Disclaimer: skip to the second paragraph for my actual opinion on the matter.
The best match of incursion (or really any game mode honestly) was one where I strongly considered a surrender. A team of randoms all under level 15 on my side vs a group of 5 level 30s all in a party. We had them pushed to their sentry consistently until they backdoor sniped our sentry, and I figured we were screwed. But we had been doing really well despite that so I stuck with it for the full 30 minutes, and we scraped out a win in the last minute. The other team lost a player somewhere at the halfway point which contributed to our success, but it still felt like a real accomplishment.
Anyway, Iām strongly against removing the option for surrender and think it needs to stay exactly how it is. Actually I think it could use an increased window to vote and should only require a majority vote to decide. Some games are simply a loss and thereās no shame in admitting it, nor does it need to be a bad thing.
Seriously? If you can find enjoyment going 3v5 with randoms, falling behind in levels, and getting dominated by more powerful enemies with player advantage, then more power to youā¦
Currently, if you are down a Sentry you are already at a huge disadvantage because of the Shepard. Also, if they have a good team that is controlling your teamās supply station you have little to no chance of coming back. On top of the fact they will have control of 3 separate merc camps that can be soloād and if you already spent 20 mins futilely trying to deal damage to their sentryā¦
Just saying, there arenāt good options for comebacks currently and when playing on a bad team or being down 2 more more team members with 10 mins leftā¦ Not worth my timeā¦
I would rather end the game, collect our rewards, move on.
I donāt mind it myself. There has been a game or two where I just wasnāt feeling it, mostly a combination of trying out a character that doesnāt mesh with my style and being slaughtered by opponents. That doesnāt mean I always will go to surrender if Iām losing. Usually I play until the bitter end, but an option to end it early isnāt a bad thing.
The surrender option is there because of the mechanic they have in place to discourage ragequits. If you drop out of a match you canāt play another match until the one you dropped out of ends. So without a surrender option, any player(s) not enjoying a particular match are forced to either stay in and not enjoy the game for the remainder of that match, or drop out and not enjoy the game for the remainder of that match. Not a great choice IMO.
I think some conditions on when a surrender vote can be called would be nice, but I do not feel the option to surrender should be removed. All that will accomplish is having people leave instead, which solves nothing.
Given there are objectives that measure the progress of the game and who is winning in a very broad sense, something could be cobbled together. I very, very much dislike it when your team is losing by a small amount but one person calls a surrender vote, because immediately your team takes a huge morale hit and that person is probably not going to help much if the vote fails.
For example, in Incursion, if neither team has lost a sentry yet, I do not think a surrender vote should be able to be called. If you have not yet lost an objective, it is very hard to claim your team is certainly doomed; you may be behind on score or kills, but at least in the win scenario you are still in it. It is probably worth playing until at least a sentry falls, and if the game is just so horribly mismatched that will not take very long, anyway. I have seen cases where it is like 97-62 and a team will vote to surrender, when that is simply not logical. It can take one good push to take out a sentry, so that 35 point gap is not that important. It could go to 62-50 very quickly, potentially.
This type of game is a lot harder to make a comeback from compared to other games without character levelling. Iāve seen huge counter-plays in other games that decide the result but if youāre a player down or the enemy team gets you in a snowball situation itās not particularly enjoyable.
I would prefer to end the game as best as I can but if you end up with a player down and the opposing team just move around as one big herd after they have the upper hand it can be pretty demoralising to just run into them and die repeatedly.
There has to be some balance between people quitting before the match gets under way in earnest and getting stuck feeding another team until an unfair match ends, but Iām not sure which direction it needs to be nudged in at the moment.
30:00
-2 Players have left the game (Anytime your team is reduced by a 1/3 or more of itās capacity it will make winning improbable.)
25:00
-Your teamās Sentry rating is already below 50. (Sentry rating is 100 at the start of the game, killing a Sentry drops it down to 50. It is very unlikely to come back from this point especially because you let it happen in the first place.)
15:00
-Your team is far behind in both Sentry Damage and Team Score that winning becomes improbable. You already lost the game, end it with some dignity and let people collect their rewards and move on to another match.
45-92 may not look like a huge Sentry rating difference but this means the opponents have a near full health Sentry, and have done 3% more damage to your second sentry than you have done to their first. You already are fighting off waves of shielded minions and attempting to secure your teams supply station. They have a vantage point with defenses and supply station and they could now be soloing Mercs and drinking your milkshake. This is not a fun scenario; imo. This needs to be solved by improving comeback mechanics.
5:00
-Itās obvious who is winning here. Everyone should know. Losing team should just surrender and let the game end. There is no reason to drag this games out this long. You are losing 5 mins.
Iāve seen teams make a final desperate push in the 5min mark, and actually come back to win it by a couple of points, very frustrating when you was on the dominating team lol.
Unless you mean all that has happened in the same match, ie the 2 leaving, etc., in which case, yeah.
And people canāt just be like āWell someone will replace the people that leave.ā Nope, that slot is locked for that player for the rest of the battle (Which I do like).
I understand where you are coming from but at least for now comparing the option to surrender in League Of Legends and this game would not be fair to either game. The differences and the reason to why each would surrender are similar but different. But as someone said already, there should be an out for people who do not wish to continue playing the match without having to just quit the game entirely and wait for the match to be over.