DOTA 2

[Twig]

I mean I don't know why you're acting ignorant! That's awkward. You know exactly the number one problem it solves: Getting stuck in a miserable game. Better matchmaking cannot possibly solve that ever, because sometimes you just get fucked even though you should be evenly matched. Nothing can solve that except being able to give up. Or I suppose redesigning the game so that matches are half as long as they are now. But we all know that's not going to happen, nor should it.

[Henroid]

Better question: who gives a shit about battlepoints? Is that really your counterargument? Please.

You not finding value in a feature in a game doesn't mean it's a global sentiment.

[njoos]

Giving a surrender option is essentially redesigning the game to reduce match time though. 

[Twig]

No it's not...

The only value to battlepoints in Dota are that you gain a pointless level and are guaranteed a cosmetic item drop. That is literally it. Well, I guess they changed it so new players have to reach a certain level to unlock different matchmaking options.

So, I'm sorry, but if you care about battlepoints past that point, well, you shouldn't. Even if you do, for some ridiculous reason, battlepoints in Dota are strictly delivered based on time played, I believe? So, being able to surrender and move on to the next game will give you the same amount even if the next game only lasts as long as the first game would have continued past the surrender point.

[Henroid]

Giving a surrender option is essentially redesigning the game to reduce match time though. 

Give an example of what you mean. Because the tournament matches have an official means of surrendering - it's when the gg is called. None of that has changed the game's design.

[undermind9]

I don't know what any of that means. I thought we were talking about Dota! Are they called battlepoints in HoN, too?

I thought nj00s was referring to the Hon surrender system.

We are talking about Dota, and to that I agree, who cares about battle points,

I'm very anti concede. But if a hypothetical surrender existed someone should get dinged, not like an abandon... But if you call for surrender vote X a day welcome to low queue

[njoos]

Pro players don't normally grief their own team, or try to surrender after first blood and then feed for the rest of the game when it is denied. They should add it to 5man ranked matchmaking, or 5v5 unranked. That is fine. 

[Twig]

Non-pro players can and will grief their own team regardless of the surrender option, so that's not really a valid point, is it?

 

undermind: yeah I edited my post with an extra sentence because I realized he might've been talking about HoN. My bad!

[Henroid]

No it's not...

The only value to battlepoints in Dota are that you gain a pointless level and are guaranteed a cosmetic item drop. That is literally it. Well, I guess they changed it so new players have to reach a certain level to unlock different matchmaking options.

So, I'm sorry, but if you care about battlepoints past that point, well, you shouldn't. Even if you do, for some ridiculous reason, battlepoints in Dota are strictly delivered based on time played, I believe? So, being able to surrender and move on to the next game will give you the same amount even if the next game only lasts as long as the first game would have continued past the surrender point.

People do care about those guaranteed cosmetics. Again, just because you don't care about them doesn't mean you're 'right.' Your opinions and values are true for you and nobody else. Arguing about whether or not they should care is... silly.

 

As for the battlepoints being given out based on time spent, yep, I can't contest that. But you forget that victory also has an effect on points earned, and surrendering would allow for the game to be more easily picked up / put down. Or moved on to the next match. Spending 40 minutes in a match that you've been losing since 20 minutes in is awful; but if you can cut out of it and get into a match afterward where you're winning by the 20 minute mark, your time has been given more value already.

[njoos]

Winning a hard game is more interesting than playing two easy boring 20minute games. 

[undermind9]

Twig, I'm with ya, I've had some train wreck games where I want nothing more than to auto attack the throne myself... But also had games where one team fight turns a seemingly over game to a rax and aegis and have a game again

I'd personally rather have the latter with occasional dragged out disasters. I know that a surrender button will all but eliminate that opportunity

[Henroid]

Winning a hard game is more interesting than playing two easy boring 20minute games. 

Some people like watching every match their favorite football team plays, and some people only like watching the playoffs.

 

Value differences and nothing more.

[njoos]

If you dont like losing maybe stop playing a game with a matchmaking that tries to keep you around 50% win ratio. Must be an awful time for you guys. 

[Henroid]

If you dont like losing maybe stop playing a game with a matchmaking that tries to keep you around 50% win ratio. Must be an awful time for you guys. 

The problem isn't losing, the problem is being forced to sit in a losing situation for 15+ minutes lest you be punished by the system.

[Twig]

nj00s stop being like that. It's not losing. It's being forced to endure a game of hell for way longer than is necessary. You know this, and yet you're pretending that's not the case because you think it helps your argument. It just makes you look like an ass. I guess if that's your intent, good job.

undermind: I disagree completely. There are very few instances all told when I actually completely give up in a game. I mean, it has happened. I have almost 2500 games of Dota. I'm not perfect. I'm pretty bad, in fact. So losing is a thing that happens. But I almost never give up. I'd say a max of maybe fifty of those games did I just straight up give up completely, while still going through the motions. I'd treat a surrender option exactly the same way. Even games I was sure I'd lose (and did end up losing), I don't regret playing them all. Adding a unanimous surrender option would change none of that for me. I'd still vote no most of the time if a vote was called. I'd still keep trying even if I voted yes and someone else voted no. The surrender option only exists (I mean, if it existed) for those rare occasions when you know you've got no chance and literally no one on your team wants to continue. That's all there is to it.

[undermind9]

I'm never happy losing, but since my face isn't in compendium I know it's going to happen more than not

Losing close or hard games are fine though, I remember them, talk about them with my friends, figure out what went wrong or right.

Having ones time wasted is just part of the package unfortunately. No different in any other team game without drop-in/drop-out capabilities.

[Henroid]

Let's be clear here.

 

People are adults and have shit to do with their lives. Playing a game of Counter Strike back in the day had clear winning scenarios and rounds were brief. If you were on the losing side, you weren't punished by real world time. You were just finished. Boom. Done.

 

When you're losing in DotA 2 beyond means of making a comeback, your time is at the mercy of the enemy team. You can't leave because the system will push you into the shit-show queue.

[undermind9]

Let's all agree it's the griefers fault.

GG FF sometimes inspires teams to push up the mid and destroy the throne. Unfortunately it sometimes leads to griefers to Stat pad... Which is also weird to me because Dota doesn't track kda ratios

[BusbyBerkeley]

You can eat an abandon every once in a while without being shitqueued. Also, if your entire team disconnects at the same time the game will end before anyone gets an abandon. 

[Henroid]

You can eat an abandon every once in a while without being shitqueued. Also, if your entire team disconnects at the same time the game will end before anyone gets an abandon. 

That function needs advertising then.

[Twig]

Also, if your entire team disconnects at the same time the game will end before anyone gets an abandon. 

This used to be true. It's not anymore. The first person to disconnect gets an abandon after five minutes, and then the game officially ends thirty seconds later.

 

Having ones time wasted is just part of the package unfortunately. No different in any other team game without drop-in/drop-out capabilities.

Just saying this doesn't make it okay. I wish it did. But! It's not okay! It's a problem that needs to be fixed!

[undermind9]

As twig said used to work, there some complicated DC criteria in place now

Even worse when someone dc's and one ass stays, 6-slots and tries to push out rather than quitting to insta-end the match

[Twig]

I feel I should reiterate: it's not an option anymore!

Unless... they added it back in. I'd find that surprising, though. I don't think it was ever intentional. It was just a side effect of attempting to automatically end the game after an abandon leads to everyone quitting the game.

[undermind9]

Ya, I edited, but will also go looking later for exact disconnect situations

[njoos]

Use gg ff to catch them in a smoke gank!