Quitting Low in Tournaments (Split Topic)

[The_Revelation]

This is a split topic from the Deep Six 5/11/2014 tournament discussion. The topic shifted enough towards needing its own thread.



I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

[-LanceheaD-]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Definitely agreed on this one.

[goober]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Definitely agreed on this one.

idk, quitting low is essentially the opposite of an intentional die down in terms of its implications. at least something set forth so we dont have shmucks coming in and out trolling people.

[theintern]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Definitely agreed on this one.

idk, quitting low is essentially the opposite of an intentional die down in terms of its implications. at least something set forth so we dont have shmucks coming in and out trolling people.

I agree. K-K quit low when 1 up and I had him in a 2v1 and sidewinder quit when there were 2or 3 of us shooting him after Mia died. If I had gotten one of those kills which I had a good chance at doing I would have won a cup. It affected the outcome for me as much as someone dieing down and ditto for anyone who had Evangeline or boogy quit. Sidewinder even came back in towards the end to spam who's your daddy. Just absolute trolling.

I think quitting low was particularly magnified this tournament where only 3 people made captain and there only ended up being two captains at the end

[-LanceheaD-]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Definitely agreed on this one.

idk, quitting low is essentially the opposite of an intentional die down in terms of its implications. at least something set forth so we dont have shmucks coming in and out trolling people.

I agree. K-K quit low when 1 up and I had him in a 2v1 and sidewinder quit when there were 2or 3 of us shooting him after Mia died. If I had gotten one of those kills which I had a good chance at doing I would have won a cup. It affected the outcome for me as much as someone dieing down and ditto for anyone who had Evangeline or boogy quit. Sidewinder even came back in towards the end to spam who's your daddy. Just absolute trolling.

I think quitting low was particularly magnified this tournament where only 3 people made captain and there only ended up being two captains at the end

No, it didn't affect anyone. It never gave a kill to you or ANYONE, therefore, it is a level disadvantage. Whereas dying down, gives the unfair advantage to whoever gets the kill. Quitting low never hurt anyone except for the time people waste to teleport to the low quitter's site and shoot the ground as he misses when the quitter quits out. You can't ever assume you were going to get the kill when there are 2 or more of you. If it didn't benefit anyone, I think it's fine. No doubt though it sucks and is pretty lame, but like rev said I would say it would be no more than a reputation tarnish.

[-LanceheaD-]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Definitely agreed on this one.

idk, quitting low is essentially the opposite of an intentional die down in terms of its implications. at least something set forth so we dont have shmucks coming in and out trolling people.

I do think it does suck though when people quit out, i just dont think they should be banned for it. Maybe a tournament only mechanism that makes it so you cannot quit out until 10 seconds AFTER the last person shoots you. (this is a similar mechanism in the wilderness in Runescape back when i played... it basically made it so people cannot log out whilst being attacked) They can quit out before they get attacked though or 10 seconds after the last shot hits them.

[PD3.0]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Yes, yes....

B00GY, Evangeline, and -SidewindeR-'s reputation will surely be affected.


Your point is moot when people are doing this on tanks that are have never seen the light of the main map, or any other tourney for that matter and now of course, they will never admit to playing said tank after that brouhaha yesterday.

You want to play it that way? Fine, we'll do IP look-ups after every tourney of all the people who quit low to confirm their identifiable main tank name, then tar and feather the shit out of them.

No, it didn't affect anyone. It never gave a kill to you or ANYONE, therefore, it is a level disadvantage. Whereas dying down, gives the unfair advantage to whoever gets the kill. Quitting low never hurt anyone except for the time people waste to teleport to the low quitter's site and shoot the ground as he misses when the quitter quits out. You can't ever assume you were going to get the kill when there are 2 or more of you. If it didn't benefit anyone, I think it's fine. No doubt though it sucks and is pretty lame, but like rev said I would say it would be no more than a reputation tarnish.

It did. 4 separate people quit out low. 4 kills that, had they not quit out, WOULD have happened undoubtedly. It doesn't matter about a specific tank getting the kill. By quitting out low, the quitter and the quitter alone control the outcome, THAT is what is unfair, plain and simple. For all I know, every single one of the people who quit out yesterday had a friend who was in 1st place or 2nd place, and quit out just to save their placing. Not to mention the fact that a couple of them were trolling by entering and exiting the map continually. These people do not seem like noobs, except K-K I'll give him that. They are doing this maliciously to ruin tournaments simply because they can.


I still run on the platform of Tournament Ban. You don't play fair, you don't play at all(for a short period). Tourney's should be a privilege. Much like prison, don't be an idiot and you'll have the privilege to stay in the free world. Don't be an idiot and you'll have the privilege to play tournies.

[goober]

It doesnt matter if the unfairness is specifically targeted to help one person (ie a free kill) or to harm multiple people from getting a potential kill and cup (ie quitting low). Quitting low also puts the strain of people teleporting halfway across the map when they come in and out of the game putting people at disadvantages. I'd say either have some sort of IP tagging system so we know at least at the end of the tournament who was who. Or we have some sort of voting system to vote for people who played unfairly to bring it to the attention of SW.

[Bunker Hill]

So if someone makes Major in a tournament they can't just leave? They are going to cup so why stay in for the remainder of the time? What if someone has to leave during the tourny, now they can't quit? What happens to their tank if they pull the plug or close the browser? I have full armors and am being attacked but I have to leave the game, now I can't because I am low on fuel and being attacked with full armors? I think it is a critical part of the game being able to quit out, while yes, it does cost a player a promotion, it is not given to any player therefore is a fair move; dishonorable and reputation ruining of which this community has no issue doing and making a point of. There will always be a player doing this and it is a critical part of the game. New player is number 17 and while they aren't going to cup, seeing their name on the leader board for 17th is rewarding to them. If you put them in a position that they cannot see an achievement, how do you expect them to continue to participate and add value to the game?

I'm pretty sure we all realize this and maybe this is more a gripe session for those affected by it, however, I'm sure we can all agree that it is a needed feature of the game including in tournaments.

[weekend_nachos]

Bunker, what you are describing are scenarios far different than what we've been discussing. The fact remains that seasoned players are purposely quitting low and trolling the map to alter the potential results of the tournament. Some even posting in this thread, but not admitting their fault, even though its pretty blatantly obvious who it was.

I can understand newbies quitting low, but when it's seasoned players with an agenda, it's something else on a whole different level, and deserves a level of punishment if it can be dealt. And it usually comes from them wanting to protect their rank because they might still be in place to cup, placing to cup, have friends in the top spots they dont want to have bumped, dont like the player that could potentially kill them and so on. And that's not right. If you get caught fair and square, that's your own fault, quitting to avoid that is absolute cowardice.

Anybody can quit the tourn whenever, but when they're blackfueled and screwed on their own accord, in my opinion the Q button should be disabled till they get enough fuel to teleport. I've seen many people lose out on kills and cups cause of that. If K K didnt quit out last night there's a good chance the intern might be sitting with a cup right now, and he definitely deserves it.

[Bunker Hill]

Yes, my misinterpretation of the conversation. Wouldn't that involve, to an extent, invasion of privacy and right to play as one chooses? By using the IP to see who has been purposely abusing the "Q" key does that single out a seasoned player in the same way as it would a new player? Can you really justify the case if it is acceptable for one and not the other?

Not trying to start or add to this great debate, but uniformity also must be given scrutiny to the situation. SW probably does not want to play tournament police and if he did take action against those who 'Q' low purposely (How do you define this) he would have to apply it across the board.

How would you act against someone if they didn't press 'Q' but closed the browser? What about the person who pulls the plug or has a power outage? The system can still be abused by these factors which may or may not be true of the player. Perhaps if multiple offenses took place, but then the abusers could just IP spoof and there would be no concrete evidence, unless SW can pull MAC addresses...

Anyways, I am interested in your thoughts Nachos, and anyone else for that matter...SW...

[The_Revelation]

Bunker, what you are describing are scenarios far different than what we've been discussing. The fact remains that seasoned players are purposely quitting low and trolling the map to alter the potential results of the tournament. Some even posting in this thread, but not admitting their fault, even though its pretty blatantly obvious who it was.

I can understand newbies quitting low, but when it's seasoned players with an agenda, it's something else on a whole different level, and deserves a level of punishment if it can be dealt. And it usually comes from them wanting to protect their rank because they might still be in place to cup, placing to cup, have friends in the top spots they dont want to have bumped, dont like the player that could potentially kill them and so on. And that's not right. If you get caught fair and square, that's your own fault, quitting to avoid that is absolute cowardice.

Anybody can quit the tourn whenever, but when they're blackfueled and screwed on their own accord, in my opinion the Q button should be disabled till they get enough fuel to teleport. I've seen many people lose out on kills and cups cause of that. If K K didnt quit out last night there's a good chance the intern might be sitting with a cup right now, and he definitely deserves it.

Nachos, I agree with you on every level but there are two different points being discussed here. The "Existing Reality" and the "Desired Reality".

Existing Reality
Quitting low is aloud in the main map and in tournaments. It has always been aloud for veterans and noobies since 1997 and will continue to be aloud - so we can stop barking bans at people because its not against any rules.


Desired Reality
Most of us would love a "delay" on quitting while in battle, only in tournaments. This would be similar to Runescape like Lancehead said - you cannot quit if you have been shot within 10 seconds (The specifics of this kind of mechanism is a entire thread of its own, but the details are irrelevant to the main point). This would allow for better flow in tournaments and prevent veterans from trolling people. It would also prevent people who miscalculate their shields in the last minute and quit out to prevent losing a cup position (I have a huge personal beef with that one). Like I said in my above post though, SW could easily implement this, and this is likely not the first time its come up in discussion - so we can assume that he does not think that it will benefit the game.

[-LanceheaD-]

I didn't play it. But as far as quitting low in tournaments in concerned - I do not agree that players should get any length of ban for it.

If SW didn't want it to happen in tournaments it would be a very easy fix (not like free kills or die downs). Yes, It really sucks and I think that players should be called out when they do it - but nothing further than a reputation tarnish is required.

Yes, yes....

B00GY, Evangeline, and -SidewindeR-'s reputation will surely be affected.


Your point is moot when people are doing this on tanks that are have never seen the light of the main map, or any other tourney for that matter and now of course, they will never admit to playing said tank after that brouhaha yesterday.

You want to play it that way? Fine, we'll do IP look-ups after every tourney of all the people who quit low to confirm their identifiable main tank name, then tar and feather the shit out of them.

No, it didn't affect anyone. It never gave a kill to you or ANYONE, therefore, it is a level disadvantage. Whereas dying down, gives the unfair advantage to whoever gets the kill. Quitting low never hurt anyone except for the time people waste to teleport to the low quitter's site and shoot the ground as he misses when the quitter quits out. You can't ever assume you were going to get the kill when there are 2 or more of you. If it didn't benefit anyone, I think it's fine. No doubt though it sucks and is pretty lame, but like rev said I would say it would be no more than a reputation tarnish.

It did. 4 separate people quit out low. 4 kills that, had they not quit out, WOULD have happened undoubtedly. It doesn't matter about a specific tank getting the kill. By quitting out low, the quitter and the quitter alone control the outcome, THAT is what is unfair, plain and simple. For all I know, every single one of the people who quit out yesterday had a friend who was in 1st place or 2nd place, and quit out just to save their placing. Not to mention the fact that a couple of them were trolling by entering and exiting the map continually. These people do not seem like noobs, except K-K I'll give him that. They are doing this maliciously to ruin tournaments simply because they can.


I still run on the platform of Tournament Ban. You don't play fair, you don't play at all(for a short period). Tourney's should be a privilege. Much like prison, don't be an idiot and you'll have the privilege to stay in the free world. Don't be an idiot and you'll have the privilege to play tournies.

Like rev mentioned again, I like the whole quitting out delay mechanism in tournaments similar to what was in runescape. And I still stand by what I said that it didn't affect anyone in any favorable way, therefore it is a LEVEL disadvantage. Because it is unfair to ALL, it then becomes FAIR because it affects everyone in a similar manner. It's as if they never played (except for like i said, the time and energy to teleport to that site to shoot the quitter). Putting hard restrictions in something that has been around for over a decade is a big move and should be done in a systematic step by step way. I think a delay in quitting out would be a good one to implement and would be more of a "soft" restriction than a "hard" one.

[-Kirby-]

I really don't think it is a level disadvantage, certainly not all the time. The most prominent example of course being if say player 'A' spends ten minutes armoring down a newbie and nobody else notices, only to have that newbie quit low on them 1v1 as they are about to die.

Even so, I also think player 'A' would be disadvantaged unfairly if they were to get low-quit-on after positioning themself on the killing side of a 3v1, for example. That's a 33% chance of scoring a kill - and if this were to happen to them 3 or more times in the same tournament, I think it would stand to reason to say player 'A' was likely to have scored a kill if players didn't quit low on them (probability-wise, three 3v1s would have yielded a ~70% chance of scoring a kill in the tournament)

It doesn't affect everyone in the tournament evenly - it disadvantages the players that were there when the q-low occurred. Subtracting a screen in which player 'A' earned a 33% chance at scoring a kill creates a disadvantage to player 'A' and the other two tanks that were going for it, and in-turn creates an advantage for everyone else that wasn't there (since one less adversary will have ranked as a result)

For a simpler yet extreme example: if ten players quit low on player 'A' in one tournament, and in the same tournament only one player quits low on player 'B', it can usually (almost definitely) be said that by low-quitting being allowed, player 'A' was unfairly disadvantaged relative to player 'B' - never mind the rest of the map

Positioning is, of course, considered a skill. When you are present for a killscreen, you are at an advantage relative to everyone else in the tournament that isn't there. It doesn't matter if there are two or twenty tanks shooting the victim, having X% chance at a kill is an advantage over 0% chance at a kill. Low quitting takes away the advantage that the tanks on the killscreen earned (or lucked into) by being there.

I think it only levels out if every tank in the tournament is on the killscreen, which is extremely unlikely

No, it didn't affect anyone. It never gave a kill to you or ANYONE, therefore, it is a level disadvantage.

I think the key to this is that a chance at a kill is advantageous to no chance at a kill in the first place. Being there for a potential kill creates an advantage over those that aren't there. Therefore a low-quit disadvantages those that were there, and in turn advantages everyone that wasn't.

Not that it was mentioned but who actually would have gotten the kill if a low-quit hadn't occurred is also likely to be irrelevant in this discussion

[weekend_nachos]

And I still stand by what I said that it didn't affect anyone in any favorable way, therefore it is a LEVEL disadvantage.

So who were you in this tournament eh?

[PD3.0]

Like rev mentioned again, I like the whole quitting out delay mechanism in tournaments similar to what was in runescape. And I still stand by what I said that it didn't affect anyone in any favorable way, therefore it is a LEVEL disadvantage. Because it is unfair to ALL, it then becomes FAIR because it affects everyone in a similar manner. It's as if they never played (except for like i said, the time and energy to teleport to that site to shoot the quitter). Putting hard restrictions in something that has been around for over a decade is a big move and should be done in a systematic step by step way. I think a delay in quitting out would be a good one to implement and would be more of a "soft" restriction than a "hard" one.

Stop using that oxymoron. Firstly, that term does not exist anywhere, and even if it did, you're still wrong.

There is no such thing as a level disadvantage. You cannot have a level disadvantage, it's just called a DISADVANTAGE. If it were level, it wouldn't be a disadvantage.

Kirby put it more eloquently but I'll put it simply. It's a disadvantage to all who were after the kill and it's an advantage to all of those who don't need a kill. For example, all the people that have already made capt are at an advantage points wise and rank wise because many people have just chased around a low quitter wasting good pph and never getting a kill. It's a disadvantage because people who have already made Captain just happened to be lucky enough not to have some jerkoff quit out low on them during their ranking kill. And if you happen to be one of those people...

Congratulations! You just achieved an Unlevel Advantage

[goober]

And I still stand by what I said that it didn't affect anyone in any favorable way, therefore it is a LEVEL disadvantage.

So who were you in this tournament eh?

Lancehead tell that to #2 pph lt who couldve gotten a kill and 2nd place EASILY.

[eldawg51]

I really don't think it is a level disadvantage, certainly not all the time. The most prominent example of course being if say player 'A' spends ten minutes armoring down a newbie and nobody else notices, only to have that newbie quit low on them 1v1 as they are about to die.

Even so, I also think player 'A' would be disadvantaged unfairly if they were to get low-quit-on after positioning themself on the killing side of a 3v1, for example. That's a 33% chance of scoring a kill - and if this were to happen to them 3 or more times in the same tournament, I think it would stand to reason to say player 'A' was likely to have scored a kill if players didn't quit low on them (probability-wise, three 3v1s would have yielded a ~70% chance of scoring a kill in the tournament)

It doesn't affect everyone in the tournament evenly - it disadvantages the players that were there when the q-low occurred. Subtracting a screen in which player 'A' earned a 33% chance at scoring a kill creates a disadvantage to player 'A' and the other two tanks that were going for it, and in-turn creates an advantage for everyone else that wasn't there (since one less adversary will have ranked as a result)

For a simpler yet extreme example: if ten players quit low on player 'A' in one tournament, and in the same tournament only one player quits low on player 'B', it can usually (almost definitely) be said that by low-quitting being allowed, player 'A' was unfairly disadvantaged relative to player 'B' - never mind the rest of the map


Positioning is, of course, considered a skill. When you are present for a killscreen, you are at an advantage relative to everyone else in the tournament that isn't there. It doesn't matter if there are two or twenty tanks shooting the victim, having X% chance at a kill is an advantage over 0% chance at a kill. Low quitting takes away the advantage that the tanks on the killscreen earned (or lucked into) by being there.

I think it only levels out if every tank in the tournament is on the killscreen, which is extremely unlikely

No, it didn't affect anyone. It never gave a kill to you or ANYONE, therefore, it is a level disadvantage.

I think the key to this is that a chance at a kill is advantageous to no chance at a kill in the first place. Being there for a potential kill creates an advantage over those that aren't there. Therefore a low-quit disadvantages those that were there, and in turn advantages everyone that wasn't.

Not that it was mentioned but who actually would have gotten the kill if a low-quit hadn't occurred is also likely to be irrelevant in this discussion

I love your logic, Kirby.

[-LanceheaD-]

Kirby, I see your point. Some of your cases you mentioned are more extreme cases and your other is more of a normal occurrence. I do see that it is a disadvantage when you do not succeed at the chance at killing someone. I guess what I saw it as is personally, either way if I was shooting someone 1 v 1 and wasted all their armors, I am getting points (pph) so it's not like I didn't get anything from it, whether a kill or not. Also, I usually assume 1 v 1 killings are very rare simply because in a tournament many people are aware of who is low and teleport in to snag a kill. It's just more unlikely than not that someone can 1 v 1 another's armors all the way down without a small mob noticing.

My main point was I dont think that quitting low in a tournament warrants being banned. I think it is just looked down upon. It is not like getting a free kill, which I tend to think more of as a blatant form of cheating. Therefore, i'm not opposed to implementing a quitting low delay mechanism in tournies.

Weekend, if you must know, I was -SidewindeR-. Surprised you didn't already accuse me if you were going to ask that question. :/ All I will say for this, is d6 is the shittiest tourney map I know of. It's one of those tourney maps that I just play however I feel like cause its just so different, largely water. What I did at around the 45 min mark was I saw someone pretty dead low with minimal equipment and noticed that he was going to be trapped in the mid top big island. I, having only a half tank of fuel, decide to just go for it and try to kill him (when I teleported on him, i had like 1/6 of a fuel tank... pretty low but enough to keep shooting and teleporting if he moves a little bit off screen). I also knew that were I to do this, the mob would instantly go after me if I killed him or when this target died. As my fuel bar inched lower and lower firing my shots away, I decided oh well... no other chance at getting close to cupping (I already gave up pph at the 15 min mark) just stay and shoot until he dies. By the time he died, I had maybe just over 5%...fuel tank not enough to get off the "big island" i was on. So to just prevent a free suicide kill, I quit out with minimal fuel instantly after this target died. Personally, I just thought of this as a risky but warranted intentional suicide type of last resort move to just risk it all. At the time I quit low, I had about 82 armors (i started at 92 armors as a part of mob) because of one guy in the mob that started shooting me instead of the main targ seconds before the target died. So I purposefully didn't come in until the last 45 seconds again as to avoid giving any individual a kill just to see the last few seconds of it.

Do I think it was wrong for a veteran to try at this type of chicken scratch? Yes, but I guess it was a decision I made based on the circumstances and I felt it was one of those gray areas in tournament controversy that I decided to act upon. I think that would be the first time in TP2 I've quit low in a tourney.. I mean if you have to quit low, you are essentially eliminated from the running of cupping, so it is to most people's advantage to not quit out. If one does though, "tough luck for them" is how i feel towards them, basically they forfeited their chance at that tournament is how I see it. Unfortunately, I guess I did negatively affect 6 or 7 players to void them of a chance at getting a kill on me (which would have followed in probably 30-40 seconds). Because the "raid" on me literally JUST started with only the first shot or two fired, I figured that would be the only time I would quit low to minimize that impact on everyone, at the start of it.. If I had like 5 or 10 armors, I would have died a normal death.


I just thought about this a little more and realized this is the underlying reason I quit low....I put myself PURPOSEFULLY on my own accord in a suicide position to risk getting a kill, so because it wasn't really anyone earning a kill on me by their doing, but by my OWN doing, I didn't feel like giving away a sort of "free" kill. I felt like no one actually deserved that kill because it was a suicide mission, esp with that size mob, so I decided no one should have it. That's why I quit out immediately after the target died and I therefore, forfeited my running in the tournament. I saw it as an internal loss not a loss to everyone else.

I play this game to have fun and play by the "rules" as much as possible. Like for example, there is no rule explicitly forbidding cupping other's tanks... but people really don't like this apparently. Not a rule, but more of a no-no, apparently. But sometimes I take things into my own hands depending on the situation. As for me quitting low, you're right there would have been a chance that 1 of around 7 people could have gotten a kill on me. If you think I deserve a ban, have at it... I will take what the community think is deserved of this action. Thanks weekend for speaking up.

[theintern]

Kirby, I see your point. Some of your cases you mentioned are more extreme cases and your other is more of a normal occurrence. I do see that it is a disadvantage when you do not succeed at the chance at killing someone. I guess what I saw it as is personally, either way if I was shooting someone 1 v 1 and wasted all their armors, I am getting points (pph) so it's not like I didn't get anything from it, whether a kill or not. Also, I usually assume 1 v 1 killings are very rare simply because in a tournament many people are aware of who is low and teleport in to snag a kill. It's just more unlikely than not that someone can 1 v 1 another's armors all the way down without a small mob noticing.

My main point was I dont think that quitting low in a tournament warrants being banned. I think it is just looked down upon. It is not like getting a free kill, which I tend to think more of as a blatant form of cheating. Therefore, i'm not opposed to implementing a quitting low delay mechanism in tournies.

Weekend, if you must know, I was -SidewindeR-. Surprised you didn't already accuse me if you were going to ask that question. :/ All I will say for this, is d6 is the shittiest tourney map I know of. It's one of those tourney maps that I just play however I feel like cause its just so different, largely water. What I did at around the 45 min mark was I saw someone pretty dead low with minimal equipment and noticed that he was going to be trapped in the mid top big island. I, having only a half tank of fuel, decide to just go for it and try to kill him (when I teleported on him, i had like 1/6 of a fuel tank... pretty low but enough to keep shooting and teleporting if he moves a little bit off screen). I also knew that were I to do this, the mob would instantly go after me if I killed him or when this target died. As my fuel bar inched lower and lower firing my shots away, I decided oh well... no other chance at getting close to cupping (I already gave up pph at the 15 min mark) just stay and shoot until he dies. By the time he died, I had maybe just over 5%...fuel tank not enough to get off the "big island" i was on. So to just prevent a free suicide kill, I quit out with minimal fuel instantly after this target died. Personally, I just thought of this as a risky but warranted intentional suicide type of last resort move to just risk it all. At the time I quit low, I had about 82 armors (i started at 92 armors as a part of mob) because of one guy in the mob that started shooting me instead of the main targ seconds before the target died. So I purposefully didn't come in until the last 45 seconds again as to avoid giving any individual a kill just to see the last few seconds of it. Do I think it was wrong for a veteran to try at this type of chicken scratch? Yes, but I guess it was a decision I made based on the circumstances and I felt it was one of those gray areas in tournament controversy that I decided to act upon. I think that would be the first time in TP2 I've done that.. I mean if you have to quit low, you are essentially eliminated from the running of cupping, so it is to most people's advantage to not quit out. If one does though, "tough luck for them" is how i feel towards them, basically they forfeited their chance at that tournament is how I see it. Unfortunately, I guess I did negatively affect 7 or 8 players to void them of a chance at getting a kill on me (which would have followed in probably 30-40 seconds). Because the "raid" on me literally JUST started with only the first shot or two fired, I figured that would be the only time I would quit low to minimize that impact on everyone, at the start of it.. If I had like 5 or 10 armors, I would have died a normal death.

I play this game to have fun and play by the "rules" as much as possible. Like for example, there is no rule explicitly forbidding cupping other's tanks... but people really don't like this apparently. Not a rule, but more of a no-no, apparently. But sometimes I take things into my own hands depending on the situation. As for me quitting low, you're right there would have been a chance that 1 of around 8 people could have gotten a kill on me. If you think I deserve a ban, have at it.. Thanks weekend for speaking up.

I was the guy shooting at you when MIA died. And yes there were a few of us (I remember at least two other people right there but I could be wrong, it was kind of heat of the moment, and if you had that many armors left I'm sure more people would have shown up while we were burning them) that were about to turn on you when you quit. The thing is I actually died to DEEP BLUE SEA really late in the tourney. Like you I realized the only hope at cupping was a kill and started being a lot more risky going after kills especially with about 10 minutes left and ended up fuel insufficient with 50 armors, but I figured if I died, it was a result of the way I was playing and it was part of the risk I was taking that someone may kill me and end up getting a cup because of that (it ended up being DBS, who I guess didn't have enough pts to make major, so not that much of an impact on the outcome). Oh well, I wish you hadn't quit in the chance that I could have had the kill. But I appreciate the honesty Lancehead :/

[eldawg51]

It's best to just not quit low at all...ever...in any situation. Problem solved.

Lancehead, that kind of shocks me. What if your targets you killed in that streak you had quit low before an imminent death? You wouldn't have had that streak. You took a risk and it didn't work so you quit, robbing everyone the chance at a kill in the process? I didn't even play and that annoys me, lol.

You're way too good a player to rationalize a dumb decision like that.

[-LanceheaD-]

I was the guy shooting at you when MIA died. And yes there were a few of us (I remember at least two other people right there but I could be wrong, it was kind of heat of the moment, and if you had that many armors left I'm sure more people would have shown up while we were burning them) that were about to turn on you when you quit. The thing is I actually died to DEEP BLUE SEA really late in the tourney. Like you I realized the only hope at cupping was a kill and started being a lot more risky going after kills especially with about 10 minutes left and ended up fuel insufficient with 50 armors, but I figured if I died, it was a result of the way I was playing and it was part of the risk I was taking that someone may kill me and end up getting a cup because of that (it ended up being DBS, who I guess didn't have enough pts to make major, so not that much of an impact on the outcome). Oh well, I wish you hadn't quit in the chance that I could have had the kill. But I appreciate the honesty Lancehead :/

Yea, I completely see what you are saying and sorry that you didn't have that chance. I have accepted a long time ago that tournaments never go the way you plan it and if someone quits out on you, you just have to move on. It's an extremely dynamic environment and you have to adjust to whatever happens, there are obviously risks when playing in a certain style. I went balls out unfortunately in this last one, and knew that my mission was cup or suicide, on my own accord. It wasn't a popular choice for me to quit out, but it is what happened. I was impressed at your playing though, are you new to TP2?

[-LanceheaD-]

It's best to just not quit low at all...ever...in any situation. Problem solved.

Lancehead, that kind of shocks me. What if your targets you killed in that streak you had quit low before an imminent death? You wouldn't have had that streak. You took a risk and it didn't work so you quit, robbing everyone the chance at a kill in the process? I didn't even play and that annoys me, lol.

I was essentially giving away a free kill (to a mob, that would have undoubtedly grown because I had nearly full armors when i quit). I didn't feel it was deserved (as a free kill never is deserved), so I quit out before anything could develop. Thats how I thought of it at that spur of the moment. Lol, sorry that annoys you though.. i wont do it again. D6 is the one map that tempts me in this way... just because of how shitty of a map it is. It wasnt the right decision though, so I'm sorry.

But like i said earlier, if you want to prevent all this, I wouldn't mind a quitting out delay mechanism in tournaments. I'm sure it would benefit us all.

[eldawg51]

I'm not saying it's not tempting to hit the 'q' when I know I've screwed myself. It's annoying to have to sit there and watch 90 shields get drained and there is nothing you can do. Happened to me in a couple tournaments. It's more annoying on the flip side though, especially in tournies when kills aren't a prevalent as they used to be.

It's all good though man, I know you won't let it happen again. You the man!

[theintern]

I was the guy shooting at you when MIA died. And yes there were a few of us (I remember at least two other people right there but I could be wrong, it was kind of heat of the moment, and if you had that many armors left I'm sure more people would have shown up while we were burning them) that were about to turn on you when you quit. The thing is I actually died to DEEP BLUE SEA really late in the tourney. Like you I realized the only hope at cupping was a kill and started being a lot more risky going after kills especially with about 10 minutes left and ended up fuel insufficient with 50 armors, but I figured if I died, it was a result of the way I was playing and it was part of the risk I was taking that someone may kill me and end up getting a cup because of that (it ended up being DBS, who I guess didn't have enough pts to make major, so not that much of an impact on the outcome). Oh well, I wish you hadn't quit in the chance that I could have had the kill. But I appreciate the honesty Lancehead :/

Yea, I completely see what you are saying and sorry that you didn't have that chance. I have accepted a long time ago that tournaments never go the way you plan it and if someone quits out on you, you just have to move on. It's an extremely dynamic environment and you have to adjust to whatever happens, there are obviously risks when playing in a certain style. I went balls out unfortunately in this last one, and knew that my mission was cup or suicide, on my own accord. It wasn't a popular choice for me to quit out, but it is what happened. I was impressed at your playing though, are you new to TP2?

Thanks man, yeah I just started playing about a month ago and already am at 92 hours and about to get a shiner haha I forgot how addicting this game is. I used to play bf but I don't think any of my tanks were that memorable.

Yes it is the choice you made and like I said, respect for stepping up and admitting it. I know that you are a great player, I've seen you on the main field crush raids and I know you're great at tourneys from reading here too. It was just frustrating because that incident happened right after K-K quit but I know tourneys are dynamic and cups are something I'm going to have to work for because I was never that great at them on BF (I only won one bronze cup in the 10 to 15 tourneys I played on bf I think lol). I just disagree with your reasoning to quit out because you intentionally went in low on fuel trying to get a kill because you thought you would have been giving away a free one. Like I said, the same thing happened to me later in the tournament going into a mob low trying to score a kill and I ended up dying. I just thought it was part of the strategy aspect of the game. The more desperate you get, the more likely you are to make mistakes and other people can capitalize on them. But it is what it is and I don't hold a grudge or anything. This was only the second TP tourney I've played, so I guess I will have to pay my dues before I can win a cup. I'm gonna try to play again Thursday :)

[987]

kirby usin the brain ftw

ban them all. just as bad as intentionally dying down, almost as bad as collaboration. watching people in 18th who should know better quit low is part of why i left this shithole in the first place. if you're not good enough to survive without quitting, thats your problem, not your attackers. they shouldn't be penalized in time/opportunity cost because you happen to be a little bitch. get better or get killed

[tournamentJESUS]

kirby usin the brain ftw

ban them all. just as bad as intentionally dying down, almost as bad as collaboration. watching people in 18th who should know better quit low is part of why i left this shithole in the first place. if you're not good enough to survive without quitting, thats your problem, not your attackers. they shouldn't be penalized in time/opportunity cost because you happen to be a little bitch. get better or get killed

gospel.

[-LanceheaD-]

kirby usin the brain ftw

ban them all. just as bad as intentionally dying down, almost as bad as collaboration. watching people in 18th who should know better quit low is part of why i left this shithole in the first place. if you're not good enough to survive without quitting, thats your problem, not your attackers. they shouldn't be penalized in time/opportunity cost because you happen to be a little bitch. get better or get killed

if it really is as bad as you say it is, there should be a note in the tournament window saying "NOTE: No quitting low! Quitting low is cheating!". Just like it says "No free kills, this is cheating!". I feel if SW believed it was severe enough to be considered cheating, it would say that in the window. But, if you guys want to change tournaments to enforce this, speak to SW and make him believe that a quitting low stopping mechanism should be implemented. I would be for this.

Also 987, I'm sorry you left because of reasons like this. As a player who has seen a lot, esp in tournaments, I would think you understand that the game is not perfect, and there are always people who simply don't play exactly how you want them to. I have learned to just accept that as part of the game, and really all I can do is my part... controlling what I do and so I will do so in a better way in the future. I try to enjoy tournaments for what it actually is in reality and it still is fun and challenging even though some people don't play honorablly all the time. Dont let others determine if you can enjoy or play a game or not. Don't let others sour you into a grumpy old lemon head.



HONOR: Thanks, you are the kind of player that I am willing to listen to because you listen. You are there to make the game better, not to unreasonably slander and jump at other's throats to make yourself look better. We need people to help improve the game and players, not drive others away from the game. You look for solutions and ways to move forward and don't hold grudges. We need more reasonable people like you.



theintern: It is a part of the strategy of the game, don't do what I did. Sweet man, better luck next time!

[987]

i learned to accept it too. my method of acceptance was leaving. i've seen everything in a tournament that there is to be seen, and upon my departure a lot of what i was seeing was the same old shit that erodes the game (including and especially in the regular map), even in the absence of collaboration. it was almost embarrassing to witness, and it was embarrassing to keep investing the same "capital" (debate, time, etc) and seeing no new results. that's also the definition of insanity, and if it simply wasn't good enough in the moment with no future prospects for progress, there was no purpose in continuing.

a major part of my problem is the pursuit of perfection, or at the very least semi-ideal conditions that enable healthy and interesting competition. it simply didn't appear as though we were going to get to where i (perhaps unrealistically) wanted, especially because the experience can be tarnished by a minority of one. if all it takes is one, and more often than not you see a bit more than one, then what are the odds of "getting there"? terrible. so again, the solution was to leave, at least until my fire for the game returns, which it undoubtedly will eventually. it is a problem though if it keeps going out for the same reasons, and if a decent enough chunk of the community has issue with the same bullshit, something should be done.

however the fault partially lies with yourselves, especially as you continue to default to sw. it's not entirely on sw's head to keep you stupid fucks in line. how soon you guys forget, that for over 10 years the social aspect/consequences of the game were in the hands of the people, not the developer? what happened to the deterrents that were used in those days? ban the faggots from the forums, bar them from teams, shun those who associate with them, but make sure you at least try to enlighten them first.. a major issue in the last few years has been an overabundance of posturing and "perspective", debate (which is generally good), but a complete lack of reaction/consequences to continued shenanigans. it's almost like collectively a lot of you have declined and denied the aspects of what constitutes positive reinforcement, and instead have accepted basically taking it up the ass.

why?

how hard is it really to just simply

1) not die intentionally in a tournament
2) not quit low in a tournament
3) not collaborate in a tournament
4) play the regular map with a healthy amount of respect and consideration for other players
5) not be a little bitch ALL the time


you're telling me its good to just accept that the community just can't quite handle these daunting guidelines? can't even ATTEMPT to enforce half of them?

get the fuck out

[-LanceheaD-]

i learned to accept it too. my method of acceptance was leaving. i've seen everything in a tournament that there is to be seen, and upon my departure a lot of what i was seeing was the same old shit that erodes the game (including and especially in the regular map), even in the absence of collaboration. it was almost embarrassing to witness, and it was embarrassing to keep investing the same "capital" (debate, time, etc) and seeing no new results. that's also the definition of insanity, and if it simply wasn't good enough in the moment with no future prospects for progress, there was no purpose in continuing.

a major part of my problem is the pursuit of perfection, or at the very least semi-ideal conditions that enable healthy and interesting competition. it simply didn't appear as though we were going to get to where i (perhaps unrealistically) wanted, especially because the experience can be tarnished by a minority of one. if all it takes is one, and more often than not you see a bit more than one, then what are the odds of "getting there"? terrible. so again, the solution was to leave, at least until my fire for the game returns, which it undoubtedly will eventually. it is a problem though if it keeps going out for the same reasons, and if a decent enough chunk of the community has issue with the same bullshit, something should be done.

however the fault partially lies with yourselves, especially as you continue to default to sw. it's not entirely on sw's head to keep you stupid fucks in line. how soon you guys forget, that for over 10 years the social aspect/consequences of the game were in the hands of the people, not the developer? what happened to the deterrents that were used in those days? ban the faggots from the forums, bar them from teams, shun those who associate with them, but make sure you at least try to enlighten them first.. a major issue in the last few years has been an overabundance of posturing and "perspective", debate (which is generally good), but a complete lack of reaction/consequences to continued shenanigans. it's almost like collectively a lot of you have declined and denied the aspects of what constitutes positive reinforcement, and instead have accepted basically taking it up the ass.

why?

how hard is it really to just simply

1) not die intentionally in a tournament
2) not quit low in a tournament
3) not collaborate in a tournament
4) play the regular map with a healthy amount of respect and consideration for other players
5) not be a little bitch ALL the time


you're telling me its good to just accept that the community just can't quite handle these daunting guidelines? can't even ATTEMPT to enforce half of them?

get the fuck out

If thats your attitude, theres obviously nothing more that can be done because you have just given up. You would be right to leave if you cant handle the idea that your ideal setting has to start with you, the player, not having that kind of attitude. If it's not SW we can rely on to enforce such an implementation (which I actually think is pretty easy), then it has to start with players, and thats you. If keeping people in line isn't SW's job, it must come from the community and leaders that have that a vision to have people play respectfully, like yourself. If you choose to leave, well then that doesn't do shit for anyone. You are not being realistic.

IF SW does something about it, it is a realistic and PRACTICAL means of achieving a desired result. You can't expect everyone to play a certain style just based on integrity, there will always be noobs/trolls/occasional foul play. If you really want an immediate reesult, you have to enforce it. Like you said, there are a lot of discussions but no actual actions. Well, the actions come from mechanisms in the game, that has to come from SW.

In the areas that we can't control, those should be remedied by leading by example.. I think thats really all we can do. Give positive feedback as well, this is huge. In all other areas where a practical implementation is reasonable and useful, SW can and should do those things. Go ahead and leave if thats how you cope with this, but if everyone coped with it like you, then the game would be deader than dead. If you actually care about achieving what you said above, you need to have a renewed attitude about the community, regardless of how bad it seems. If you truly want results like you imagine it, your leaving the game had better be a temporary one.

Youre obviously frustrated at the current state of affairs in tankpit. Do something about it. Lead, discuss, enforce, give positive and negative reinforcement where its due. Don't just spill your vision of an ideal tankpit and leave, and expect something to be done about it.

There are 3 things that can be done:
1. Implementing rules into game by SW (practical and achieves desired results)
2. Lead by example (definitely practical and can achieve desired results over time)
2a. Give positive feedback where due.
2b. Shun bad behavior and allow time and chances for improvement or change. Understand that for some it will take longer than others.
2ba. Don't give up until desired result achieved.
3. Ban only if necessary after multiple attempts at getting player to change behavior and giving fair attempts for them to improve. Attempt to communicate with them, and if they blatantly reject what is considered fair play and turn to foul play, then and only then, ban.