same time, I probably wouldn't hold it against you. I would have played it out anyways. That being said, I would have just suicided as an alch and respawned as a scout and see if I could have done something. People need to understand that humans aren't helpless and can attack. They don't have to camp, but they need to move together, which is a big catch there for most players. Just because humans can camp an area doesn't mean vampires can't.

PencileyePirate
21st Mar 2014, 04:55
It makes me terribly sad to see that people are okay with pussing out in the second round once they scratch ahead. Regardless of the situation, the fact that this is seen as "smart" makes me lose a lot of excitement towards the game.

Again ... camping an entire round is one thing, while playing defensively or evasively as necessary is another. It seems to me that the former is a problem, while the latter is perfectly reasonable.


The problem is if you are ahead entering your second round as the vampires there are some maps where you can hide the entire match without problems.

I agree this could be a problem, but the thread-starter was talking about evading for the last minute. In his scenario hiding made perfect sense, and humans were punished for making a bad decision: going without a scout.

Omhxyz
21st Mar 2014, 05:44
Yeah, everyone seem to miss OP's point and moving topic into a different area. Sure its bad to do, shouldn't be done, penalized or whatever BUT OP says its 2nd round, LAST min, barely winning, already have to be extremely careful with your death count and then SOMEONE LEAVES(this is the point everyone missing). You are 3v4, heading for a CERTAIN loss, this is as unfair as it gets. Speaking of fair-play and sportsmanship? Tell other team to have 1 guy sit the rest of the round out THEN it's fair. Otherwise, going with your logic, human team continuing to play as 4 is as unfair as the vampire team camping that LAST minute.

Anything more than a minute is wrong, if it is 4v4 it is wrong, but i don't see a right or wrong in this, logical choice, pretty neutral.

Oroibahazopi
21st Mar 2014, 07:37
I really don't give a crap about what people perceive as right or wrong, I used escape and evade as much as I could because it was effective.

All that matters is it's boring to play and it's boring to watch so if this game is going to be espurtz it has to be changed.

Vucar_Dumat
21st Mar 2014, 07:51
Personally, I don't agree with what you did. I woulda just said "Screw it" and kept attacking the humans, come what may.

I kinda feel that you boned the enemy out of a rightful win. you won by two through running away and setting a precedent for who you're with.

Tactically sound? Yeah. You were down a guy and that's never fun. But the gap was so close even with the four of you, the humans easily could've pulled ahead at any given moment -- Had you grit your teeth and continued.

But hey, in the grand scheme of things a win or loss doesnt really matter. I'm more uncomfortable with your conduct when things aren't going smoothly.

So in a position that is clearly in his disadvantage he should martyr-up and just make a bad decision because its what, the "right thing to do"? His situation was unfair to him, and you're saying his choice was unfair to the other team. So no matter what, its unfair for someone. So why must it be him? Why arbitrarily decide he and his team should take the fall for a poor situation that made things worse for them?

Have you ever watched a single game of football? When a team is barely ahead with little time left, they'll run the clock as much as they can. It's something competitive teams just do because its smart.

His choice was logical and rational, i'd have suggested the same.

Tureil
21st Mar 2014, 22:52
So in a position that is clearly in his disadvantage he should martyr-up and just make a bad decision because its what, the "right thing to do"? His situation was unfair to him, and you're saying his choice was unfair to the other team. So no matter what, its unfair for someone. So why must it be him? Why arbitrarily decide he and his team should take the fall for a poor situation that made things worse for them?

Have you ever watched a single game of football? When a team is barely ahead with little time left, they'll run the clock as much as they can. It's something competitive teams just do because its smart.

His choice was logical and rational, i'd have suggested the same.
Nah. I don't watch football. I can't stand watching sports, I have to be playing to get any enjoyment out of it. Hell, I fell asleep during the last Superbowl I tried to get into. I'd be even more bored if I see them wasting time like this **** here.

I never said "Martyr himself." I never said run piecemeal at the enemy. It'd be preferable if they worked more in concert as a team to harass the enemy and break them up, because now they don't have a choice with the manpower loss. is that always viable? No. Sometimes the enemy team is too coordinated.

But then again I take the "martyr" route. I figure if I lost ahead of time, I just do my best to make the loss as painful as possible for the enemy team. I still get my enjoyment out of that.

I don't just cower on a rooftop and hope no one has a scout...

The man asked for an opinion on the forums. Clearly he had some doubt in his mind about what he did. Unless all he wanted was to come here and get a circlejerk to make sure he was doing the "smart" thing.

Competitive game communities, ladies and gentlemen. Cowards.

cmstache
21st Mar 2014, 23:13
HAHA, about time I get to use this on these forums....This made my week...

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee408/cmstache/933928_10151787265546488_1827132005_n_zps9962e7e8.jpg

PencileyePirate
22nd Mar 2014, 02:08
Unless all he wanted was to come here and get a circlejerk to make sure he was doing the "smart" thing.

Competitive game communities, ladies and gentlemen. Cowards.

I see we've degraded to insults and name-calling. Mods might as well close thread now.

cmstache
22nd Mar 2014, 02:17
I took it as sarcasm. I really don't think it was meant as an insult.

PencileyePirate
22nd Mar 2014, 02:44
Oh, I apologize if that's the case; it sounded serious to me. I'm not sure what he meant if that was all sarcasm ... that he supports smart play and pulling back into defensive positions when necessary, I suppose.

cmstache
22nd Mar 2014, 02:50
He gave a serious response, followed by the outrageous statement, which generally shows sarcasm... it is, however, the internet, so it's easily misconstrued.

Khalith
22nd Mar 2014, 03:36
My goal wasn't to start an argument! Though I did imagine there were going to be those that disagreed, I do think the thread has remained civil though perhaps it's run it's course. Locking/deleting it might be a good idea.

shinros
22nd Mar 2014, 12:30
In my opinion its fine if the humans can't change their tactics to suit the situation they lost and you won thats it. If they don't like? What can you do? I think people need to break the idea humans don't always have to be on the defense.

Oroibahazopi
22nd Mar 2014, 12:56
Some maps have places where humans can't hit without a specific pick, but you also cannot change your class or loadout without dying so you can't change to chase the vamps, with grenades or alcs.

cmstache
22nd Mar 2014, 13:42
Suicide via skllsd. In this scenario they had alchs which can do it themselves. Suicides don't help the enemy score there. They could have changed.

I thought about having the topic locked. But, this issue needs to be discussed. It's a valid issue.

MasterShuriko
22nd Mar 2014, 13:52
I dont support such a tactic. These are the kinds of tactics that will become more and more used over the stages if something isnt done.
People will run in and make sure their team gets a score higher than the enemy and then just leech the time until ticks away.

Its this kind of abuse that will lead to a game dying beause people arent "playing it" they are only doing whats basicly "needed" to score a win and then afk, leech time or what not. And I for one DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS GAME DIE because of poorly regulated player behaviour.

These are my 2 cents

Oroibahazopi
22nd Mar 2014, 16:21
Suicide via skllsd. In this scenario they had alchs which can do it themselves. Suicides don't help the enemy score there. They could have changed.

I thought about having the topic locked. But, this issue needs to be discussed. It's a valid issue.
Uh huh, so killing yourself with self damage to change class is fine, but having a button to do it isn't?

cmstache
22nd Mar 2014, 16:28
Killing yourself via a button takes what? 15 seconds with the respawn? Killing yourself with self damage takes a while, and allows vampires to affect it, thus still getting the kill. And in your previous examples you wanted to change loadouts, not entire classes. Which still wouldn't have helped.


Personally, I probably would have hurt myself and used me as a low life bait to lure vampires out. It's better than not fighting. I don't condone camping, but it's do-able (at least for now). So, killing yourself would have to be done by necessity, not luxury. Nor would It happen more than once that match. Killing yourself also works within the parameters of what's already in the game, not adding features for convenience. There's a difference there.

Oroibahazopi
22nd Mar 2014, 16:43
Killing yourself with a button can take as long as you want lol and you admit that suicide with self damage is better than my compromise since you can change class.

Also if it takes time to suicide with a button a vampire can still kill you while you're helpless.

Razaiim
22nd Mar 2014, 17:03
@Khalith. In short: In the mindset of preserving your oh so precious win/loss. You did the right thing, as it's a winning move. From the perspective of playing a game for the sake of playing and entertainment, that's a **** move.

cmstache
22nd Mar 2014, 17:43
@Khalith. In short: In the mindset of preserving your oh so precious win/loss. You did the right thing, as it's a winning move. From the perspective of playing a game for the sake of playing and entertainment, that's a **** move.


^That.

PencileyePirate
22nd Mar 2014, 18:47
@Khalith. In short: In the mindset of preserving your oh so precious win/loss. You did the right thing, as it's a winning move. From the perspective of playing a game for the sake of playing and entertainment, that's a **** move.

Not sure why it's a "dick move" to play the game how he likes ... to be honest I prefer my opponents play defensively when they're at a disadvantage, as it makes for a more even game.

Contrary to what you might think, competitive players don't do it for K/D or W/L, but because competing in games is fun. I care nothing about my statistics at the end of the day, but competing is a part of the game, and I enjoy it.

Those who would complain when the opponent uses his brain to win should perhaps be playing angry birds instead.

Khalith
22nd Mar 2014, 19:35
Contrary to what you might think, competitive players don't do it for K/D or W/L, but because competing in games is fun. I care nothing about my statistics at the end of the day, but competing is a part of the game, and I enjoy it.

Indeed, I'm not too keen on preserving my W/L or K/D ratio, I mean here, here it is:

http://postimg.org/image/r20ifdejd/

http://postimg.org/image/a84i19peh/

I don't condone getting ahead and camping for nine minutes, I don't believe that the game would be fun or that it would happen, another thing to keep in mind is that if the other team would have taken a scout and made a balanced team instead of spamming hunter/alchemist the whole game they still could have won. I stand by my decision, given the circumstances it was the best one to make and if any on my team disagreed then it would have been for nothing, I will admit that I did want to win (I don't get this idea that because we were put in a bad situation we should have to take the loss), the first round was really close and we were only down by two, we did have a good chance at winning it.

The game was well in hand until that one dude disconnected in the last minute, we were going to win either way, up by 5 in the second round with a minute to go? The game was in the bag, I don't believe in throwing away a win that we did work for (the other team was quite good) and so playing defensively for the last 60 seconds of the round made sense, I don't believe it was a "dick move."

k8Faust
26th Mar 2014, 04:05
I stuck it out in a 3v5, with one of my two teammates AFK for half the first round, and another leaving in the second half of the first round. Of course--once the match was over--I left the lobby, but I think that pretty much sums up my stance on this.

That said, it was also silly for anyone on the other team to complain about it. In a 4v4, a man down is a big deal, so I wouldn't care if my opponents decided to just sit back and wait until they had a fourth, even if the round ends before that.

All in all, I'd say that you actively seeking the win by running out the clock was wrong, and the other team complaining about it was wrong. By saying what you did, you soured what was otherwise a good game, win or lose.

Ygdrasel
26th Mar 2014, 06:17
Poor sportsmanship but whatever.

I'm more inclined to notice "The humans couldn't get to us from where we were in Provance since they were two alchemists and two hunters, leaving them unable to really snipe us for any good damage."

...Did they never think to change classes or loadouts or anything? They earned their loss.

RainaAudron
26th Mar 2014, 11:11
"...Did they never think to change classes or loadouts or anything? They earned their loss. " they can´t if they won´t die and with a minute left, not sure how fast they could do a suicide..

Unknown_Mystery
27th Mar 2014, 21:42
What?! How can anyone complain about being DEFENDIVE in a game that skews the lines of defense vs. offense when switchting sides? It's the humans fault for not having abilities that can attack them, and for losing the first round in the first place. Poor judgement on the humans for losing, shouldve tried harder. Actually, the humans probably wouldve done the same thing if they were winning. I love your tactic, and the fact that your team followed through, shows commitment for victory. As for the opinion of it being "Unfun", its a chase! how can a chase not be fun?! Its thrilling, especially for it being the last minute. I mean, could they have possibly been afraid of trying to fight vampires when they outnumber them?

Viridian24
27th Mar 2014, 22:15
It's a competitive game. Seriously, if people are getting upset that you pulled out for one minute, after odds were stacked against your team(a player dropping) then that's ridiculous. If people are complaining that you cost them "one minute of fair and equitable gameplay," that's just silly.

A) if they really just cared about having fun and not winning, then they played 19/20 minutes of a really close and fun game. I'll take a 19-minute game that's really fun and intense over a 20-minute game that's one-sided. There is nothing to complain about from the perspective of "having fun."

B) if they are just in the game to win, they had their chance to win the other 19 minutes beforehand, AND if they were in your position, they would do the same thing since they're also just focused on winning. In a 3 v 4 fight, it's highly unlikely that they would have come out on top. If they went in 3 v 4, they would have thrown the game. If the humans complained that they didn't get handed the victory due to one vampire disconnecting, that's even more unsportsmanlike and cowardly. "Oh, one of your players disconnected, we deserve to win!"

Therefore, there's nothing wrong with what you did. If you played humans and beat them by a few points, then the next match when you play vampires, you hide for the other 10 minutes, I can see how that can be unsportsmanlike, but honestly... they had their chance to win the first 10 minutes. It's not like they didn't make any mistakes and to "no fault of their own," they lose. But I do agree, that would be really boring.

B3nny56
28th Mar 2014, 21:52
I don't see a problem with it; is there something against the human vampire-hunters actually hunting the vampires down? If i was on the human side and noticed the vampires were ahead and stopped attacking I would've just told the team to stick together and hunt 'em down.
Plus humans have ranged weapons, which pretty much means "I can see you, I can hit you"; with them trying to run and hide it seems it'd mean "I can hit you but you can't hit me!" Plus along with the traps; and explosives and the alchemists grenade launcher you dont even actually need to see them to hit them haha

Although I agree it's a little unnecessary during the Beta ; and unnecessary unless it's a ranked match - but oh well lol

MordaxPraetorian
28th Mar 2014, 23:34
If the game allows you to do it then it's a legitimate tactic

Play the game infront of you, not the game you'd like it to be.

Today we have learned that Nosgoth has a strategy where vampires camp in places that humans have difficulty reaching them, and that in all bar one situation (where a grappling hook is required), the humans can counter this by having someone suicide and switch to Scout

An undesirable tactic was found, a counter was found, and the metagame rotates, this is healthy and as it should be

Gryregaest
31st Mar 2014, 08:09
Unfair? No. Kind of petty and absurd? Absolutely.

Yes, you're using the advantages given to your side to make sure you win. But why? Is your win/loss ratio that precious to you, that you must win at all costs, even if it means refraining from actually playing and having any fun?

I wouldn't begrudge someone as being unfair for doing something like this, in the sense that I don't consider it exploitation, but I seriously don't understand it. Losing a match doesn't harm you in any way and if your pride can't handle it, I think you're taking the game too seriously.

Bazielim
31st Mar 2014, 14:26
Unfair? No. Kind of petty and absurd? Absolutely.


Agreed, came across some guys playing this tactic for entire rounds the other day - I haven't played the game since, it totally kills it off.

To use an analogy, it's like taking a football into the corner flag and holding it there for the whole match. Yeah it's a legitimate tactic to try to hold out, but if you're going to that corner flag for anything more than the last few seconds, you can't pretend it's even playing football anymore - it's just ruining the spectacle and enjoyment for everyone because of the lack of footballing skill.

... and if they had to do that to beat me, I mean come on, how poor at the game were they?;)

Oroibahazopi
31st Mar 2014, 14:46
wow much cry

How about stop weeping over the fact you got outplayed and focus on making psyonix change the game for the better.

Bazielim
31st Mar 2014, 15:17
wow much cry

How about stop weeping over the fact you got outplayed and focus on making psyonix change the game for the better.

well, x hours playing with no gameplay going on is a good enough reason to be annoyed. I didn't get played at all - that's kind of the point - its bad sportsmanship to the extreme of "I'm winning so I'm not playing and I'm gonna stop everyone else doing it too".

A little empathy and understanding towards other players and members might be a bonus as well... as in rule 6;)

Oroibahazopi
31st Mar 2014, 15:22
You couldn't find a way to win in the situation, sounds like you got outplayed to me. Otherwise you would have won.

I really get sick of people who complain that others should play the game "their way", when the most optimal is something totally different. And then they come on the forums to attack people for playing the most optimal way because they're too inadequate to adapt their playstyle to suit the metagame.

cmstache
31st Mar 2014, 15:25
You couldn't find a way to win in the situation, sounds like you got outplayed to me. Otherwise you would have won.

I really get sick of people who complain that others should play the game "their way", when the most optimal is something totally different. And then they come on the forums to attack people for playing the most optimal way because they're too inadequate to adapt their playstyle to suit the metagame.


Actually Oroi, the OP was the person who did it. And they wanted to know peoples' opinions. So your argument holds no weight here.

Bazielim
31st Mar 2014, 15:26
Or the alternative is true. They killed the game precisely because they couldn't play it and couldn't win legitimately.

I remind you again of rule 6 ;)

Oroibahazopi
31st Mar 2014, 15:52
Who are you to say what is legitimate or not?

My argument is perfectly vaild also, OP wanted to know people opinions so I give mine. Or is it only the consensus of the green badge un-elected council that only matters these days?

Xenonetix
31st Mar 2014, 15:59
Is it only the consensus of the green badge un-elected council that only matters these days?

I find it personally offensive that you not only believe my team does not have legitimate opinions, but also that they're considered the only ones that matter. Please refrain from flaming the moderation team in any way, as they are replying as players with opinions as much as anyone else, and their opinions are no less or more valid than others.

Rather than quibbling over whether an opinion matters, I'd rather you give feedback on the actual opinions. Thanks for understanding, and let's return to the subject at hand please.

cmstache
31st Mar 2014, 17:23
Who are you to say what is legitimate or not?

My argument is perfectly vaild also, OP wanted to know people opinions so I give mine. Or is it only the consensus of the green badge un-elected council that only matters these days?


Yes, your opinion on whether it's a legitimate tactic or not is valid. Although, highly disagreed with by most players. However, my comment was directed at you complaining about:
"I really get sick of people who complain that others should play the game "their way", when the most optimal is something totally different. And then they come on the forums to attack people for playing the most optimal way because they're too inadequate to adapt their playstyle to suit the metagame."
I was specifically talking about that comment, which was most of that post. Because the opening poster wanted opinions on that specifically each person who disagrees has a valid point. Most players, including those that disagree, do in fact say it's a legitimate tactic, but also agree that it ruins the spirit of the game. It's one thing to beat a team, it's another to not play them because you don't want to lose.

Driber
3rd Apr 2014, 09:29
HAHA, about time I get to use this on these forums....This made my week...

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee408/cmstache/933928_10151787265546488_1827132005_n_zps9962e7e8.jpg

Ha, I love it!

Don't mind if I use that, myself :D

Minsoinch
3rd Apr 2014, 13:39
This tactic is valid, if Psyonix does not want this tactic to be used then a timer should have never been implemented. :)

Oroibahazopi
3rd Apr 2014, 17:48
Yes, your opinion on whether it's a legitimate tactic or not is valid. Although, highly disagreed with by most players. However, my comment was directed at you complaining about:
"I really get sick of people who complain that others should play the game "their way", when the most optimal is something totally different. And then they come on the forums to attack people for playing the most optimal way because they're too inadequate to adapt their playstyle to suit the metagame."
I was specifically talking about that comment, which was most of that post. Because the opening poster wanted opinions on that specifically each person who disagrees has a valid point. Most players, including those that disagree, do in fact say it's a legitimate tactic, but also agree that it ruins the spirit of the game. It's one thing to beat a team, it's another to not play them because you don't want to lose.
I don't cater to people who live in a fantasy world and reject the reality of a situation. Most effective is most effective, if you wont play that way and Psyonix wont alter the game then you will just end up a loser.

Also do you not think that to an average poster the statement made by a person in a position of apparent authority, because of the green moderator badge, that the tactic isn't legitimate is not a clear expression of is his personal opinion and rather a statement by proxy from Psyonix or Square.

Driber
3rd Apr 2014, 21:17
Oroibahazopi,

Except for a select few people, all moderators on our forums are volunteers (including the one you're responding to). By definition that means that they express their personal opinions, not official company statements (unless explicitly stated otherwise).

You already offended one admin, now you have the attention of two. I highly recommend you cease these provocative jabs at the staff.

Oroibahazopi
4th Apr 2014, 17:18
Jabs at staff? Disagreeing with the moderators about their personal opinions is now taking jabs at them? I don't see why the staff should get special immunity from people calling them out on any nonsense they state as fact in their posts.

I know they are volunteers, you know they are volunteers. But to someone who doesn't know the ins and outs of the world of forum moderation and only sees a special badge reads a higher level of authority in the posts of these people. If you care to scroll to the bottom of the forum you'll see everyone listed as a moderator, while I am aware that it is simply stating which users have moderator rights with respect to the forum software it makes it ambiguous for other users.

Driber
4th Apr 2014, 21:40
Oroibahazopi,

Disagreeing with moderators about their opinion on the game is absolutely fine. Derailing a thread by squabbling about ranks and making unsubstantial implications about special treatment (when in fact the only one who seems to be applying special treatment is you) is not.

I do not wish to see further debate about this here. Keep it on topic and constructive now, or take it into PM with the person you have an issue with.

Calverp
5th Apr 2014, 11:38
Meh, I'd rather lose having fun and playing "honourably" :shrug:
Especially in situations where I'm at a disadvantage I enjoy the challenge, I've been in matches where people from my team have dropped, where the game has glitched and it's been 2v6/3v5 and even against a player who was quite blatantly speed-hacking in some form, and in each situation I feel like I've become a better play by learning how to play in those unmatched situations.

BOOMstyx
8th Apr 2014, 13:20
yeah had the exact opposite happen. humans got ahead when they were vamps in teh first 1/2 of the map and the played hide and seek for alot of the second half. i don't even think they were down a guy either. so screw 'em. if you're willing to spend the last bit of the map bored for the win sobeit. no worse than a team of 4 stomping on 1 or 2 guys to 30 kills.

Nubi_K
8th Apr 2014, 14:24
Earlier today in a deathmatch a situation occurred and it left me with a tough decision to make and I made the call.

I played as human in the first round, we managed to hold them off reasonably well, vampires won the round with a score of 27-24. Then the second round starts, after roughly nine minutes we were ahead 19-14 then with a minute left one of the members of our team suddenly disconnects leaving us with 3 against the 4 humans, rather than attack and risk losing though, I advised my team to hang back and run out the clock for the last minute. They were paying attention to what I said in chat and agreed to do it. The humans couldn't get to us from where we were in Provance since they were two alchemists and two hunters, leaving them unable to really snipe us for any good damage. We stayed away for the last minute and won the match 43-41, a few of the humans were unhappy with the results.

But given the situation, I think that running away to run out the clock for the last minute was the most tactically sound decision to make rather than attack them 3v4 and risk losing the match. I just wanted to ask what the thoughts of others were. I don't regret the decision mind, given the very specific situation (ahead by two, 3v4, and only one minute left in the round) I think retreating was the most strategic decision we could make.


No, you were in the right, you played smart and won the game because of it.

Anyone who is crying or complaining about what you did is a scrub, its that simple.
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html

Gryregaest
8th Apr 2014, 16:26
I... can't tell if your post is serious or not.

Oroibahazopi
8th Apr 2014, 19:00
No, you were in the right, you played smart and won the game because of it.

Anyone who is crying or complaining about what you did is a scrub, its that simple.
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html
This is, with all honesty, not a smurf account of mine.

Btw people tend to cry a lot resulting in warns/bans around here if you try to tell them they're bad. The competitive aspect of nosgoth is still in embryo.

MordaxPraetorian
9th Apr 2014, 05:10
No, you were in the right, you played smart and won the game because of it.

Anyone who is crying or complaining about what you did is a scrub, its that simple.
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html

This

A million times this

I was linked to that article or one very very similar to it many years ago and it radically changed the way I thought about games

The wording is perhaps a little harsh but it hits the nail on the head

Those who play for "honour" will quickly come to experience the same tired and boring match over and over again, they'll get bored of the game after a few months at most and move on to the next game to do the same thing

It's those who want to explore all of the intricacies of Nosgoth without limiting themselves with self-imposed made up rules that will still be here, exploring the game and buying their Runestones years down the line

There is no rule in the game that says that the Vampires have to berserker charge the humans throughout the game with no let up and if all Vampire players imposed that rule on themselves then the game would quickly end up in a state where tight Human formations in the best defensive spots won every match

At a competitive level, the solution to a Human formation in the best defensive zone on the map, will be to gain an early lead before the humans get there. Then if a human team does reach that defensive zone all together the Vampires can stop attacking and the timer will force the Humans to leave their holdout and come looking for them.

That timer is so fundamental to producing a game with a 2 way flow of offensive strategy, because if you fall behind it means you have to start playing aggressively to close the kill gap before the round ends. This ensures that it can't be Vampires attacking Human formations all of the time, the Humans have to have aggressive hunt-and-kill strategies open to them as well.

When Human teams start realising that when they're behind on kills they have to go and find the Vampires it's going to open up a new and interesting play dynamic that will keep the game fresh and interesting for everyone, we'll end up with a deeper game where both sides have both an offensive and a defensive mode to explore

But we'll never get to that stage if we all decide that the vampires have to follow this unwritten rule that they should always be looking for fights with the humans