Why credit sharing is bad for gameplay

[zybork]

Well, i took some time to find a different approach, and surprise surpise, camping. Sprint if you see a goon, wait until tyr come to you and try to block it/trap it. Shoot dretches for free cash, do not even think to go outside and hunt if your team got no money.

YOU GOT IT! full ack.

[tuple]

I would like to build in some game logic so that poor players on a team don't impact the likelihood that the better team will win.  Perhaps we can make it an all bot game, and I can just join and watch a bot play for me, one who is no better, and no worse than the players on the opposite team.  That way it is fair and I don't have to deal with people doing dumbshit things, like feeding like I used to just cause they aren't that good yet.

Anyone who doesn't differentiate between types of feeders has only dealt with newb players, not noobs who will feed maliciously specifically to see how fast they can ruin a match without deconning.  Feeding is usually what happens when you try a new tactic for a few games, one you see really really good players trying, and it doesn't work out at all.  Or you're 1-2 months into the game.

A really good player takes the hits as they come, and they will come, and adjusts their strategy as needed to account for the varying capabilities of their teammates.  I've sat back and let my team feed an overall weaker human team, and as the human team attacked I racked up the kills, staged up, and pushed the humans back.

Not to be a complete asshole, although I can be at times, but feeding isn't the problem.  Your inability to deal with it is.

[Prince_Andrei]

Anyone who doesn't differentiate between types of feeders has only dealt with newb players, not noobs who will feed maliciously specifically to see how fast they can ruin a match without deconning.  Feeding is usually what happens when you try a new tactic for a few games, one you see really really good players trying, and it doesn't work out at all.  Or you're 1-2 months into the game.

Try to stay practical. My proposed mod allows players to experiment and only gives them a nudge when the feeding becomes preposterous. Also, newer players often don't understand staging. My suggestion (or something akin) is far better than have their team cursing at them and trying to kick them.

A really good player takes the hits as they come, and they will come, and adjusts their strategy as needed to account for the varying capabilities of their teammates.  I've sat back and let my team feed an overall weaker human team, and as the human team attacked I racked up the kills, staged up, and pushed the humans back.

Thanks for helping my argument. You managed to push back an overall weaker opponent. Good thing you weren't evenly matched (or worse), or their base attack probably would've ended the game. A really good player recognizes feeding on the opposition and translates it into a sub 10 minute win.

Not to be a complete asshole, although I can be at times, but feeding isn't the problem.  Your inability to deal with it is.

I think you missed asshole and wound up somewhere near douchebag territory.

[Nux]

constant
@Std = Standard Spawn Time (i.e., the amount of time it takes to spawn with one node/egg and no one in the queue)

variables
@feeds = how many feeds has the player had in the last 90 seconds or since the last kill, whichever is lower
@spawntime = if @feeds > 2 then [(@feeds - 1)^2 * @Std]/2 else @Std

When you say 'the last 90 seconds' do you mean the last 90 seconds of play? Otherwise their spawn times will fluctuate as the added time affects the rate at which they can feed. Consider the case of when their spawn time is equal to their 'judgement time' (10 feeds aprrox. taking standard to be 1 second approx. though spawning is instant when nobody is in queue). They wouldn't be punished for dying instantly for the next two times. Each time their spawn time grows too large it would 'renew' and have to build up again. Maybe this is good for those who want to change thier habits but it hardily seems rigorous.

Also, I hope you realise that this would no longer be a FIFO system which makes it a lot more ugly to handle.

[Prince_Andrei]

When you say 'the last 90 seconds' do you mean the last 90 seconds of play?

Yes, that is exactly what I mean Nux. I could've been more clear.

Also, I hope you realise that this would no longer be a FIFO system which makes it a lot more ugly to handle.

I agree this adds unnecessary complication. To simplify things instead of calculating spawn time it could calculate time to enter the queue. That's probably much cleaner and it retains the FIFO logic already in place.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

I think it would worth a test to see what happens if the 'kills needed counter' would be visible for both teams.
it's so simple yet so obvious, that it may change some (feeder) game habits almost instantly.
however, the suprise of the stage changes would lost (what also happens on maps that are using stage counting as a trigger method, like Uncreation or UTCS)... what I would miss.

[tuple]

when the feeding becomes preposterous. Also, newer players often don't understand staging.

feeding that is "preposterous" changes based on the team situation.  Sometimes ya gotta feed, sometimes its bad.  Perhaps we should just require half the people on the server to watch the other half and critique them so noone does anything stupid?

edit: forgot to mention, I've seen "old" players that don't understand staging, and think the only goal is stage 3, so, whatever.

Thanks for helping my argument. You managed to push back an overall weaker opponent. Good thing you weren't evenly matched (or worse), or their base attack probably would've ended the game.

Uh, the weaker team in terms of skill and strategy lost. The stronger team in terms of skill and strategy won, DESPITE the feeding of new players.  How exactly does that help your argument?  If the other team was better, they would have won with one of their base runs.  They would then be a better team.  My team won because we were an overall better team even with feeders, the better players knew how to counter it.  If you can't counter it, YOU are not a better player.

I think you missed asshole and wound up somewhere near douchebag territory.

wow, you're a prick and you're stupid, DOUBLE WIN!  Maybe you should learn to not suck, then I might care about your feeding complaints.

[Prince_Andrei]

You're a prick and you're stupid, DOUBLE WIN!  Maybe you should learn to not suck, then I might care about your feeding complaints.

Try re-reading the last several messages you've sent my direction and notice your attacking, mean-spirited tone and insults, none of which are lessened by the inclusion of a smiley face at the end. I've been nothing but polite, and I certainly haven't gotten that back from you in response. As far as learning not to suck goes... if you want to compare skills in-game, let me know where you usually play. We can settle who sucks more quite easily.

[benmachine]

I've been nothing but polite

I think you missed asshole and wound up somewhere near douchebag territory.

[Prince_Andrei]

Until that point, obviously. One can only take so much drama and attitude before getting tired of it.

Tuple and I can use private messages if we really want to discuss this further. Let's not ruin the topic.

[tuple]

"attacking, mean-spirited tone"

If you can successfully read tone from printed text, congratulations, you are the only person on this planet who never sends an email that is misinterpreted because the douchebag on the other end THINKS he can read tone from printed text.  Authors spend a lot of time perfecting it, so you should start teaching classes on it.

As far as your little pissing contest goes, I have clean pants so I don't take part in such things.  I'm sure you'll find some other way to expend your excess testosterone.

This is aside from the fact that I haven't stated that I'm all that good.  I only stated an example that demonstrates that your theory is at the very least incomplete, and very potentially flawed.  Incidentally, my example is generic, representing many, many, many such matches I've played across many servers using many different names, covering many years.  Thats 5 many too many for me to discount the many's.

You see, I am not a twitch gamer, I like the strategy.  I can clearly see how feeding can have a strategic advantage in many situations.  I can see how an opponent feeding on your teammate will become overconfident and leave their base less defended, and will devote less resources to building a secure base, or will not be so critical of the newb builder since they are convinced that they will win.  I particularly enjoy watching the opponent go in for that last base run to take out the aliens while I mara hop their RC and leave them little to come back to.  They'll get a lot more kills than me.  I don't care, I will win.

Feeding isn't the problem, players who think everyone else ruins the match for them is.

How can you marshal your other teammates into a strategy that takes the feeder into account?  How can you give a suggestion that helps the feeder actually get kills?  I've PMd feeders and given suggestions that they take, and then thank me for.  Do it in public, and they may feel embarrassed and ignore you, or feel like you are being haughty.  Maybe your problem is that you know how to benefit your team, but don't really know how to work with them.

In any event, people spend far too much time complaining about, and trying to fix team problems by modifying the server.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

[quote author=tuple lI can clearly see how feeding can have a strategic advantage in many situations.  I can see how an opponent feeding on your teammate will become overconfident and leave their base less defended, and will devote less resources to building a secure base, or will not be so critical of the newb builder since they are convinced that they will win.  I particularly enjoy watching the opponent go in for that last base run to take out the aliens while I mara hop their RC and leave them little to come back to.  They'll get a lot more kills than me.  I don't care, I will win.

Feeding isn't the problem, players who think everyone else ruins the match for them is.
[/quote]

wow-wow-wow, please necro my oooold "the way of the feeder" topic :-) i maximally agree.

[techhead]

Note: If 3 people on aliens camp, they can have an Dragoon in just over 2 minutes, with no work at all.
Same goes for MD, batt-pack, and l-armour.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

Note: If 3 people on aliens camp, they can have an Dragoon in just over 2 minutes, with no work at all.
Same goes for MD, batt-pack, and l-armour.

srsly, who the heck is gonna ask all of his team members to send all their evos/credits to him with success in a regular game???
people are just greedy enough to not to share their stuff away so easy.
the guys who are sharing are having overflow of rewards or wants to be specialised in lower classes or equipments. or the team really badly needs some special class, or some buddy is in the group.

on share/donate servers, sharing is not that common as it's theoretically suspected here. most of the dudes doesn'T even know how to do that, or cannot afford it.
and does who does, are not mindlessly giving away the points.
such as most of us doesn'T pay a tyrant to an übernoob just to add +hundreds of credits to the enemy.

the typical tremulous player is not running with an average 5 evos / 1000 credits while still evolved/equipped.

[techhead]

Two words: Clan matches
Seriously breaks clan matches, share does. Many clan servers with share on forget to turn it off for scrims.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

Sharing/donations mode would be disabled by default.

so easy then :-)))

[Revan]

Feeding isn't the problem, players who think everyone else ruins the match for them is.

How does that old saying go? ah yes!, Every cloud has a silver lining.

We should change it to: Every flame war has a correct view.

[kevlarman]

Note: If 3 people on aliens camp, they can have an Dragoon in just over 2 minutes, with no work at all.
Same goes for MD, batt-pack, and l-armour.

on share/donate servers, sharing is not that common as it's theoretically suspected here. most of the dudes doesn'T even know how to do that, or cannot afford it.
and does who does, are not mindlessly giving away the points.
such as most of us doesn'T pay a tyrant to an übernoob just to add +hundreds of credits to the enemy.

the typical tremulous player is not running with an average 5 evos / 1000 credits while still evolved/equipped.

um, yes it is. i was (as far as i know) the first one to put /share on a US server. i was there to see how cool it is, and to see it broken before many players had even heard of it.

[Megagun]

Sharing is great when you play with experienced players, and players who respect eachother. It's a good way for experienced players to, together, finish a game when their team is not adequate.

Also, the 'tone' of share-enabled games seems to be more friendly (and social), too (apart from the beggars, ofcourse), perhaps because newbies aren't being badmouthed by "experienced" players who don't understand what politeness is about (in my opinion, you can't call yourself an experienced Tremulous player if you're badmouthing your teammates).

I fully agree, though, with the motion that neither share-enabled or share-disabled is 'perfect'. We'll need to find a compromise somewhere. Perhaps something like giving human players X ammount of credits every second, and giving aliens something like that, too (say, X evo points per second, where a Tyrant would cost 1000 evo points, or something), and temporarily increase X when a kill is made.

[Survivor]

Experienced players, together, team not adequate. Contradiction.
Share-enabled affects the 'tone' of games? Compared to what? Experienced players will badmouth newbies if they lack politeness no matter if share is on or not. And you can call yourself an experienced player even when you're badmouthing teammates, you just can't call yourself nice.

Dumbing down a game for the lowest common denominator will just result in a bad experience for everyone. People need to learn, and that includes feeding and living with other people feed on your team.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

Always look on the briiiight side of share, tadam, tadmtadam-tadam...

Now let's all whistle! 

[janev]

My two euro cents
I stopped playing on share on servers because the effect it had on games when both teams were full of veteran gamers. *insert pro goon* was almost always able to goon up the rest of the team. It became very frustrating to 24/7 be chasing goons. That said I now play the role of the retarded and abusive admin on satgnu.

Off topic: my nicks are usually white 

[InsanityQ]

credit sharing is not bad for gameplay! I bet you credit share all the time

[temple]

I hate share because you can dominate a team, especially campers, but it seems like there is no consequence. 


Someone somewhere will feed them more credits, usually from feeders on your team, and it is a big cycle.  At some point, the weaker players should end up broke and the stronger players should have more resources.  That leads to a close of the game.  But since players can respawn indefinitely, as long as there are feeders rushing their base, there are credits, and as long as there is share, everyone can be equally armed. 

Share is good because it rewards the whole team but at some point, the individual units of a team should earn their reward. 

~If you join a game 30 minutes in, how can you get anywhere? You have a rifle against tyrants and advanced dragoons, or a dretch against bsuit or helmet + armor with mass driver, shotgun, saw, basically any weapon. You're at a disadvantage because you joined a game ...

You can still contribute. But with share, you don't have to learn to.  You can just beg until someone with skills does the work for you. 

If a team is down or broke, the match needs to end.  I think people try to extend games far beyond what they should last.  Camping mentality.

I'm afraid this might only be in your head. In these 10v10 public games, it's not possible to have a big enough single killwhore on the team to supply everybody with credits.

Yes it is very possible to have someone to kill whore and share with his team until everyone is at least armed.  But that is because a player worth being called 'good' is able to exploit the enemy.  Unless teams are evenly matched, the best player can usually pick apart the other team.  This happens all the time when it comes to stage progression.  Credits are no different.

to land 3 headshots on a bsuit, a tyrant needs at least 2.25 seconds (assuming you stand still and take all of them), in 2 seconds 3 chainguns will have already done 450 damage.

Purely depends on the situation. If the chaingunners are in the open and the tyrants rushes them, then it is possible for them to DPS the tyrant down in 2-3 seconds.  Most of the game is in hallways with cover and no, it is hard to get 3 guns on 1 rant while he is moving around.  Hell, a decent tyrant will force you shoot your teammate by placing his target between himself and any assisting enemies.  Any tyrant worth his salt can ambush (note ambush or surprise) and kill 2 battlesuits consistently.


Ultimately, with share, it breaks the stage 3 game down.  The more upgrades you get, more effective you are at getting credits.  So, a good player can feed his team credits or evos and then you have a map of tyrants or battlesuits.  Without share, in order for a team to get that much firepower, each player has to earn it.  A map full tyrants or battlesuits means that a smart player would camp in that case as to not feed due to not having enough credits.  You can say that both teams have access to share and that keeps the 'arms race' balanced but as we all know, a team full of tyrants is a lot more powerful than credit rich team of humans.  The game isn't balanced around share. 

[Breathe]

To temple:
That's why I hate tyrants.

Too powerful by far.

I'm neutral on credit sharing. I haven't played any share off games, all the servers which aren't super high (100+) ping for me have sharing enabled.

As little as sharing tends to come my way unless I ask (which I only do if the team really needs me, a decent marauder, to help an attack going bad), I don't think it would effect me much.