Concession Rule Discussion

The concession rule MUST be added! this will help with people quitting.
I have played 2 games now and both games my opponent conceded.
I know people dont care at the moment but this was even happening on BB2 and i think it might stop people doing it.

Yes people lose connection but thats the nature of the internet and you just have to accept it.

What are your thoughts?

@HalflingChef said in Concession Rule Discussion:

Yes people lose connection but thats the nature of the internet and you just have to accept it.

What are your thoughts?

That ’tis much more Prudence to acquit two Persons, tho’ actually guilty, than to pass Sentence of Condemnation on one that is virtuous and innocent.

Not to mention that the majority of teams in BB2 don't have any players with 51 SPP, so it wouldn't even be that much of a deterrent. If you want fewer concessions, play in CCL instead of COL.

I do think, however, that they should make concession games give the conceder no SPP. The person who concedes should not walk away from the game with any rewards.

lol if someone concedes he gets no gold or mvp the winning team gets his share its already like that lol

@ICEdrake said in Concession Rule Discussion:

lol if someone concedes he gets no gold or mvp the winning team gets his share its already like that lol

He still gets any SPP accrued during the match, meaning someone can play until they think their players might suffer an injury or death and then simply concede, keeping player development to that point. Given that they can concede (especially via disconnection) right before suffering a nasty hit, or right before allowing the opponent to score, they can use concession to deprive the opponent of SPP they'd have otherwise earned... I don't see any reason they should get to keep their own SPP from the match to any degree.

I played several games back in CE against Pro Elves and the like and they would receive the kick off, keep the ball on their half of the field, and just pass it back and forth for five or six turns until their apo was used, and then concede. I guess if you have time and no grasp of 1 SPP vs. 3 SPP that's one way of leveling your positionals.

This problem looks worse than it is during the beta, because there is no official concession-policed ladder. Some leagues (like ReBBRL) do have one, however.

Personnaly I believe we should allow concessions. Games are long and when you force new player to play a full game where they are completly Nuffled, you take the fun out of it.

Public leagues are made for all public and you want the game to be competitive but most of it you want player to have fun if you want them to stay.

Sometimes Dices just screw all fun out of 1 game.

I am not convinced my opinion will count, but I believe the "no concession rule" comes from hardcore player from the community which I believe do not realize that it may take the fun out for the less hardcore players. So even if I understand the purpose, I would love if this limitation of 5 concessions was reconsidered.

@JRCO said in Concession Rule Discussion:

I am not convinced my opinion will count, but I believe the "no concession rule" comes from hardcore player from the community which I believe do not realize that it may take the fun out for the less hardcore players. So even if I understand the purpose, I would love if this limitation of 5 concessions was reconsidered.

The 5 concession limit is only in the CCL - competitive ladder.. which, on merit of being the competitive ladder with prizes and such, really is aimed more at hardcore players. The basic open league, COL, has no concession limits.

BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

@JRCO said in Concession Rule Discussion:

I am not convinced my opinion will count, but I believe the "no concession rule" comes from hardcore player from the community which I believe do not realize that it may take the fun out for the less hardcore players. So even if I understand the purpose, I would love if this limitation of 5 concessions was reconsidered.

There is no "no concession" rule. There is a limitation of 5 concessions in CCL only. In COL you can do what you want. If you want to be able to concede play in COL.

Yep but COL is just pointless friendly game. Only CCL is an open competition in which you can compete(oustide of organized private leagues). I understand why there is the 5 concessions Rules, but I still do not like it. It forces you to play when completly Nuffled from turn 1 and make you waste your evening is just not that fun when you have only time for 1 full game, it also encourage some player to express their frustration and become Rude. Just my opinion.

last edited by JRCO

@JRCO
It can be equally as frustrating being on the "conceded to" side of the situation, as they could only have time for 1 match as well but can't get the bb2 itch scratched because some opposing coaches can't handle bad dice and concede.
Not to mention in some cases coaches are likely to earn more spp than just the 5 they would get from a concede if the match were to play out.

I don't think the concessions limit was introduced into the champs ladder to benefit "hardcore coaches" or hinder "less tenured coaches" but to mitigate the number of conceded matches in the public leagues which had around a 50% concession rate (way too high, imho) before the champions ladder was added.

I believe conceded matches are frustrating on both ends. Less frustrating for the coach that gets the win but still frustrating.

last edited by Tizzle Bizzell
BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

@JRCO - Tizzle Bizzel has it right - before CCL was introduced the concession rate in COL was very, very high indeed (around the 50% mark) and people didn't like it: they wanted to complete games. We had the same issue in BB1 and I created FOL to help resolve that by instituting a concession limit there. It worked and the concession rate reduced enormously. So the same was done here and CCL was created.

You complain that COL is "pointless friendly game" but there are rankings there just as there are in CCL. Games in COL are as pointless and friendly as you make them. If you want to be able to concede that's the place for you, but in CCL the imperative is on finishing games to 16 turns.

BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

There is nothing more frustrating then after getting your team smashed about countless times whether it be by bad play or getting diced as some call it but stick in there and finish the games. And then finally you get a game what goes your way and your thinking finally I can get some nice well earned xp and then see your opponent concede say turn6 because they losing 1-0 on there drive or used there apo already. Its very annoying especially kill team coaches who love it when its going there way but soon as the shoe is on the other foot they conceded they to me are the worst ones lol

@Dode74 @Tizzle Bizzel

I understand the purpose and why it has been implemented.

Maybe a way to make less frustrating to have to finish games that you are Nuffled from the beginning would be to have the possibility to choose the turn duration like we could in BB1. Cause in BB2 3 min turn due to all anim makes for very long games. (possibility to choose to play 2 min Turns would be welcomed)

Like I said, It is just my opinion that I would prefer a more relaxed approach on the concession side, but I understand why there is the rule.

last edited by JRCO

Or you make the game finish against the AI when people "quit the game "or "disconnect" but keep the same for the one who "concede"

I would like to see the concession rule added, but have it set as an option for leagues
that way at least we have it and we can then discuss the fairness of it in the public leagues or not at a later date, can vote on it as well.

But first lets have it as an option for leagues (private)
That I feel is the first step

Well that way you would have rage quit by intentionnal disco instead. I prefer a clean concession than a disco that make you lose 5 min (at least).

@JRCO said in Concession Rule Discussion:

Well that way you would have rage quit by intentionnal disco instead. I prefer a clean concession than a disco that make you lose 5 min (at least).

I cop the rage quit 5 min wait all the time as it is
you see it... double skull on a loner, re roll fails from loner he has to pick one the skulls but bam no its the 5 min wait... why cant those jokers just concede I dont know, but be nice to laugh knowing maybe not all their players over 51 spp will stick around for a dummy spitting coach

so no, adding the rule wont add more intentional disco's, if anything it may even lessen them (and concedes)

BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

First problem: the vast, vast majority of games in MM don't have any players with 51SPP or more.

Second problem: how do you know it was dummy-spitting rather than a legitimate problem? You can be as sceptical as you like about the timing, but you have to admit it is entirely possible that they lost power (or whatever) at that point. Is it fair to give people permanent punishments for what may be legitimate issues?

@dode74 said in Concession Rule Discussion:

First problem: the vast, vast majority of games in MM don't have any players with 51SPP or more.

Second problem: how do you know it was dummy-spitting rather than a legitimate problem? You can be as sceptical as you like about the timing, but you have to admit it is entirely possible that they lost power (or whatever) at that point. Is it fair to give people permanent punishments for what may be legitimate issues?

First I dont know if you have stats that show the vast majority of games in MM don't have any players with 51SPP or more, I am sure you do as you always seen to have a well of information and cool stats i normally cant find till you link, however I can onlt say when i use my 1500+ TV teams i never seem to have a problem getting a game and the teams i face all have 2 or more 51+ spp players (note I dont trim or min max my teams and so often am up the higher TV range)

second you're right it could have been power or anything, my network resets sometimes and though i normally get back in before 5 min is up, I have been known to lose a game or 2 because it didnt load fast enough (thinks back to a game I was 3-1 up 1 turn to go had it in the bag and bam, i was so pissed off)
however I would have been fine with the loss of 1 or both of my players that at that time were over 51 spp, if its in the rules that fine by me, I may be sad and in morning for those brave guys, bless their digital hearts, but would only last a few minutes as I realize stuff them for leaving my team they had no loyalty 😉

so in answer to that question, yes, yes it is fair to give people permanent punishments for what may be legitimate issues

those that have them are few compared to the many that dummy-spitters out there. Too many times it happens that the player has a problem right after rolling double skulls and had no prior problem before hand in the game
players with legitimate issues often you see them time out, come back and so on throughout the game

we don't need to pamper bad behavior because some one 1 time may, or may not have a legitimate issue at some point. we do it too much as it is IRL
Be accountable for your actions is my moto. The concession rule is in the rules, so use them. And really if some one gets so upset at losing a digital heart because of legitimate issues, then I think the loss of that thing on the screen is the least of their problems and they should seek medical advise, therapy and not play a GAME on a PC or xbox 😉

Edit: also side note i have a fling team in col atm with 4 wins and 1 loss, 2 of those wins came from concedes just before i could score, i have missed out on lost of SPP because of it (you just have to watch the game to know why I say this) now I know those players would not have suffered from the rule as all low teams, but that behavior can be habit forming, personly i dont want them even playing the game, but if and when they get to the upper TV it would be nice to know that it may have them think twice before they quit... hell they may find that by not quitting (because of the rule) that being forced to play, they turn that game round and win it as i have many times. It is only then that the habit may be broken and then that is one less dummy spitter and now a real coach and player.

last edited by coachjester
BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

I don't have specific data for SPP per player per game, but the median team lifespan is 2 games. That means 50% of teams which play a game play no more than 2 games. There's realistically zero chance of getting 51SPP in even 4 games, so the data does support the statement I made.

That you would be content to lose players in those circumstances does not mean everyone would be, and the more legitimate (i.e. non-conceding) players you annoy with permanent punishments the smaller the playerbase gets. There are adequate non-permanent punishments which can scale with the number of offences (such as the timeout option mentioned above) that we don't need to lose good players. That's not pampering bad behaviour, it's ensuring the innocent aren't punished.

The concession rules in TT were designed for TT. While I have seen ragequits, I'm yet to see one side's team have a power failure on TT 😉 Some of the rules are not appropriate to a large open league.

@dode74 but those numbers could be same DS (Dummy spitters) concede first game and then delete the team, in theory it may be just one player doing it every few min to over inflate the numbers
like 99 players lets say keep their team building and 1 DS why deletes 101 times in same period. that would show that 50% the teams made play only one game but in reality 99% of the players looking for games with their team that they built are in said league if you get what i am trying to say. yeah I know, i am no math guy and am sure some 1 out there can point it better... what are the factors that are used to come to the median team lifespan? if its just total teams made / by games played i dont think would be very accurate to assess the average

take the open ladder IX it hast on the leader board 2740 team yet only 1094 have played 2 games that is not 50% and btw some of those teams TV were 1400 - 1600, they are developed (now i didn't look at the players on the teams to see if any at 51 spp and i didnt take into account any low TV teams that may be mini maxing and have only 4 players level 7 on the roster. I think that is roughly 39% have played 2 or less games yeat all of it = 0 because as i said of those 1094 two game teams some had a TV that was way above what you could get from 2 games, and also i am sure some of those are still planning to play more games so in the open ladder IX that 39% would be even lower

BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

No, I also break it down by games per coach. It's not a minority doing it. The minority are those who keep a team.

0_1504803807003_upload-1ea4d1c1-7893-4535-837d-da4a6fb1a60b

Median is the 50% point (i.e. 50% of teams play more and 50% of teams play less). Average (mean) is exactly what you say it isn't: total teams/games played. Average would actually show a higher number due to the fact that people tend to play more teams that they quit early than play teams that they stick with, a bit like the dashed distribution shown as an example above.

Goblinspy for Open IX shows 4565 games played at the moment, with 3899 teams in the rankings. Of those teams 2832 (72%) have played 2 or fewer games, so the median is currently less than 2. But it's early in the season, so that's expected as you suggest. Looking at Champ Ladder VII, the last completed Champ Ladder, shows 8578 teams played matches, 5521 of which played 2 or fewer games. So again the median is less than 2.

oh ok great thank you

oh one last silly question dont use goblinspy i take it that the cyanide leaderbord don't keep teams that have been deleted and gobspy do? and if i dont use gobspy do my stats cont on it?

somehow i am left feeling sad now and it's helped make me lose interest in BB knowing so many do this crap of concede, delete concede delete, now i remember why i have only played in a private league from 2011 😞 oh well there is always war thunder 😢 lol .... WTF I need a can of harden the fuck up 😝
i have been sheltered from this nightmare

still think the 51 spp rule should be added 😉

BB2 Champion Ladder Admin Team

Gobspy automatically gets data from the server: you're not using it at all, it's collecting from Cyanide. I don't think it deletes teams which are not in the league. I used similar data when I do the checks for concessions, from the same source as Gobspy, but using a different method.

I agree private leagues are better. I play almost exclusively in such leagues. Private leagues can add the 51SPP rule at their own discretion using dicerooms etc. OCC does exactly that, for example.

Here is my take on concession/DCs (and we discussed it a lot in Suggestions before 🙂 )

Unless they concede under conditions allowed by CRP (can't field more than two players), or if they DC (occasional connection issue won't be a big problem as it will happen rarely enough, and should be just accepted as unlucky coache's own fault by him; I haven't face DC so far more than a couple of times, just get a better ISP):

  1. They must keep all injuries acquired so far, but don't keep any SPPs

  2. This match must not be accounted for their MNG players and the likes (otherwise we just ask them to concede/DC each time they want to heal their players)

  3. After each such event they must be placed on lockout timer (suggested by somebody in previous discussion); they can't play any MP match for next 10 minutes on all their accounts bound to this key. The lockout time progressively increases each time they do it again, up to 30 mins; the counter is reset each 24 hours.

  4. That was my proposal, which for some reason didn't see much love 🙂 In case they do more than 2-3 Concedes/DCs per day, all their teams on all accounts are put into separate MM pool and can play only with other conceders, or with those coaches who explicitly agree risking to play with them (a new checkbox is added when you start MM, which you must set so that system started to pair you with the conceders' pool as well). This counter as well is reset once per day, so anybody is given 2-3 DC/Concedes limit per day, what should be enough to account for random networking/RL issues; when counter is reset, they are moved back to regular pool again. As it can be exploited easily by two coaches deliberately conceding to be placed in there so they could be paired together more easily (as this pool will be more narrow, most likely) and farm SPPs, matches between 2 conceders in that pool must happen in Rez mode (no inj, no SPP gain, plus also no points of any kind affecting ranking or winrate etc). Only if conceder is paired with coach from regular pool match is conducted as usual.

last edited by Mori-Mori

@Mori-Mori said in Concession Rule Discussion:

That was my proposal, which for some reason didn't see much love

That's quite the bait-and-switch there, Mori. What you proposed that "didn't see much love" was:

@Mori-Mori said in With Legendary Edition + 50 Starplayers it should be time for a new kind of Matchmaking !:

In case of DC (w/o subsequent re-connect) or Concede (unless under terms allowed by CRP, when you can't field at least 3 players at the start of a drive), if Apo is already wasted, a randomly chosen player on your team does an injury roll (because attacked by disappointed fans, of course )

What you listed as point 1 was what I said I thought should be done instead of what you proposed, combined with point 3... dode mentioned the sliding scale of time for it, though I'm not sure that's even necessary. I'm not sure MNG even has much place in open ladders, but I suppose point 2 is fine too.

We already have two ladders that let people choose how they're willing to play in regard to concession... no need to subdivide any further.

@VoodooMike said in Concession Rule Discussion:

That's quite the bait-and-switch there, Mori. What you proposed that "didn't see much love" was:

No, I meant what I meant, this post specifically. I thought we already agreed before that the one you are citing isn't that good idea, unless you want to go over it again.

Edit:

@VoodooMike said in Concession Rule Discussion:

dode mentioned the sliding scale of time for it, though I'm not sure that's even necessary.

Without this nothing still discourages coaches from cherry-picking their opponent all the time, which, imo, is where the majority of all such cases is.

@VoodooMike said in Concession Rule Discussion:

We already have two ladders that let people choose how they're willing to play in regard to concession... no need to subdivide any further.

Correct, we still have two of them. If we can disregard issues of coaches who play in COL that easy (for whatever reason they choose it, it may not only be because of free concessions), why do we need it at all? The 4) option doesn't really divide it, it leaves to coaches' discretion whether they want to play with those who can't sit through the whole match, for whatever reason. If pool is low and they can't find a game for a while, they may opt to set the checkbox and risk playing with those in conceders pool, if they wish. The opposite won't work indeed, but those who earned their place in conceders pool shouldn't expect that anybody else ought to play with them, if they can't show the same kind of respect to others.

I still see how 3) and 4) together may seem like an overkill, so they should be seen as mutual exclusive instead.

last edited by Mori-Mori

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.