Author Topic: Fairness of the Auto-concede  (Read 15965 times)

Offline Xyst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #30 on: November 18, 2014, 09:23:45 AM »
First, let me define the Honorable Adversary and Infinite Coward tags so that you understand the following system I am presenting below:

Honorable Adversary tag-
When a player plays a game in these formats (Constructed:Normal Play/Constructed:Ranked Play/Draft:Rift Run) and does not concede, that player achieves a new rank of Honorable Adversary. Each rank gained gives that player a 1% IP Boost. The maximum rank that can be achieved is rank 10 (10% IP Boost).

Infinite Coward tag-
If you concede a game in the Constructed:Normal Play format, you gain this tag for 1 hour (online or offline time). During this hour, you may only queue up against other players with the Infinite Coward tag in the Constructed:Normal Play format. For the duration of this tag, you may not achieve any ranks in the Honorable Adversary tag.

I think that this would be a really simple solution. I'll break it down into types of match-ups:

Training/Campaign/Academy/Draft:Practice/Any Invite Game-
Allow conceding with no penalty as it is now. Anyone should be able to concede vs bots or any invited game.
If you concede, you do not gain the Infinite Coward tag. You do not gain progress for the Honorable Adversary tag in these game modes.

Constructed:Normal Play-
Allow conceding, but a player that concedes gets a 1 hour tag as an Infinite Coward (Deserter has been taken by that other game). Infinite Cowards only queue up against other Infinite Cowards for the entire duration of the tag. They also lose any benefits gained from the Honorable Adversary tag and it resets to zero.
If you concede, you gain the Infinite Coward tag and lose the Honorable Adversary tag for the 1 hour duration (timer ticks online or offline time).

Constructed:Ranked Play/Draft:Rift Run-
Allow conceding, but a player that concedes loses any benefits gained from the Honorable Adversary tag and it resets to zero. They do not gain the Infinite Coward tag as conceding in these formats clearly only hurts themselves.
If you concede,you do not gain the Infinite Coward tag but you do lose the Honorable Adversary tag, though you will not have to wait any duration to re-gain ranks from the Honorable Adversary tag in game formats that it can be gained in.

I firmly believe that this is the common ground you are looking for, Teremus. I don't believe more than a handful of players would oppose this idea as it would include something we have been wishing for with the Honorable Adversary tag; a percentage boost to our IP would alleviate 'grind' concerns. The hardest part from the Lightmare perspective would be assessing the Honorable Adversary tag bonus' and then designing and implementing the system.

Offline Cleanse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
    • View Profile
    • Message Cleanse on Infinity Wars Wiki
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #31 on: November 18, 2014, 09:33:20 AM »
Infinite Coward tag-
If you concede a game in the Constructed:Normal Play format, you gain this tag for 1 hour (online or offline time). During this hour, you may only queue up against other players with the Infinite Coward tag in the Constructed:Normal Play format. For the duration of this tag, you may not achieve any ranks in the Honorable Adversary tag.

I firmly believe that this is the common ground you are looking for, Teremus. I don't believe more than a handful of players would oppose this idea as it would include something we have been wishing for with the Honorable Adversary tag; a percentage boost to our IP would alleviate 'grind' concerns. The hardest part from the Lightmare perspective would be assessing the Honorable Adversary tag bonus' and then designing and implementing the system.

Well, I would oppose that quite strongly. You're punishing people who concede for any reason and at any time in normal.

Offline Symphony

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • "...you've met with a terrible fate, haven't you?"
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #32 on: November 18, 2014, 10:02:23 AM »
Quote
Of course don't just say "BALANCE YOUR PUFFING GAME" I'm looking for actual feedback here.
While that is a fair request, Teremus, IW's balance has a fair share of guilt on people auto conceding. As some people have already mentioned, Hard Counters are a thing, so are a few annoying decks (Mill, BioSol for some, Yuanshi's Hydras back in infestation, etc). Getting a match decided on turn 1 or being paired against a deck you'll have no enjoyment playing against should be enough reasons to concede turn 1.

I don't usually do this because of the crappy queue times, so you should make the best of that single game you get every 10 minutes, even if it's against the same player, playing the same hard counter against your deck. But that's not to say I don't do it, either. Back at infestation's early days where I didn't have a 'playable' collection, I used to auto-concede against Yuanshi's Hydras constantly, and during the period Mill was running rampant, I had no shame in autoconceding against every single 1DoD/1Exiles deck.

The big thing to consider here is that you shouldn't force a player to play out a game they'll have no fun playing! It completely defeats the purpose of a freaking video-game to bring you fun times. If you lock autoconceding, people will find a way to get around it, even if it means extending the timer for x amount of time until they can get out.

Solutions? Like some have already said here, change how Normal MMR works so queue times aren't as ridiculous as they are now while consequentially broadening the player pool you can be paired against (i.e. not the same 5~10 players I ALWAYS get matched against).
And since normal's pretty much the only problem (as getting an auto-concede in ranked is great, for obvious reasons), shortening queue times should be able to alleviate the issue a great deal, really.

Offline Xyst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #33 on: November 18, 2014, 10:07:57 AM »
Infinite Coward tag-
If you concede a game in the Constructed:Normal Play format, you gain this tag for 1 hour (online or offline time). During this hour, you may only queue up against other players with the Infinite Coward tag in the Constructed:Normal Play format. For the duration of this tag, you may not achieve any ranks in the Honorable Adversary tag.

I firmly believe that this is the common ground you are looking for, Teremus. I don't believe more than a handful of players would oppose this idea as it would include something we have been wishing for with the Honorable Adversary tag; a percentage boost to our IP would alleviate 'grind' concerns. The hardest part from the Lightmare perspective would be assessing the Honorable Adversary tag bonus' and then designing and implementing the system.

Well, I would oppose that quite strongly. You're punishing people who concede for any reason and at any time in normal.

Exactly, but you get to play with other people who concede for any reason and at any time for 1 hour in Constructed: Normal Play, which is the circle those types of players should be in. You can still play in these formats (Training/Campaign/Academy/Draft:Practice/Any Invite Game/Constructed:Ranked Play/Draft:Rift Run), you just cannot gain ranks in Honorable Adversary during the timer.

The benefits of the Honorable Adversary ranks far outweigh the negative impact of a person who chooses to concede in Constructed:Normal Play. If you really want to get picky about it, then EDIT my proposal with an exception to the Infinite Coward tag if the current game you are in has reached or surpassed a specific time (5-8 minutes seems fair).

A side affect, benefit, to this proposed system is that it would lower the queue time for Constructed:Normal Play/Constructed:Ranked Play/Draft:Rift Run since players would want to earn ranks to the maximum Honorable Adversary IP bonus.

Offline Cleanse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
    • View Profile
    • Message Cleanse on Infinity Wars Wiki
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #34 on: November 18, 2014, 10:16:51 AM »
Exactly, but you get to play with other people who concede for any reason and at any time for 1 hour in Constructed: Normal Play, which is the circle those types of players should be in.

If you're going to attack the very idea of conceding overall, I don't think you're going to get much support. You're suggesting its the same auto-conceding as conceding after 10 minutes when its clear that a long-running game is lost (and both players will get full rewards anyway).

And no, setting a minimum time wouldn't work because people would just do nothing for five minutes then concede. That would be an even worse experience for both players. As mentioned by a number of people above.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 10:20:16 AM by Cleanse »

Offline Xyst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #35 on: November 18, 2014, 10:41:33 AM »
Exactly, but you get to play with other people who concede for any reason and at any time for 1 hour in Constructed: Normal Play, which is the circle those types of players should be in.

If you're going to attack the very idea of conceding overall, I don't think you're going to get much support. You're suggesting its the same auto-conceding as conceding after 10 minutes when its clear that a long-running game is lost (and both players will get full rewards anyway).

And no, setting a minimum time wouldn't work because people would just do nothing for five minutes then concede. That would be an even worse experience for both players. As mentioned by a number of people above.

If you are in a game that is lost, why would you concede? Just click the Next Turn button and lose. There is no reason to ever go to options and click concede game when you are about to lose. It is much easier to click the next turn button without playing any cards or taking the turn in general. That should be the policy of any honorable player, thus gaining ranks in Honorable Adversary.

If your complaint is that you do not want to be stuck in a Constructed:Normal Play format game against a deck you do not want to play against, then here is a solution to that:

When matched against a player in a Constructed:Normal Play format game, there will be a screen showing your commanders and their commanders for 10 seconds. This screen will have two buttons either player can press. Button 1 is PLAY. Button 2 is FORFEIT. If a player selects forfeit, both players go back into matchmaking. If both players select play or 10 seconds pass, the game starts.

Offline Rawonall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #36 on: November 18, 2014, 11:29:55 AM »
Xyst, if somebody does something you don't like, forcing him not to do it by using rewards if they don't do it or punishment if they do is generally a horrible idea, since people will just look for workarounds and inevitably twist your oppressive "rules". Circumventing rules is always easier than enforcing them.
What you should do, instead, is figure out WHY they do the things that annoy you, and make them happy by removing the cause of their bad behavior.
In our case, this is very simple:
Quitters annoy you (and other people, it seems);
Quitters do exist because random matchmaking causes them to face decks that they don't have fun playing against.
Solution (technically possible although maybe implementation would be too expensive, but it's the only thing that would work for sure): do as MTGO does; you do NOT click "play game" and get paired against a random opponent, but you have a list of "queued" games you can join, each with a description, and you can either join one of them or create one of your own and wait for somebody to join.
If I see a game whose description is "Testing Bio Sol, serious players only" be sure as hell I won't join that game even if it was the only one available for hours; if I want to test a goofy aggro deck, I'd create a game whose description is "casual deck, no triple verore pls" and so on.
Obviously, random matchmaking will be kept as is for ranked.

Offline DrayGon777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2107
  • Friendly Neighborhood Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #37 on: November 18, 2014, 11:36:09 AM »
The thing is, in a non-electronic TCG, conceding is usually seen with respect. The conceder would lay down his hands, say, "You win. There's nothing I can do", and shake hands. It saves both players time and allows them to move on to the next game sooner. I think the reason that conceding isn't viewed in such good light in a digital medium, is two-fold. You can't see your opponent so you can't gauge their emotional state and you have some people waiting a period of time to find someone to play the game against. IW also has two other reasons why conceding can be viewed negatively. You get less rewards if the game is conceded before the cap is reached, and you both are taking your turn so can get conceded upon while taking your move.

The main reason for conceding is because you know you can't win the match. While I tend to disagree that you can know you won't win just by seeing the commanders first turn (unless you faced the same opponent not too long ago and the commanders haven't changed), others do not and can feel like there's no point playing certain match-ups. They are welcome to those opinions, but the fact is that conceding tends to hurt the one conceded upon just as much (if not more) than the one conceding, at least how the game currently is. Not sure how to fix that as these things are in place to allow people to be able to play for free, while also preventing botting. :(
Just so you guys know, if you're ever vs WWK, just start putting out random numbers and mathematical symbols, he will surrender.

Offline Rethorian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #38 on: November 18, 2014, 11:44:20 AM »
Exactly, but you get to play with other people who concede for any reason and at any time for 1 hour in Constructed: Normal Play, which is the circle those types of players should be in.

If you're going to attack the very idea of conceding overall, I don't think you're going to get much support. You're suggesting its the same auto-conceding as conceding after 10 minutes when its clear that a long-running game is lost (and both players will get full rewards anyway).

And no, setting a minimum time wouldn't work because people would just do nothing for five minutes then concede. That would be an even worse experience for both players. As mentioned by a number of people above.

If you are in a game that is lost, why would you concede? Just click the Next Turn button and lose. There is no reason to ever go to options and click concede game when you are about to lose. It is much easier to click the next turn button without playing any cards or taking the turn in general. That should be the policy of any honorable player, thus gaining ranks in Honorable Adversary.

If your complaint is that you do not want to be stuck in a Constructed:Normal Play format game against a deck you do not want to play against, then here is a solution to that:

When matched against a player in a Constructed:Normal Play format game, there will be a screen showing your commanders and their commanders for 10 seconds. This screen will have two buttons either player can press. Button 1 is PLAY. Button 2 is FORFEIT. If a player selects forfeit, both players go back into matchmaking. If both players select play or 10 seconds pass, the game starts.

1. You can lose a game long before the turn it technically ends. Triple Verore is a good example. Once Verore takes control VS certain decks, you can't come back into the game. But Verore kills you relatively slowly. Spamming end turn VS Verore still takes forever to end the game.

I was playing an opponent once, and fearing Calamity, I was using most of my resources drawing cards and trying to prepare for that, and only slowly killing him with a flyer or something, playing extremely cautiously. Then he says, stop wasting time and just finish me. I had no idea what he had, but he had already known he had lost the game. I didn't. This is why you concede.

And really, I don't see anything honorable about spamming end turn VS spamming Concede. One just takes longer.

2. Letting people cherry pick their opponents is a horrible idea.

Vertu Honagan

  • Guest
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #39 on: November 18, 2014, 12:53:58 PM »
If you are in a game that is lost, why would you concede? Just click the Next Turn button and lose. There is no reason to ever go to options and click concede game when you are about to lose. It is much easier to click the next turn button without playing any cards or taking the turn in general. That should be the policy of any honorable player, thus gaining ranks in Honorable Adversary.

If your complaint is that you do not want to be stuck in a Constructed:Normal Play format game against a deck you do not want to play against, then here is a solution to that:

When matched against a player in a Constructed:Normal Play format game, there will be a screen showing your commanders and their commanders for 10 seconds. This screen will have two buttons either player can press. Button 1 is PLAY. Button 2 is FORFEIT. If a player selects forfeit, both players go back into matchmaking. If both players select play or 10 seconds pass, the game starts.

Why would you concede if the game lost? Well, simple answer to that, the loss will take much longer than just conceding. I absolutely hate when people take the full timer just to finish me off on the last turn! We both know they've won and all they have to do is hit end turn to finish me off. Yet they still don't hit end turn! Why should I be forced to wait for them to feel like pressing the end turn button to finish me, when I can just click concede get the full reward for my loss and go onto the next game?

Also, to break apart your idea of punishing people, if I'm going to be forced to play against a deck that I don't like playing against or that I feel is just impossible to win, then I will just hit extend timer to the maximum every turn and just afk. Why should I have to sit through a terrible unfun game? Might as well make both of us have a terrible unfun game. 2 verore + I'm looking at you. Those are the only decks that I hate playing against and some days, I'm just not in the mood to play a 30 minute game. I don't mind playing them sometimes, but I have to be in a good mood to play them. Otherwise I just concede and find a more enjoyable match.

Offline MerliniX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #40 on: November 18, 2014, 03:44:51 PM »
So let me hear some feedback to the point of what may assist players better in these scenarios? Of course an auto-concede can just be viewed as rude and inconsiderate, but what could a developer do to alleviate this issue for both sides?

Well here are my thoughts;

We don't want to take away the concede option for players, as that will push people into more negative means of expressing their frustration at being in an unfun matchup. We also don't want to punish players who just want to queue up for a 'fun' game and run into a Bionic Sol/Mill/3CoV/Whateveryourpersonalmosthateddeckis. Those people don't want to be stuck playing out an unfun match that they are just going to lose, and they would rather spend their time queueing for a new match against something they will find more enjoyable.

The problem as I see it is in the matchmaking system, where after the concede, if both players requeue they have a pretty decent chance of just getting matched with each other again.

For normal games only, I would suggest a toggle option where it will allow a player to chose to have a longer queue time in order to not get paired against the last player they played against. This allows both players to move on and find new matches without the chance of running again into the same unfun deck or the same unfun auto concede.

Offline Kerio

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #41 on: November 18, 2014, 04:09:30 PM »
The root of the problem with long queue times and being matched with the same player repeatedly is that there isn't that big of a player base. If you're complaining about this but you're coming up with a solution that punishes auto-conceding/conceding then you're actually making the problem worse!

In Xyst's solution, its suggesting to actually segregate players so that "Cowards" queue against each other and "Honourable" do the same. We already have long queue times, now you can match up with even fewer ppl so we'll have even longer queue times!

Punishment will lead to fewer players (and so longer queue times) and really should only be reserved to toxic players (botter's/cheaters/spammers). I don't believe ppl choosing to concede = toxic

Offline Heart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 604
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #42 on: November 18, 2014, 04:43:16 PM »
Balance the game and implement a fix to queue times is how you solve this, especially for normals. Other than that there is very little you can do in terms of punishing players for conceding. Can't force people to play a game they don't want to.
Follow your...

Offline kitsunexans

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #43 on: November 18, 2014, 06:53:02 PM »
I admit i tend to auto concede vs 2 or 3 pure cov unless they play poorly I almost always lose to them no matter how many death spells I dodge. that decks that hard counter mine (yuanshi in command) or when im up against someone for the 10 time that day.  i wouldn't mind some way to get a reward for the time you end up in the que like a stacking bonus to ip for extended waits.

Offline Winsanity

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
  • The Winsanity is overwhleming
    • View Profile
Re: Fairness of the Auto-concede
« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2014, 07:54:02 PM »
I admit i tend to auto concede vs 2 or 3 pure cov unless they play poorly I almost always lose to them no matter how many death spells I dodge. that decks that hard counter mine (yuanshi in command) or when im up against someone for the 10 time that day.  i wouldn't mind some way to get a reward for the time you end up in the que like a stacking bonus to ip for extended waits.
You know you love playing me 10 times a day kitsune  ;)