Alderaan Warzone: If you're Losing DON"T CAP!

[Pistols]

Since you guys seem to love analogies...

 

When you play chess and you get checkmated, you don't play the game out and hope your opponent forgets what he has to do to win. You lay down your king and say "gg, re?"

 

Terrible analogy tbh. Checkmate signifies the game is indeed over with & no moves left (chess). Quitting a WZ BEFORE the shields reach zero, is not "checkmate". It seems you enjoy "layinig down", and you're probably one of those sitting at the lone turret, raging in Ops chat to other people trying, to just do what you do and quit. And if you were in the majority you wouldn't be making this thread, and since others continue to fight and actually play the game as intended, you felt you needed to nerd rage here.

 

We get it.

 

/checkmate_thread.

[Phaedrynn]

I feel this way about huttball games where the opposite team is filled with leapers and sprinters. Just let em win. There is no way to defended against them when there are so many of them.

 

Or Voidstar games when the game keeps going even after you've lost. At least that will be changing in 1.2.

 

Umm..yes, there is. If you let them control the middle (which has nothing at all to do with "leapers and sprinters"), then you deserve to lose. I don't care how fast they can cap, if they cannot get the reset, they lose.

[Grubfist]

When they have 2x your Ship's HP and have held the 2+ cap for the entire match, it is CHECKMATE. The only way your team can now win is to hold 3 for the rest of the game, although you couldn't even get a second node within the first 10 minutes. Checkmate.

 

Their entire raid can sit on one node for the entire remainder of the match, turtle, and win.

 

Any chance you think you have of overcoming this deficit is just a delusion. You have a better chance at having the opposing team disconnect than clearing 8 off a side node before they can graveyard zerg you. Playing it out is like asking the chess player to explain the checkmate to you.

 

That's a check, not a checkmate. I've seen a team lose the situation you just described. They got overconfident and ran off one base for kills, and their other base wasn't well guarded and got squished. We held a 3-cap for awhile, then lost 1 base and ended up winning with 30 points.

[Sporticus]

In the rare losing Civil War game, I will sometimes lead charges to attack other nodes although we have lost. HOWEVER, I will NEVER cap the node in a losing game (which is what this entire thread is about), even if we dominate them and win the battle for the node. Prolonging the match by 1-5 minutes serves no purpose. Nobody is saying "Let them kill you," or "Don't kill enemies,", but regarding objectives, if you are already passed the point of no return and have 4 medals, don't interrupt them capping your only node in Civil War, or capping that 6th ball, or reaching the datacore.

 

I definitely see your point. Once they are past the first door in Voidstar (if we failed to even get that far) I generally just concentrate on killing the inevitable scrub who is talking smack/emoting while be carried by a premade from another guild over...and over... and over.

[Sykper]

Hmm, I was wondering when this kind of thread would appear in PvP Discussion...

 

Time Efficiency vs. Never Giving Up

 

There is actually no right answer, people are going to play one way or the other, or perhaps some other way.

 

The former side wants either success or efficiently losing, speeding up losses to increase gains, and more games to be played. With the given that this may be sort of cowardly and against the whole 'PvP for fun' thinking, there is a considerable number of people who hate playing a game where they are getting stomped at, and extending the stomping is not only a waste of time for them but does not help their opinion of players who keep the game going on.

 

The latter side will play to win, regardless of the circumstances. They will only think of how to carry their side to a victory, not particularly caring for medals but will only consider two things, the way to win objectively, and pursuing it. The score could be 50-300 with an enemy three-cap in Civil War, and they will try to solo the third point that isn't being touched by allies to pray that they can cap it, and at the same time, the other 2 points are being capped by their teammates, giving their side a chance.

 

Everyone plays between these two extremes, myself included. People who fall outside the extremes play for different reasons (dance-contests on enemy huttball goalline, or whatever- I HAVE NOT DONE SUCH A THING >.>).

 

Where am I going with this? Well, I am just laying out the foundation, frankly in PuGs there is no way to get consensus to go one way or another. It is kinda of moot then to go with the OP's opinion, he can ask, but he probably shouldn't expect those who want to go all 'DINE IN HELL' in a game to follow-through.

 

My Opinion? I would rather play for REVENGE, a darker sort of fun for myself. I can concede that the 0-5 Huttball game, or the enemy 2-cap 120-300 Civil War will more than likely be a loss, but be damned if I don't find a healer or that one DPS of my choosing to go all vengeful on. I will be a Bounty Hunter, and HUNT. I WILL go all out, since the game will end in a minute or real soon anyways.

 

...That is just me, you guys can do whatever you want.

[Nicain]

Come 1.2 this will not be true.

 

Beyond that some of us are not losers and will always be trying.

 

So when you keep trying, even though you're going to lose, the fact you tried makes you not a loser but a winner?

 

Here's your "I'm a winner like everyone else" trophy. We have a table full of them out back.

[MightyHalo]

Some idiots on my server did this last night in void star.

 

We didn't allow them to cap, but they got past 2 doors, and clowns started saying, let them through! We lost so give up and then a couple of others agreed with them.

 

They said the premade was too good, and they didn't even try to hold them to one door.

 

It was beyond pathetic.

[Nytak]

If you are going to lose a game against the opposite faction and they 3 cap you,

 

Don't try to be a hero and cap one of the bases, it just slows down the game.

 

You can argue for defender points, but it's alot better to farm a position while the flag has been capped by the opposite faction, since they will keep rushing to defend the flag.

 

This speeds up the game and makes it so you can get your 4 medals quite easily.

 

 

Thank you

 

Winners never quit, and quitters never win.

 

I sure hope you don't have this same pathetic 'give up' mentality in real life.

[Tyraelium]

Winners never quit, and quitters never win.

 

I sure hope you don't have this same pathetic 'give up' mentality in real life.

 

What you don't understand that quitting is the what the 'winners' do here. We swallow our pride, take the loss when we know we've lost a match and requeue again. We gain more valor and commendations at a quicker rate than you, allowing us to acquire gear quicker and more efficiently, which in turn allows us to win more Warzones.

 

Reminds me of StarCraft(RTS) players that hide buildings and re-expand when you've already destroyed their main base and expansions.

[Nicain]

Terrible analogy tbh. Checkmate signifies the game is indeed over with & no moves left (chess). Quitting a WZ BEFORE the shields reach zero, is not "checkmate". It seems you enjoy "layinig down", and you're probably one of those sitting at the lone turret, raging in Ops chat to other people trying, to just do what you do and quit. And if you were in the majority you wouldn't be making this thread, and since others continue to fight and actually play the game as intended, you felt you needed to nerd rage here.

 

We get it.

 

/checkmate_thread.

 

 

Its a good analogy, just mis-represented. In chess you can get into check, where you will eventually get checkmated due to how many pieces you lost and all you can do it pro-long moving your king and shifting pawns to sacrifice them but you're going to lose. It's actually polite to forfeit at this point, as you're done and you're going to lose.

 

Apparently you've never played chess.

[me_unknown]

Reminds me of StarCraft(RTS) players that hide buildings and re-expand when you've already destroyed their main base and expansions.

your "analogy" fails the same way as the chess one we got somewhere above.

[me_unknown]

Its a good analogy, just mis-represented. In chess you can get into check, where you will eventually get checkmated due to how many pieces you lost and all you can do it pro-long moving your king and shifting pawns to sacrifice them but you're going to lose. It's actually polite to forfeit at this point, as you're done and you're going to lose.

 

Apparently you've never played chess.

 

no sorry, but you are wrong. he understood quite well how it is in chess. your mistake is that this point does NOT exists on the alderaan wz.

 

in chess you do not give up only because you got checked! a check is by far no checkmate. but you give up when you got a checkmate, which means it is obvious what moves have to be done by the winner and you can do nothing to prevent the loss.

 

there is a similar situation in alderaan, though only similar: this is when one has 2 cannons and having double the points left as the other one. here you could argue that as long as you hold at least one cannon you cannot lose.

 

this is true, but actually it happens quite often in pug games or even semi pug ones (with a 4 man premade) that you can get all three long enough to turn the wheel.

 

i saw it dozens of times! HENCE it is by far not over at this point. this is totally different in chess!

Edited March 26, 2012 by me_unknown

[Pvtcarnage]

Did all the defeatist come from France or something? Stop with the loser attitudes and maybe you won't be losers.

 

just a suggestion.....

[Ch_Zero]

Since you guys seem to love analogies...

 

When you play chess and you get checkmated, you don't play the game out and hope your opponent forgets what he has to do to win. You lay down your king and say "gg, re?"

 

I'll use your quote, because i like it.

 

The skilled Chess players know many moves ahead when to call it, so they will often give up even before a checkmate has even been initiated.

 

Because they "know" when it's over and they see many moves ahead.

 

 

the less skilled players with not as much warzone experience will cap a node in the hopes of a win, but fail to see they already lost the battle.

 

Matter of time efficiency, when you get skilled you will see what we see.

[Angel_of_Cain]

Winners never quit, and quitters never win.

 

 

If this is true, who came up with the term; "quit while you're ahead."?

 

anyway, some of these posts just make me sad:( Some people will meet thier deaths with dignity (the let them win crowd). I will meet mine kicking and screaming (not giving up)

[Smashbrother]

Earlier this week we were down 4-0 in Huttball with 4 minutes left. The majority of you spineless defeatists out there would say "Ah, just let them score two more times, obviously you can't beat them, may as well get it over with.".

Well, they got careless, started farming kills, we drew them off towards the sides and our goal, and we set up a quick passing chain and we wound up winning 5-4. That's a victory that we wouldn't have had "any chance" of getting according to a lot of quitters out there, and yet we still won.

 

If you're going to give up the second you're behind, what's the point of playing the damn warzone to begin with?? There is no such thing as being mathematically eliminated in Alderaan Civil War until the game is over. Even if the score is 520 - 50 and you're about to lose, if you push hard and manage to 3 cap you can still win, however unlikely it may be. It's especially stupid to give up when you're talking about a score like 580 - 450 or something. So what if they 3 cap at that point? Take the nodes back! You have plenty of time.

 

 

The only people pushing for quick losses are people valor farming or people with a defeatist attitude. Neither of those groups matters; if you don't like games taking the full duration, please don't play warzones.

 

And for every one of those games there are hundreds out there where you still lost. A team is only able to 4-0 in huttball or 3 cap in CW if they utterly dominate your team.

 

The chances of a comeback in that situation are slim to none. No thanks. I value my time, and I'd rather take a quick loss and play another game.

[Ch_Zero]

This thread has still not hit 10,000 views?

 

 

what a shame.

[SweetOldBob]

That's a check, not a checkmate. I've seen a team lose the situation you just described. They got overconfident and ran off one base for kills, and their other base wasn't well guarded and got squished. We held a 3-cap for awhile, then lost 1 base and ended up winning with 30 points.

 

I was lucky enough to be on a Alderaan Civil War side that was down 100 to 5 when we 3 capped; we held the cap and won 5 to zero.

 

Not at all the normal outcome, but boy was it a hoot!

[Erasimus]

For the most part if I'm going to leave a WZ it will be prior to the start and this is usually only when I get Huttball on my Republic Gunslinger. I have to play enough Huttball on my empire characters. (50 Gunslinger, 50 Sorcerer and a host of other alts).

 

Very rarely will I leave a WZ or quit trying and if I do it is usually because my team is behaving so badly it makes it an unpleasant experience (that doesn't mean losing, I'm fine with that if they are trying.)

 

I don't understand why people play if they don't enjoy PvP and if they do enjoy PvP why quit? You can still practice and try to do the best you can, not simply roll over.

 

I will aways keep trying.

 

On another note I also don't agree with those that get upset when someone scores the last point or downloads the data instead of "farming" kills. Whatever for? If we've rolled the team and they are no challenge why keep farming them unless you are a sadist. It is more fun fighting back in a losing game than farming kills when you've already won (at least in my opinion).

[Astarica]

There's a difference between not giving up and understanding reality.

 

If you're losing badly in a civil war, assuming you didn't somehow just get a new team from all the weak players quitting, you're probably outgunned significantly.

 

So if you've 2 guys and you see 4 guys defending a node, there's virtually no chance you'll win no matter how good you think you are. If you attack them you probably just die and have nothing to show for it. At this point it'd be best for you to observe, because it's 2 on 4 so you should have an advantage elsewhere, and if the rest of your team either sucks or is just not attacking at all, there's no point for you to charge in and die either.

 

On the other hand if you see a 2on2 it's perfectly reasonable to go down fighting.

 

With losing game a lot of time you got 4 guys AFK by your turret, the enemy defends with 4/4 so there's really no way you could ever attack that kind of defensive formation with just 4 guys no matter what, so you might as well throw in the towel too. Now if people are actually trying to do stuff, a losing game is actually a pretty good time to experiment with strategies since you're almost certainly not going to win by fighting the enemy straight up (otherwise you wouldn't be losing badly to begin with), and you might learn something interesting too.

[LittleFuzzy]

If you are going to lose a game against the opposite faction and they 3 cap you,

 

Don't try to be a hero and cap one of the bases, it just slows down the game.

 

You can argue for defender points, but it's alot better to farm a position while the flag has been capped by the opposite faction, since they will keep rushing to defend the flag.

 

This speeds up the game and makes it so you can get your 4 medals quite easily.

 

 

Thank you

 

Some of us are playing the game though, not farming. We WANT to try and be heroes.

[Pistols]

Its a good analogy, just mis-represented. In chess you can get into check, where you will eventually get checkmated due to how many pieces you lost and all you can do it pro-long moving your king and shifting pawns to sacrifice them but you're going to lose. It's actually polite to forfeit at this point, as you're done and you're going to lose.

 

Apparently you've never played chess.

 

Getting "checked" does =/= "eventually get checkmated".

 

Regardless, the analogy is terrible.

 

Quitting a WZ before the game says "checkmate" is not the same as getting checkmated in chess (yes, played the game plenty). The difference between the two are glaring, even for the simpletons.

[Bullwrath]

OP please quit the game already. I don't need people on my team with your way of thinking.

 

Nonsense! Don't quit the game OP! Just roll Imperial on Master Gnost-Dural.

 

This will improve my gaming experience considerably. . .since I play Republic.

[richardya]

If your entire goal is too maximize commendations, the best thing to do is join a WZ in a premade and hide by a turret. Your team will lose quickly with the 4 of you doing nothing and you will get your 4 medals. You will get more commendations losing quickly because you will get more matches played. The reason you don't do this is the same reason I don't quit. Edited March 26, 2012 by richardya

[Derian]

Nope. I always fight. If you're going to roll over and not try don't play