This topic contains 39 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Jock 10 years, 9 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #13394

    hobbesme
    Participant

    @deathstryker wrote:

    Stealing is wrong Hobbes and that’s why I stand by my opinions of the resignation limitation.

    Is “simulated stealing” in a game more wrong than “simulated killing”? 🙂

    @deathstryker wrote:

    If you were so experienced you wouldn’t need to “steal”.

    I won’t deny that if I was VERY GOOD at the game, I MIGHT never need to resign. But I am only mediocre — some skill, but not consistent or exceptional — and this is one of many methods that provides an occasional edge.

    If I was an amazing player, MAYBE I would never resign.

    Maybe.

    #13395

    Bobirov
    Participant

    @hobbesme wrote:

    I say “I think resigning is a reasonable & viable strategy”; you say “I think you need to just suck it up and take what is coming to you.”

    No hard feelings about the difference. But these differences of opinion between our two camps aren’t persuasive enough for either side to change their opinions! 😉 But I sure love debating it! 🙂

    Exactly the way I see it, there are two sides to this issue and I doubt that any amount of debating is going to cause anyone on one side to convert to the other. But it doesn’t hurt to try I suppose?

    Honestly I wasn’t planning on making another post about this subject, but seeing as how so many people have now come out against it and my side is being drowned out, here goes.

    First off, some reasons why I won’t be changing sides on this issue any time soon. The other side of this issue is more apt to drawing in people who advocate things like:
    @Apollo Tangent wrote:

    The best psyche is to say yes to a truce… then blow the truceeeeeee away! Yay! Ya gotta love it!

    I have resigned, I have said that I was going to… yet didn’t… in order to survive a volley… whatever it takes to plant the “frustration seed” short of verbal abuse…

    Yes that is only one person’s opinion, but it is the same kind of thinking that leads to wanting the “magical disappear button”. I guess this is where honor comes in to play and wanting to be known for keeping your word. I am all for fair and fun means of frustrating my opponent, but I don’t think that includes being dishonest to do so.

    @deathstryker wrote:

    And as for other tricks that people use to evade shots, I believe it will be impossible to remove them all. It’s just something you’ll have to face in Simultaneous mode. I think that’s why I like Sequential mode better. Sure it’s slower but it illiminates those tricks.

    When did I ever say anything about eliminating other methods people use to avoid shots? In fact I’m trying to promote other methods that are more fair and reasonable… 😛

    I suppose this was in response to Apollo’s comments about a certain “un-named” player, but I figured I’d comment on it.. 😉

    @hobbesme wrote:

    @Apollo Tangent = Apollo Sine / Apollo Cosine wrote:

    Resigning is a covert way to frustrate other players … whatever it takes to plant the “frustration seed”

    Hear! Hear!

    THIS statement is the very heart of why even SEASONED players can & have used resigning as a psychological weapon! Bravo ❗

    I am not against doing things that frustrate other players. In fact, the dirt and fuel alternatives are a means to do exactly this but in a way that I deem more fair and reasonable.

    However, I do not deem the current resign method fair or reasonable. I can think of no other reasonably designed game that allows you to just instantly remove yourself from play with absolutely no risk or penalty involved. The exception to this might be poorly conceived MMORPGs, but do we want to be imittating a poorly conceived game scheme?

    @hobbesme wrote:

    @ebonite² wrote:

    To sum up: I don’t play to win rounds, I play to win games. I use the resign option to deny other players that one kill that will put them over me at the end when we have the same number of round wins.

    In addition to the psychological effects of resigning (see Note #3), this is the STRATEGIC use of resigning against seasoned players.

    Again here, I see both dirt and fuel as serving this same strategic purpose. But they do so in a way that is not totally scewed toward the person using the tactic. The new resign behaviour will also still serve as a perfectly good strategic manuever, but its going to require you to make this decision before you’re sitting there with 1 health with no alternatives in your inventory. If you don’t make the call before that moment, odds are you are gonna die.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    AND even if there are only two players left, stealing the kill from a player who is going to win the round anyways is a VERY reasonable move to make so that the player doesn’t advance in winning the game any more than necessary!

    And the resign change isn’t going to prevent you from doing this. But you’re going to have to make that decision BEFORE the other person defeats you in a fair fight. If you don’t decide early in the fight that you are going to lose, then you are running the risk that you will be defeated.

    I liken this to two armies surveying eachother on the field, and if one army decides it has no chance of winning before the fight has even begun, they can concede. But if they engage in battle and one side trys to surrender amid the battle, they run the risk of the other side wiping them out as they attempt to flee.

    @ebonite² wrote:

    I feel that targeting a tank that is going to resign because it can’t hit anything when there are other, full-strength tanks in the game is a wasted shot anyway … The other guys are likely already aiming at you, so you’re at least one shot behind on zeroing them.

    Ok uhm, this to me is actually an argument for my side. Honestly if you think and act like this, then the resign change is not going to affect you. Because since you’re not going to shoot at the injured player anyways, how is it going to matter if that person resigns at the end of the turn instead of beginning?

    @ebonite² wrote:

    I’m still partial to the suggestion that the resign option would only be available for the first five seconds of a turn and when used, broadcast a message that PlayerX was resigning.

    I would support this, it was my second suggestion in the original post made by combining other people’s ideas. However, I still would rather have the current solution because it adds a risk to resigning. By adding a risk to it, it is no longer the cheap (read lame), end-all solution that it currently is in version 37.

    In the end, try not to just think about this small change affecting your resigns. It is going to affect your opponents resigns as well. So yes its going to be a little bit harder to get away with a resign if you’re trying it at the last second. But it is going to be just as hard for every other player in the game. If you look at it like this, you just might see that the resign change might just actually be good for you in the end.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    Again, it all comes down to a difference in opinion to what is “reasonable”, “valid”, “fair”, etc.

    Amen bro. I am not trying to insult anyones way of playing or anything in this discussion, I am simply trying to express how I feel about it.

    Rob

    #13396

    Deathstryker
    Participant

    @hobbesme wrote:

    Is “simulated stealing” in a game more wrong than “simulated killing”? 🙂

    Yeah well people expect to die in a game. They don’t expect people to use loopholes in a game to win.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    I won’t deny that if I was VERY GOOD at the game, I MIGHT never need to resign. But I am only mediocre — some skill, but not consistent or exceptional — and this is one of many methods that provides an occasional edge.

    If I was an amazing player, MAYBE I would never resign.

    Maybe.

    I’m not the best player at this game either but I’d never use a loophole in a game to win. Sure, you might say it’s the developer’s fault and thus gives you a right but in a situation like this, my conscience plays a role. It leads me to believe this tactic is wrong and it detracts from the overall gaming experience and I imagine the majority of people are with me on this, thus I think this problem should be illiminated.

    Of course, I don’t really give too much a damn either way. I don’t play online all that much. I’m just wanting to drill in a point that I find valid (and argue with Hobbes a bit).

    EDIT:@bobirov wrote:

    Deathstryker wrote:
    And as for other tricks that people use to evade shots, I believe it will be impossible to remove them all. It’s just something you’ll have to face in Simultaneous mode. I think that’s why I like Sequential mode better. Sure it’s slower but it illiminates those tricks.

    When did I ever say anything about eliminating other methods people use to avoid shots? In fact I’m trying to promote other methods that are more fair and reasonable… Razz

    I didn’t say you did say that. I was just stating that for my own well being. 🙂

    Someone is gonna bring this post up two years down the road and laugh at us.

    #13397

    hoopy frood
    Participant

    Just my two cents on subject.
    (1)..Ive gotten pretty high in ranks without ever resigning, so I feel its unnessesary.

    (2)..Is it a ‘Legal’ move? absolutlely. Don’t like it though.

    (3) Nothing more frustrating than chipping your way through two of an oppenents shields with baby missiles (he had no chutes) and I had no shields. To get them to 30 power and then they resign.

    Don’t like it.

    (4) Ive heard it said that the penalty for resigning is not winning that round. Quess what…if you have to resign you werent going to win that round anyway. Thats no penalty. If you surrender ‘resign’ you should be penalized.

    I think you should lose your next round rights to fight.(Penalty)
    Where does a enemy that surrenders get to fight again immediately, if at all again.

    Lock that ‘resigner’ out for the next round at least.

    or only allow resigning if players damage level is above a certain amount say 50 percent.

    I love it when a player with say 5 power cowers waiting to see if the other players kill each other off so they can get the round win only to resign if that doesnt happen.

    Hoopy

    #13398

    Apollo Tangent
    Participant

    😈
    Warfare, isn’t fair. I’m sure there are plent of Soldiers, Tankers, Sailors etc. That were… and will be in the future “happy” that some of their adversaries have chosen the Hari Kiri (
    The dissapointed fighters that would have rather bayonetted them themselves… Well quite frankly should have their heads checked.

    It was the pesky Kamikazee missions that really pissed them off the most!
    Today instead of planes they do it with cars in Iraq. Well 9/11 hmm okay I stand corrected.

    So I ask you all to consider the fact that D-Heads haven’t become a side topic here yet. Why? It’s rare for people to suicide with one and because it’s shrewd players that plan in advance in order to use them. An admirable tactic!

    The tactic of dirt and gas is a valid one. I’m sure everyone here has been dirted at one point or another without having fuel in their inventory. So why not resign when that happens? (at least to counter that tactic).

    Trends change, ie: Leapers sometimes become more popular than Sandies. Hot Napalm is a little bit too expensive but it’s a great weapon to counter both Dirt and Shields. We don’t need ABC fire extinguishers for our tanks yet though do we? Maybe the price of Hot Napalm should be brought down a bit.

    Re: My statement about the fact that I’ve truced and then blown my fellow trucee away… It’s their problem that they fall for the oldest trick in the book. If they lack the sense of humor to admire my doing it. It’s a great lesson for them to learn. (War is Hell not Vacation).

    The last thing that they do before they execute someone with a lethal injection is swab the injection area with alcohol. Well isn’t that kind!? I’m sure it gives the person on the table the “peace of mind” that they won’t be dying by Necrotizing Fasciitis anytime soon… HAH HAH!
    >weg< 😈 wicked evil grins to everyone! See you in the game. 😀

    #13399

    Ebonite
    Participant

    @bobirov wrote:

    @ebonite² wrote:

    I feel that targeting a tank that is going to resign because it can’t hit anything when there are other, full-strength tanks in the game is a wasted shot anyway … The other guys are likely already aiming at you, so you’re at least one shot behind on zeroing them.

    Ok uhm, this to me is actually an argument for my side. Honestly if you think and act like this, then the resign change is not going to affect you. Because since you’re not going to shoot at the injured player anyways, how is it going to matter if that person resigns at the end of the turn instead of beginning?

    I do think and act like this, but the resign change will still affect me because other players do NOT think and act like this. I really don’t care if someone else resigns after I render them impotent. Like I said, that’s a $120 I don’t really need, and kills are insignificant next to superior round wins. What I do care about, however, is the people playing for rank, and in order to get rank, you need kills, so they’re after me with 1 HP instead of the guy across the map with full health because I’m a “guaranteed” kill. Another good argument for changing the way ranking is calculated.

    @bobirov wrote:

    @ebonite² wrote:

    I’m still partial to the suggestion that the resign option would only be available for the first five seconds of a turn and when used, broadcast a message that PlayerX was resigning.

    I would support this, it was my second suggestion in the original post made by combining other people’s ideas. However, I still would rather have the current solution because it adds a risk to resigning. By adding a risk to it, it is no longer the cheap (read lame), end-all solution that it currently is in version 37.

    Yeah, I really liked that idea. But now here’s where one of those “difference of opinions” comes in. I don’t think resigning should have any risk attached because it is the only way a player can conceed a round without suiciding. The only thing waiting until the end of the shot cycle does for anybody is the person shooting collects their kill and $120. I’m sorry, but if I conceed, I give up now, not next turn.

    It’s like in chess. If I’m 40 moves into a game and my opponent has a clear material and positional advantage, I’m not going to play on for another seven moves so he can ‘mate me. I’m going to conceed once it becomes clear I cannot win. And when I do resign, do we then play the next move anyway? No. The match ends immediately upon my resignation. There is no benefit in continuing the game.

    “But chess and Scorched are different.” True. In chess, I get the win whether I checkmate you or you resign. In Scorched, you only get credit for killing me if you actually destroy my tank. But this goes back to people trying to accumulate kills…

    @bobirov wrote:

    In the end, try not to just think about this small change affecting your resigns. It is going to affect your opponents resigns as well. So yes its going to be a little bit harder to get away with a resign if you’re trying it at the last second. But it is going to be just as hard for every other player in the game. If you look at it like this, you just might see that the resign change might just actually be good for you in the end.

    As has been clearly stated in these forums, some players will never resign, so this change won’t affect them trying to resign. It only affects those of us who do resign, and since I don’t care whether they resign or not, this change only affects my resigns. That is my opinion and only my opinion, but not my only opinion, and I stand by it. Anyone else who stands by it will likely be shot by the firing squad I’m facing.

    I’ll accept whatever change comes out, but I highly doubt this change will be good for me. Only people I see benefiting from this is the people whining about not getting the kill they “earned”. If you “earned” the kill, they wouldn’t be alive to resign.

    @bobirov wrote:

    @hobbesme wrote:

    Again, it all comes down to a difference in opinion to what is “reasonable”, “valid”, “fair”, etc.

    Amen bro. I am not trying to insult anyones way of playing or anything in this discussion, I am simply trying to express how I feel about it.

    Ditto. Apologies for any ruffled feathers, but I do feel strongly about this.

    #13400

    Deathstryker
    Participant

    If this post teaches me anything, it’s why Gavin is an only developer. 😀

    #13401

    hobbesme
    Participant

    @deathstryker wrote:

    If this post teaches me anything, it’s why Gavin is an only developer.

    First off, THAT is a great truth. I haven’t worked on too many team software projects, but the solo projects I have done I get to control all aspects from quality to consistency to implementation. Working solo is MUCH easier in some regards than working as a team! 🙂

    (As a totally self-congratulatory promotion, check out the TCP-IP implementation I developed. :))

    @deathstryker wrote:

    I’m just wanting to drill in a point that I find valid (and argue with Hobbes a bit).

    Secondly, I think this topic has been illuminating AND productive, but CERTAINLY debating & argumentative.

    And my wife knows that I’m always ready for an argument. 😉

    @ebonite wrote:

    when I do resign, do we then play the next move anyway? No. The match ends immediately

    Thirdly, chess & warfare were brought up as excellent examples :

    “Warfare isn’t fair”.

    In warfare, if one side wants to resign a battle but NOT the war, you don’t ANNOUNCE it before-hand nor do you WAIT around to see if the enemy can get in one last shot!

    No, you high-tail it out of there as sneakily as you can!

    Since this is SIMULTANEOUS shot-by-shot action, a resignation is LEAVING before the next shots are fired! NOT waiting ONE last SHOT.

    Now as a concession to the TWO, OPPOSING camps on this matter, one COULD propose that resignations could occur RANDOMLY at the start OR the end of the next shot.

    That way a resigning player is NOT guaranteed to exit before the next shot BUT also that a shooting player is NOT guaranteed that a resigning player will still be there to be killed either.

    AND to satisfy those who are REALLY opposed to resigning, the percentage that a resign is successful (i.e. the resigning player leaves BEFORE the next shot) can be based on his remaining power.

    If the player has only 5% health, he has a 5% chance of successfully resigning/leaving before the next shot is fired. If he has 45% health, he has a 45% chance. Leaving the percentage linear to health makes it easy for everyone to know the odds.

    How about that for a compromise?

    Lastly, in the games it seems that the people that favor “resignation as a means of frustration” are a minority & the people that complain about resigners is the majority.

    However in the two topics on resignation (Resign Button Delay & this current topic) there have been a few players who admit to using or acknowledging that resignation “can be a very logical and tactial move” (NMS) :

    • hobbesme
    • Ebonite
    • c(b,x)
    • NoMoreSteve (NMS)
    • Apollo Tangent
    • Gooseberry (RIP) 😉

    So I don’t know how divided the community is but it’s clearly a frustrating tactic that some love & some hate. Ebonite & I seem to be in the most agreement about our resignation philosophy — even after I resigned on him last night! 🙂

    Or wait, did I commit suicide? 🙁 😮

    #13402

    Deathstryker
    Participant

    @hobbesme wrote:

    “Warfare isn’t fair”.

    In warfare, if one side wants to resign a battle but NOT the war, you don’t ANNOUNCE it before-hand nor do you WAIT around to see if the enemy can get in one last shot!

    No, you high-tail it out of there as sneakily as you can!

    Yes but also in warfare you don’t get to just teleport out of battle. You’re still taking shots while retreating.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    AND to satisfy those who are REALLY opposed to resigning, the percentage that a resign is successful (i.e. the resigning player leaves BEFORE the next shot) can be based on his remaining power.

    If the player has only 5% health, he has a 5% chance of successfully resigning/leaving before the next shot is fired. If he has 45% health, he has a 45% chance. Leaving the percentage linear to health makes it easy for everyone to know the odds.

    How about that for a compromise?

    I quite like that idea a lot. I also think that maybe an option could be placed in the Advanced Settings to allow a Server Admin to choose which resigning option he likes. Whether it be no resigning at all or other options like the one Hobbes described above.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    Lastly, in the games it seems that the people that favor “resignation as a means of frustration” are a minority & the people that complain about resigners is the majority.

    As I thought. 🙂

    #13403

    hobbesme
    Participant

    @hobbesme wrote:

    Now as a concession to the TWO, OPPOSING camps on this matter, one COULD propose that resignations could occur RANDOMLY at the start OR the end of the next shot.

    AND to satisfy those who are REALLY opposed to resigning, the percentage that a resign is successful (i.e. the resigning player leaves BEFORE the next shot) can be based on his remaining power.

    If the player has only 5% health, he has a 5% chance of successfully resigning/leaving before the next shot is fired. If he has 45% health, he has a 45% chance. Leaving the percentage linear to health makes it easy for everyone to know the odds.

    @deathstryker wrote:

    I quite like that idea a lot.

    I rather liked the idea as soon as I thought of it myself. I think it’s a very reasonable compromise between the pro-resigners & anti-resigners AND it better simulates battle-condition resigns.

    As Deathstryker said, “you don’t get to just teleport out of battle. You’re still taking shots while retreating.”

    And a healthier tank has a higher probability of retreating than a less healthy tank.

    If a lot more players like this idea, then we should draw Gavin’s attention to this idea so he can decide whether to implement it into V38 or not.

    What do you all think?

    #13404

    poolee
    Participant


    Both hands up here!!

    Very excellent idea young hobbes! Well done! 😀

    Poolee

    #13405

    Bobirov
    Participant

    @hobbesme wrote:

    If the player has only 5% health, he has a 5% chance of successfully resigning/leaving before the next shot is fired. If he has 45% health, he has a 45% chance. Leaving the percentage linear to health makes it easy for everyone to know the odds.

    Okay, I was thinking about this idea of yours last night a bit and I too think it would be a good compromise. I think it would not only make resign more balanced with the other alternatives by adding a risk or cost factor but it would make resign more fun for both sides as well by adding a luck aspect.

    I think it is a good compromise because it adds a risk or cost factor to resigning that would balance it with the other alternatives without completely ruling out the possibility of having a normal resign. A person who gets hit might choose to spend a few batteries to improve their chance of a “rapid retreat”, thereby costing them some money (cost aspect). If they do not choose to use some batteries they run the risk of a “slow retreat” that would increase their odds of dying (risk aspect). And lastly, in the situation where a person waits till they are at 10 health with no batteries, they are still very likely to die unless they get extremely lucky (luck aspect).

    It is this last luck aspect that I think would make resigning more fun for everyone involved by making it a gamble. Imagine getting away with a rapid retreat with only 10 health left and being able to laugh at the poor guy on the receiving end. Or vice versa you get knocked down to 60 health, decide to use a few batteries to get to 80 health but still get shafted with a slow retreat and get killed. I don’t know, I just think that would be even more fun than having it straightforward always at the end of the turn.

    @hobbesme wrote:

    I think … it better simulates battle-condition resigns.

    As Deathstryker said, “you don’t get to just teleport out of battle. You’re still taking shots while retreating.”

    And a healthier tank has a higher probability of retreating than a less healthy tank.

    Ya, I think it would more accurately reflect retreat from battle as well. In fact, if this idea does get implemented I think resign should be renamed to retreat, as I started calling it above. I also think it would be cool if the server would broadcast something like “Player makes a hasty retreat” and “Player fails to make a hasty retreat” to help inform the players of what happened. How does that sound?

    Just my thoughts on your idea Hobbes, but I really think you scored a winner there. It seems like an excellent compromise that would satisfy the need of adding a risk or cost to resign while somewhat maintaining it’s strategic usability. And, like I said, I think it would make for a more fun experience for both parties if resign had a luck/gambling aspect to it. And, after all, thats what we’re trying to do is make things more fun, right? 🙂

    #13406

    hobbesme
    Participant

    @bobirov wrote:

    Okay, I was thinking about this idea of yours last night a bit and I too think it would be a good compromise … I really think you scored a winner there. It seems like an excellent compromise

    😳 Everyone’s praise is making me blush. I’m glad I scored such a winner. In hindsight, it seems so obvious that any one of us would have thought of it eventually.

    @bobirov wrote:

    A person who gets hit might choose to spend a few batteries to improve their chance of a “rapid retreat” … you get knocked down to 60 health, decide to use a few batteries to get to 80 health but still get shafted with a slow retreat and get killed. I don’t know, I just think that would be even more fun than having it straightforward always at the end of the turn.

    I totally agree; in fact, they could be powering up to either fire OR retreat — the opponents don’t know exactly which!

    And again, I think the successful retreat percentage should be calculated based exactly on your remaining power. So a tank with 5 out of 1000 power has a 0.5% chance of successfully retreating, but a tank that decides to power up to 1000 health will have a 100% chance of retreating.

    The latter sounds weird, but there are times when you are healthy but can’t take out any enemies due to map position.

    @bobirov wrote:

    Ya, I think it would more accurately reflect retreat from battle as well. In fact, if this idea does get implemented I think resign should be renamed to retreat, as I started calling it above. I also think it would be cool if the server would broadcast something like “Player makes a hasty retreat” and “Player fails to make a hasty retreat” to help inform the players of what happened. How does that sound?

    I agree. Retreat sounds better, more accurately reflects the action, AND should be reported as you indicate :

    1. “Player XXX successfully makes a hasty retreat”
    2. “Player XXX fails to make a hasty retreat”
    3. “Player XXX successfully makes a slow retreat”

    The third option is for players who fail to retreat at the start of the next shot but survive the entire round & therefore retreat at the end of the round.

    Good additions, Bobirov!

    #13407

    Deathstryker
    Participant

    I wonder if Gavin is reading this or if he thinks we are still arguing so he doesn’t bother.

    #13408

    imported_gcamp
    Participant

    No I am reading…I’m just ignoring you all…not…I’m just wondering how much time it would take to implement 🙂

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 41 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.