Surrender...

[Artos]

How the @#!$ minority can out vote the majority ? 1 player left. 4 are in a game. 1 person sets up the voting, 3 are against... YET IT STILL GOES THROUGH... Despite winning in 4v5 situation... Who at valve was like. Aight voting system in game but if 1 person wants to surrender and 3 other don't. You lose anyway....

[Renos]

because if all players remaining are not willing to play the rest of the match out
it just becomes a waste of time,
all 4 of have to agree to keep playing,

[Artos]

Originally posted by Renos:

because if all players remaining are not willing to play the rest of the match out
it just becomes a waste of time,
all 4 of have to agree to keep playing,

Whats the point of vote then ? 3 people said no, 1 (the one that initiated) said yes. We were winning. It opens a gate for trolls to just throw away ez wins. I think it should be oposite. All people should agree to surrender. Not the other way.

If system is so broken you only need 1 vote for yes. Then why the hell include vote as an option ?

[Renos]

Originally posted by Artos:

Originally posted by Renos:

because if all players remaining are not willing to play the rest of the match out
it just becomes a waste of time,
all 4 of have to agree to keep playing,

Whats the point of vote then ? 3 people said no, 1 (the one that initiated) said yes. We were winning. It opens a gate for trolls to just throw away ez wins

when a player abandons the vote to surrender is started automatically.
if a single player votes yes the match ends on the spot
should this vote fail the match continues


(i think what i will say below changed since the limited test)
if a player starts another surrender vote later it automatically ends the game.


(i think it changed to what is below when the game left the test phase)
if a surrender vote is started after the first one failed you all have to agree to surrender

[George Droyd MK77]

what if the remaining 3 players think they can still win and want to try

i actually had matches like that 1 person left another one got kicked because he was of no use and we still won.

If you are on T side its absolutely possible CT not so much. If you go on a spot its 3v2 when you take the spot without losses you have to defend the spot 3v3

[Artos]

Originally posted by Renos:

Originally posted by Artos:

Whats the point of vote then ? 3 people said no, 1 (the one that initiated) said yes. We were winning. It opens a gate for trolls to just throw away ez wins

when a player abandons the vote to surrender is started automatically.
if a single player votes yes the match ends on the spot
should this vote fail the match continues


(i think what i will say below changed since the limited test)
if a player starts another surrender vote later it automatically ends the game.


(i think it changed to what is below when the game left the test phase)
if a surrender vote is started after the first one failed you all have to agree to surrender

Unless valve themselves randomly assigns a yes vote to surrender. Then no, it didn't start by itself. A player started it, It was literally 3 no to 1 yes. Winning game. Thats a troll move to surrender if despite outnumbered we won last 4-5 rounds... It didn't work like this in CSGO 1... Idk why they changed it in csgo 2. I had many cases in last few years were games 4v5 were easly won.

[KING]

Originally posted by Catboy Ian:

what if the remaining 3 players think they can still win and want to try

i actually had matches like that 1 person left another one got kicked because he was of no use and we still won

Then suggest to valve that they make an option so the player that wants to leave can leave without penalty, and the 3 that want to stay have to take that penalty if they lose. This would be the best solution, as they want to stay. The chances of winning a 3vs5 are very little. Your average player that values their time already lost whatever x until that player left, they don't want to be fighting a losing battle or an unfair one. They shouldn't be penalized for that.

[Artos]

Originally posted by KING:

Originally posted by Catboy Ian:

what if the remaining 3 players think they can still win and want to try

i actually had matches like that 1 person left another one got kicked because he was of no use and we still won

Then suggest to valve that they make an option so the player that wants to leave can leave without penalty, and the 3 that want to stay have to take that penalty if they lose. This would be the best solution, as they want to stay.

why would a player leave if we win ? Doesn't make sense, unless randomly decided to troll

[KING]

Originally posted by Artos:

Originally posted by KING:

Then suggest to valve that they make an option so the player that wants to leave can leave without penalty, and the 3 that want to stay have to take that penalty if they lose. This would be the best solution, as they want to stay.

why would a player leave if we win ? Doesn't make sense, unless randomly decided to troll

What do you mean? A player already left, it's 4vs5, which team are you on? You're on the 4 people team. If one of the 4 people doesn't want to stay there, they shouldn't have to. They are playing an unfair match and it's not fair for them. Whether you think of feel like you can win doesn't matter, that player qued for a 5vs5 match. Once it's a 4vs5 it should be up for them to decide if they want to try again to play a 5vs5 match.

If the player doesn't leave then it's all fine right? If they want to leave, that should be up to them. They didn't sign up for a 4vs5. Doesn't matter if you think you can win or not.

[Artos]

Originally posted by KING:

Originally posted by Artos:

why would a player leave if we win ? Doesn't make sense, unless randomly decided to troll

What do you mean? A player already left, it's 4vs5, which team are you on? You're on the 4 people team. If one of the 4 people doesn't want to stay there, they shouldn't have to. They are playing an unfair match and it's not fair for them. Whether you think of feel like you can win doesn't matter, that player qued for a 5vs5 match. Once it's a 4vs5 it should be up for them to decide if they want to try again to play a 5vs5 match.

Bro, Yes im on the 4 team. We are winning and the person that decided to surrender doesn't even contribute that much. Why would such a person be able to take a responsibility for surrender ? We easly won 4-5 rounds in a row without that player. I would say having 5 would be not fair for enemies. Majority of team decided to stay and that should be a decision. If he wants to leave. Punishment should be applied.

When you joing 5v5 game, you are declaring being ready. Despite the outcome of the game...

This is just protecting trolls. Are you telling me that if we were 1 round from winning and such troll decided to give up. We should lose despite destroying enemies in 4v5 ?

[KING]

Originally posted by Artos:

Originally posted by KING:

What do you mean? A player already left, it's 4vs5, which team are you on? You're on the 4 people team. If one of the 4 people doesn't want to stay there, they shouldn't have to. They are playing an unfair match and it's not fair for them. Whether you think of feel like you can win doesn't matter, that player qued for a 5vs5 match. Once it's a 4vs5 it should be up for them to decide if they want to try again to play a 5vs5 match.

Bro, Yes im on the 4 team. We are winning and the person that decided to surrender doesn't even contribute that much. Why would such a person be able to take a responsibility for surrender ? We easly won 4-5 rounds in a row without that player. I would say having 5 would be not fair for enemies. Majority of team decided to stay and that should be a decision. If he wants to leave. Punishment should be applied.

I don't think so, someone already left and took the punishment for it, the others should be able to leave as the first person already got punished for it, and it would be a punishment in itself to make the other 4 to play. Your match is a specific case, once again, in the much larger majority of cases like this, the 4vs5 loses. Sure, you were winning once and the guy decided to leave, that's unfortunate, in this case, advocate for CS2 to allow players to leave without penalty after someone abandons without closing the match, and maybe without counting mmr because it's not a 5vs5 anymore so I don't think it should apply to ranks either, but advocate that if you just wanna stay and have fun sure, just don't keep others tied to the match. In a sense that keeps server's busy and wastes resources so I don't necessarily like that idea, but if it did happen, the worst case it would mean longer queing times.

[Artos]

Originally posted by KING:

Originally posted by Artos:

Bro, Yes im on the 4 team. We are winning and the person that decided to surrender doesn't even contribute that much. Why would such a person be able to take a responsibility for surrender ? We easly won 4-5 rounds in a row without that player. I would say having 5 would be not fair for enemies. Majority of team decided to stay and that should be a decision. If he wants to leave. Punishment should be applied.

I don't think so, someone already left and took the punishment for it, the others should be able to leave as the first person already got punished for it, and it would be a punishment in itself to make the other 4 to play. Your match is a specific case, once again, in the much larger majority of cases like this, the 4vs5 loses. Sure, you were winning once and the guy decided to leave, that's unfortunate, in this case, advocate for CS2 to allow players to leave without penalty after someone abandons without closing the match, and maybe without counting mmr because it's not a 5vs5 anymore so I don't think it should apply to ranks either, but advocate that if you just wanna stay and have fun sure, just don't keep others tied to the match. In a sense that keeps server's busy and wastes resources so I don't necessarily like that idea, but if it did happen, the worst case it would mean longer queing times.

Once again. It should be team's decision. Not individual's to give up. Its also not just my case. I had hundreds games in the past few years that such scenario played out and people were pressing surrender button to just troll. Don't enable trolls

And again. When you join game. You declare being ready despite the outcome of the game. If you wanna leave. Go ahead, but be punished for wasting someone's time

[KING]

Originally posted by Artos:

Originally posted by KING:

When you joing 5v5 game, you are declaring being ready. Despite the outcome of the game...

This is just protecting trolls. Are you telling me that if we were 1 round from winning and such troll decided to give up. We should lose despite destroying enemies in 4v5 ?

Sure, and to that degree, I actually advocate for harsher cooldowns, now I now valve wouldn't do that because the player base would take a major hit, but I think abandoning should start with a 1 day ban going to 30 days or more, not 30 minutes.

I disagree it's just protecting trolls, this isn't what this does for the majority of the time. You need to think about your 1 case scenario, and where this is used mostly. Most 4vs5 are lost, again. Not sure why you don't want to admit that. Sure you were winning 1 4vs5, it happens, that's cool, I've done it too before. But in most cases, you will lose a 4sv5, so you're just stuck there while others just keep on wanting to try. keeping you stuck in the match. But you qued for a 5vs5. So why should you be forced to play a 4vs5 when that's not what you signed up for. Why should you take a penalty for leaving a 4vs5 when that's not what you signed up for? So it makes no sense to me. It's unfortunate if you were winning but in most cases this is not that scenario, this is about most cases, and that's why I suggested you advocate for a solution that allows these players to leave, but lets you stay there although doesn't give mmr, because again in order to gain rank from it, you signed up for a 5vs5 not a 4vs5 not a 3vs5, so even if you can win 3vs5, you signed up for something else, so it shouldn't count to the rank. While yes this feature will probably ruin some matches that are winnable as yours, it will save millions of players hundreds of millions of wasted hours over time, in matches they would be stuck otherwise until they still take a defeat, and it would only push them further away from the game.

[KING]

Originally posted by Artos:

Originally posted by KING:

I don't think so, someone already left and took the punishment for it, the others should be able to leave as the first person already got punished for it, and it would be a punishment in itself to make the other 4 to play. Your match is a specific case, once again, in the much larger majority of cases like this, the 4vs5 loses. Sure, you were winning once and the guy decided to leave, that's unfortunate, in this case, advocate for CS2 to allow players to leave without penalty after someone abandons without closing the match, and maybe without counting mmr because it's not a 5vs5 anymore so I don't think it should apply to ranks either, but advocate that if you just wanna stay and have fun sure, just don't keep others tied to the match. In a sense that keeps server's busy and wastes resources so I don't necessarily like that idea, but if it did happen, the worst case it would mean longer queing times.

Once again. It should be team's decision. Not individual's to give up. Its also not just my case. I had hundreds games in the past few years that such scenario played out and people were pressing surrender button to just troll. Don't enable trolls

And again. When you join game. You declare being ready despite the outcome of the game. If you wanna leave. Go ahead, but be punished for wasting someone's time

But you shouldn't have the right to tell a user, no you have to stay here, sure we lost a player and now we have to play an unfair match 4vs5, but you have to stay here. You shouldn't be able to do that. That's not what that user signed up for. That would be trolling. You'd lock someone into a match despite them not wanting to be there and it not being right for them to be there anymore. They shouldn't incur a penalty for leaving a match where they aren't the cause why the scales aren't even anymore.

Again I said I agree it sucks it happened in your scenario, but the only reasonable solution I see to this, is to advocate so that members from the team that lost members can leave the match without incurring a penalty and for the match to keep going unless a surrender vote happens and all agree to it or no one else is left on the enemy team. However, to make it ok for the enemy team as well, because they also didn't sign up to play a 5vs4, if they wish they should also be allowed to leave at that point, without incurring a penalty, and without having to be stuck in the match. Lastly, the match should not give any rank MMR with the exception of the person who abandoned or who is qued with him(assuming they leave the match or lose the match), giving them an instant loss mmr, such that they don't get to abuse these features.

[Artos]

Originally posted by Artos:

Sure, and to that degree, I actually advocate for harsher cooldowns, now I now valve wouldn't do that because the player base would take a major hit, but I think abandoning should start with a 1 day ban going to 30 days or more, not 30 minutes.

Originally posted by KING:

I disagree it's just protecting trolls, this isn't what this does for the majority of the time. You need to think about your 1 case scenario, and where this is used mostly. Most 4vs5 are lost, again. Not sure why you don't want to admit that. Sure you were winning 1 4vs5, it happens, that's cool, I've done it too before. But in most cases, you will lose a 4sv5, so you're just stuck there while others just keep on wanting to try. keeping you stuck in the match. But you qued for a 5vs5. So why should you be forced to play a 4vs5 when that's not what you signed up for. Why should you take a penalty for leaving a 4vs5 when that's not what you signed up for? So it makes no sense to me. It's unfortunate if you were winning but in most cases this is not that scenario, this is about most cases, and that's why I suggested you advocate for a solution that allows these players to leave, but lets you stay there although doesn't give mmr, because again in order to gain rank from it, you signed up for a 5vs5 not a 4vs5 not a 3vs5, so even if you can win 3vs5, you signed up for something else, so it shouldn't count to the rank. While yes this feature will probably ruin some matches that are winnable as yours, it will save millions of players hundreds of millions of wasted hours over time, in matches they would be stuck otherwise until they still take a defeat, and it would only push them further away from the game.

Still. Its a team's decision. Its a team player game. Individuals should not be making such decisions. It was just fine for the last 10 years. Idk why it should change now. I didn't see anyone complaining and current system enables trolls. Why have a vote if it doesn't matter ?
Its a waste of my time if game is surrendered. You will never know the outcome of the game untill it ends. Current system works on assumption that people are perfect, can't do any harm. While in fact and especially in case of CSGO, player base is toxic and they troll more often than play. This just makes games more wasteful

I guess I will have to start kicking players that do nothing so I can play peacfully without worring that I lose a game that is 12-5

[KING]

Originally posted by KING:

Still. Its a team's decision. Its a team player game. Individuals should not be making such decisions. It was just fine for the last 10 years. Idk why it should change now. I didn't see anyone complaining and current system enables trolls. Why have a vote if it doesn't matter ?
Its a waste of my time if game is surrendered. You will never know the outcome of the game untill it ends. Current system works on assumption that people are perfect, can't do any harm. While in fact and especially in case of CSGO, player base is toxic and they troll more often than play. This just makes games more wasteful

I guess I will have to start kicking players that do nothing so I can play peacfully without worring that I lose a game that is 12-5

I mean I don't see the point of making people sweat their balls out to try and win and defend on ct side because someone else already left and they have to endure the rest of the match at a higher stake than the other team, or risk getting a cooldown. That makes no sense either. They're probably using the same functionality they used for the vote, but they changed the required amount of votes for it to go through.

The thing is they call it competitive for a reason. People que up and leave. Demoralizes the rest of the team, they throw left and right, etc. Thats why I advocate for longer cooldowns. Sure, maybe you lose power one time and lets say you can't play comp for the rest of the day or for a week. What's the next excuse gonna be? Ending the match in that case so you can just move on already and try again is the most reasonable solution, rather than force some attempt at winning it only so you can ♥♥♥♥ on the enemy team at how bad they are for losing a 4vs5 or to meme them, that's also super toxic. Like even if you win in a 4vs5 situation, how many times are those players not like "noobs, lost a 4vs5, lmao rekt, destroyed and we had one less, lmao bots". It just promotes toxicity.

Just keep in mind kicking too many players results in a griefing ban.