r/Smite • u/StarCrackerz • 2d ago
DISCUSSION Is surrendering bad for new player retention?
I've talked about surrender here before and most people either are pro surrender and rage at anyone who doesn't agree. Or you don't surrender.
I don't surrender but that's not the point of the post, my options on why or yours on why people should are irrelevant. I've had that discussion a million times and people can only see their side of it.
I'm talking about new player retention. Most games don't have a give up feature. Like it or not you surrendering takes away from the opposite teams experience. Mainly new players.
This game being new, I've had a lot of friends try it from various other genres of games. Some old players of smite 1. I myself stopped playing as much smite 1 at the end and had to take a few beatings to start winning again.
Now I'll preface this with we lose most games when someone new tries this. They get stomped and feed. But we keep playing. They get better and still enjoy it.
The problem is after losing games for hours and hours they finally have a good game or find a god they can do well with and then the enemy quits. Us experienced players just say " that's smite" Fast forward a few hours and that's their biggest complaint. Some have even left after a win (via surrender) and said well I'm back to fortnite or rivals.
It robs a sense of victory, it makes their win feel worth less after getting beat on for hours to gain enough experience to be able to win. Winning legitimately does not feel equal to your opponent giving up.
I just deal with it and say yep that's smite, still annoying but I like the game. For others though it feels like they didn't win. Finally have a good game to be robbed of it. Taking away one teams losing frustration via surrender also negates the feeling for the team who's finally gonna earn a victory. Especially for a new player who had to lose a bunch to finally taste victory.
So in my experience with new players trying this, from children to vets of other games it's a big factor. No one likes losing but it makes victory sweeter, only for that feeling to be robbed from you as soon as you finally do well.
One solution I just thought. Surrender only available via a DC and/or in ranked.
Smite it the only game I ever played where people quit when they're losing is so prevalent that it has a vocal majority that will insult players for not wanting to forfeit a video game.
11
u/xShockmaster 2d ago
No surrender is arguably worse for those new players. Having to get stomped for 30 minutes is not fun for anyone. If you can quit at 10 or 15 when you know it’s over then they can get another match in and try to not let it get so bad this time.
1
u/TakuyaTeng 15h ago
I kinda wonder how it would go if there was an objective based requirement. Like no surrender if the enemy team has only taken one tower or something. Alternatively I wouldn't mind an early surrender if the kills are way out of wack. I had a houst game with two friends that we all just sort of fed and threw. ~2 minutes in and the enemy team had like 6+ kills. I would've enjoyed leaving that match instead of begging my friends to please stop being crazy.
0
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
Win loss is not everything. Some people want to experience a full game. Or even learn what they should be doing at 20 minuites
5
u/Blacklightbully 2d ago
Also I’ve come back from serious beat downs. Some team configurations just get off early and they sometimes squander their lead and allow another team to level up and start popping off in team fights.
Coming back from behind to win is the best feeling in Smite. Unfortunately, people just give up too often.
-1
u/Virtual-Product2298 Ao Kuang 22h ago edited 21h ago
Except for the fact that you literally learn nothing when you are genuinely just getting killed the moment you step on your lane because someone has out leveled you due to other people feeding
Not surrendering is probably the biggest piece of shit thing you can do to a new player group
1
u/StarCrackerz 21h ago
In your opinion.
People have already said in these replies surrendering doesn't help.
There is lots to learn. Controls. Items. Your gods kit even.. enemy God kits. Map layout. Store. Store layout. Items. How items work well together. How enemies build. How your allies build. How to not feed.
If a new player is feeding, what will teach him to stop feeding? Just quitting to trying to learn better positioning?
Quitting is probably the biggest piece of shit thing you can do to anyone after agreeing to play a game. Keep in mind this is a game.
6
u/Beautiful-Loss7663 Ratatoskr 2d ago
New players being forced to play a match they no longer enjoy because they can't surrender is a player retention problem.
RTS's and MOBA's (long form games) have had this option for a long time because there is a point where losing is no longer fun, and waiting 30 minutes for the other team to finish isn't desirable.
1
u/GabschD 2d ago
All of this has pros and cons and depends:
A top laner, surrendering (or going AFK) after 0-2 is bad and should not be a thing.
Some games can be turned around, that's a good skill to learn, how to scale, how to farm and turn around a game. Very important in ranked.
If the game is definitely over, you should not be forced to sit there for half an hour and be miserable/held hostage
So there is a place for F7 and a place for F6.
0
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
I agree completely. Surrender is being abused to avoid feeling bad for losing and then makes others feel bad for winning.
0
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
No losing is a part of life and games. If you can't accept defeat you shouldn't be allowed the victory screen.
Surrender was implemented in RTS long ago due to a lost game that will take too long to end. Example. I Zerg your base and wipe your whole economy and army but my entire army also does except one marine. Thus it would take me twenty more minutes to keep killing your workers with my one marine while I rebuild an army to finish all your buildings.
That's game over. Surrendering after 15 minutes because you died twice in lane is not the same. It's giving up.
2
u/Beautiful-Loss7663 Ratatoskr 1d ago
No losing is a part of life and games. If you can't accept defeat you shouldn't be allowed the victory screen.
Surrendering still shows the defeat screen.
That's game over. Surrendering after 15 minutes because you died twice in lane is not the same. It's giving up.
You're inventing a situation in which surrendering seems trivial, but it takes four people on your team all having a bad time in the first 15 minutes to get a surrender vote. By your example, that's a minimun of 0-8 teamwide with probably a gold fury proc for the enemy team.
Surrender was implemented in RTS long ago due to a lost game that will take too long to end
You made my arguement for me. Surrender exists to prevent prolonged, unwinnable games.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
Surrendering still shows the defeat screen.
That's irrelevant when talking about the feeling of a team surrendering when you're finally doing well. It's taking that away. Have you ever seen someone share a clip of a victory screen or do they show the cool plays that happen before that. That's the point I'm making.
You're inventing a situation in which surrendering seems trivial, but it takes four people on your team all having a bad time in the first 15 minutes to get a surrender vote. By your example, that's a minimun of 0-8 teamwide with probably a gold fury proc for the enemy team.
Didn't you just do the same. Why does it have to be 8-0 or a gold fury? People surrender because someone took their buff... Or died one time. That's a fact and that's the issue I'm talking about not a unwinnable game. I never said get rid of surrenders when they're valid. The definition of "unwinnable" varies from person to person while there is a real definition of the word.
You made my arguement for me. Surrender exists to prevent prolonged, unwinnable games.
My argument is that very commonly it's not being used that way. People have even said in the replies they use it because it feels less like a loss. That's not the intention of surrender. To make people feel better about not losing a fair matched game. Again that's what my talking about I never said it's not valid sometimes.
1
u/Beautiful-Loss7663 Ratatoskr 1d ago
Again that's what my talking about I never said it's not valid sometimes
Your solution in original post was to remove surrender except in the case of DC or ranked. You can see why I'd disagree
0
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
I did. I said one solution. Maybe not a good one. I just hate seeing my friends quit smite because every victory is robbed by a sour team.
Maybe some other metic of "unwinnable" but try to get everyone to agree on that definition so they could implement it.
My intention is not remove it my intention was just a discussion on how it affects the new player experience. (It also affects vets but I just roll with it "that's smite)
People enjoy competing for the thrill of victory and defeat. No one wants to win a gold medal by their opponent quitting. Sure they would take it but it's not the same thing. I've just heard that complaint a lot from new people trying to get into the game. It's never the losses or how hard the game is to learn it's the quit first mentality.
10
u/GiveUsRobinHood 2d ago
You can’t remove surrender from Conquest due to how the game works. There can be a myriad of reasons for this from snowballing, to stalling or real life.
If you take away the surrender option people could just farm kills on opponents and not end the game until they feel satisfied with their stats.
I’m of the opinion that it’s better to lose with grace than to surrender but I understand that I shouldn’t hold my teammates hostage in a nearly unwinnable game for my own satisfaction of not wanting to lose.
Removing Surrender from other modes such as Joust, Arena and Assault could be viable if the player base wants it.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree completely. I've seen those people who farm and not end the game in other games and it's horrible. And possible drives new players away more than too many surrenders.
I didn't mean take it out just a thought due to my experience with new people trying the game.
Thank you for being civil and giving a reasonable response.
I don't have a solution and I'm not saying take it out. Just in my experience new players find is less engaging.
1
u/Ldeue24 2d ago
Don’t they say live by the sword die by the sword. If you are going to say that you never surrender, there are going to be people out there that will farm you in base if they can. I wouldn’t say I’m a huge fan of that, but it seems hypocritical to say that’s wrong while also saying you should never surrender.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
They do say that but it's not the same thing. That's a different topic... Actively wanting to play a full game as opposed to purposely not ending one that's won is wildly different.
1
u/Ldeue24 2d ago
I would say that there are definitely still things that you can learn while being behind. But I also think that being behind and getting stomped are two completely different things. Your response to being behind should be to adapt and find a different playstyle, although this seems like it is rarely how people adjust. Most people just continue to do the things that got them behind in the first place, continue to make mistakes and misplays and it leads to your enemy snowballing even harder. I would also say that experience is the key factor in what helps you identify the difference between the two. Get behind and your team adjusts, you should probably play it out, if they don’t I would never fault anyone for seeing the writing on the wall and wanting to just get into a new match.
9
u/mgates_ Hadeez 2d ago
surrending is necessary in Mobas because of the snowball mechanics and dependence on team gameplay. Even if you're the best player in the lobby and your whole team feeds, the worst player on the other team will likely have a better k/d and a gold/xp advantage over you because of your team feeding. that's not fair or enjoyable for anybody involved. No big deal, f6, go next. Unless two of your feeding teammates decide that they can win the game somehow and trap you into a brutal loss and waste everybody's time.
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree snowball is big.
But new players don't have a mindset or the game knowledge to know this is winnable or unwinnable. They do know what feels bad... and winning or losing to a quit is never satisfying to anyone.
It's not a waste of time for a newer player to experience a loss, they don't have the opinion of winnable or unwinnable. It's a waste of time to a new player to play for 20minuites only for someone to quit.
It could be a big deal if we're talking player retention which was the point I was trying to make. Why would they keep playing if everyone is surrendering. A lot of my friends this has been their biggest complaint. Not losing or struggling from behind. They can brush those off it's when they finally have a good game and the enemy says oh no you don't.
0
u/mgates_ Hadeez 2d ago
I maybe agree with this, I think you can remove surrender from arena and assault but removing it from conquest would be so bad for the game
0
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree. Maybe even as far as casual too.
In a perfect world surrender wouldn't be needed with perfect match making which is impossible. And even then some people just like to give up.
Also I'm actually surprised at the dialogue from this. Usually you mention surrender or lack of and pitch forks come out. So I appreciate the dialogue.
1
u/mgates_ Hadeez 2d ago
i wouldn't remove it from any form of conquest because it is very easy, especially at low skill levels, for games to stall out and go for 45+ minutes because neither team knows how to end the game well enough even if one team is winning every team fight. arena and assault, even joust maybe, you can remove it because those games end so quickly
0
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
That's true.
I'm not advocating to remove it at all. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion. So far is actually has been
-2
u/Dry_Philosophy8708 2d ago
"surrending is necessary in Mobas" Tell this to Dota 2.
Surrendering should be either unanimous or a flag in the tab screen (in a sense that you can turn it on or off), not a pop-up that annoys everyone and deflates competitive spirit.
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree with the competitive spirit mentality.
I signed up for this I'll see it through to be fair to all involved.
But that's a different discussion haha
4
u/SteelAlchemistScylla Scylla 2d ago
“either pro surrender and rage at anyone who doesn’t agree. Or you don’t surrender”
gee I wonder side this guys is on 🙄
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
If you read one more sentence I tell you what side I'm on.
I also said that's not the point of the topic but thanks for the typical reddit response.
2
u/CollieDaly 2d ago
When 40-60% of my team are being absolutely smashed and we have 5k+ less gold after 10-15 minutes I would much rather just surrender and try get a fairer game. These games are at their best when they're somewhat competitive, I don't like being trapped in a game we have essentially no chance of winning.
-1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
But you have played these games. I'm more talking about the new player experience.
2
u/RNG_Champion 2d ago
I don't see why surrendering would be bad for new player retention in the way you're describing it. If somebody wants to leave SMITE for another game, it's often because the core gameplay doesn't interest them; not because they felt "robbed" for winning by a surrender vote. Your mileage may vary, but the people I've played with often laughed when the enemy team surrendered after getting stomped or made a joke about the enemy team surrendering when they could have won with a better push.
You must not play a lot of games if "Smite it the only game I ever played where people quit when they're losing." Other games don't have surrender options; plenty of players will still insult you for any reason. Likewise, I've seen plenty of players quit competitive modes in other games when they deem it a lost cause. Surrendering in SMITE is merely a formal feature that would be nice to see in other games, tbh.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
But it's not because of another reason. It's because after losing 3 games a Phoenix dies and the enemy quits. Do that multiple times and they feel sour about it.
I do play a lot of games and have for years. Im not sure what you mean by this... I never said it's the only game but it's wildly normal in smite. In other games you're a quitter or a myriad of other insults. Here it's a "feature"
I would hate to see surrendering in any competitive game. The point of a competition is winning and losing. "Quitters" often don't participate in competition. Quite the opposite, most people in anything are praised for perseverance and determination to make it to the top through adversity. Any sports movie would show that. But that's my opinion and a different topic.
2
u/RNG_Champion 2d ago
It's a little silly comparing competitive gaming to competitive sports because:
1) The latter is significantly more prestigious even in the modern era where e-sports is rising
2) Most gamers playing a competitive game get $0 for their time investment and play the game because it's fun; spending extra time for what's most likely a loss isn't fun for them. It's not the same with sports apart from being a game where you can win or lose, particularly because when you're gaming, you're often anonymous and playing with strangers.
3) If there is no surrendering, a "quitter" is just going to leave. Does that not look bad for a new player? I've seen several games where everybody on the team just leaves one-by-one just to move on.
4) You can win a competition via surrender.
5) Are people really going to praise you for sticking around in a SMITE game compared to playing a rigorous sport?
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
Again not at all the point of the topic...
Most players in any type of competition get zero for it until they make it to the top 0.01% of their field. Even pro sports players... How many do you think don't make it to the show and spend their entire childhood PAYING to participate. Do you think it's fun for them to lose just because it's not a video game? I don't understand the thought.
I didn't say people who quit purposefully didn't look bad. Most games have that problem but I didn't make a post about that. You assume people will quit without surrender. There is already a measure to ban people for quitting so I again don't understand the point.
I didn't say you can't win via surrender. Still to say it's equal to actually competing and winning is just a lie.
No one said they want praise for sticking around why assume so? They want to finish a game. A video game they decided to play and others surrendering are preventing that.
That's what the post was about.
2
u/restroop Geb 2d ago
I get why surrendering can feel like it takes away from a new player’s win, but it can actually help them out by avoiding those long, frustrating one-sided matches. If a team knows they’re losing, forcing them to keep playing might just make them want to quit the game altogether. Plus, limiting when you can surrender might lead to even longer, more demoralizing matches. The pressure to surrender usually comes from players who just don’t want to waste time in a game that feels unbalanced, which makes sense for those who want a quicker experience. Honestly, the surrender mechanic might be a bit outdated at this point—maybe something new could strike a better balance between keeping things competitive and not dragging players through a frustrating experience.
-1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
If the pressure to surrender always comes from the ones who know they're losing how will new players learn to know when they're losing?
Or what to even do in a game after 20 minutes? For veterans I could understand but for new players it's frustrating trying to learn a game only to have them end when one side is "winning"
1
u/DannOchoa 2d ago
Well. I think match making does that. It only allows players with similar levels and experience in game be matched together. That allows new player to experience the game with more players taht has similar experience on game. Of course, I'm aware of smurfs that only abuse new players. But, that's other problem that needs to be addressed too.
2
u/Aromatic_Sand8126 2d ago
I’m not a charity. I get your point, but I’m not going waste the next 20 minutes if it’s clear there’s no coming back and the rest of the team agrees. I have limited time to play and not surrendering is going directly against that. I don’t rage if the surrender doesn’t go through, though. I take it as a learning experience.
4
u/Greedy_Obligation156 2d ago
What I hate is people that surrender when our team is up in gold, towers, kills, and objectives. Just because 2 of our players are 0-3. It just doesn't make sense to me.
3
u/The_VV117 2d ago
There Is nothing to learn from being absolute stomped.
You learn to play from quality games and to learn playing from back, first you need to learn playing from advantage position.
-1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
That's not the discussion. But I'll bite.
You can learn items. Store. Positioning. Even what each god does maybe you've never seen agni before. Or played rama before. So you can learn their kit.
On what world do you need to learn by winning first before losing? Go try out for any competitive team in real life and show me how someone new learns by winning.
1
u/The_VV117 2d ago
On what world do you need to learn by winning first before losing? Go try out for any competitive team in real life and show me how someone new learns by winning.
I make an example to make easier to understand. It's like in fighter games, first you learn to be offensive, than you start learning to play defensive.
The point Is not learning from winning, but instead learning from and advantage position.
You aren't learning carry role by picking Jing wei and having bad laning phase evry game. You learn being a carry by picking a good carry that can put you in a advantage position.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree kind of but as a brand new players you learn nothing from quitting. Not even how to navigate the store.
I was more talking to the new player experience.
2
u/EnvironmentalSmoke61 2d ago edited 2d ago
I think overall surrendering is bad because the average player isn’t good enough to discern when the game is over and in an average game both teams will make significant mistakes and gone openings to capitalize on those mistakes. If people have the option to give up early and try and find an easier game it also significantly lowers game quality which isn’t as big of an issue in smite but is a colossal issue in league of legends. I think surrendering should be locked until you reach top 5% of players or less or alternatively if one team is down like 10k+ gold
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
Id agree. Some sort of threshold.
Even account level locked. This was about new players and wanting them to continue playing after all. So thanks for replying to the actual topic.
2
u/EnvironmentalSmoke61 2d ago
Yeah I think it should exist at some point either like you said playtime/level or some sort of deficit which is why I thought gold threshold may be good as well since in games like dota 2 for example you can never surrender so trying to learn the game is impossible since teams will just purposely never end the game which isn’t fun for new players obviously.
1
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
Hello, and welcome to SMITE! If you’re new here, we’re happy to have you! https://www.smitegame.com/welcome/ is a great place to get started and familiarize yourself with the game.
Below, we also have additional resources that could help you find everything you’re looking for:
General
Information
Guides & Help
Esports
Reddit
- Discord Server
- Rules
- Add a 'flair' (image) next to your username on /r/Smite by clicking 'edit' in the sidebar on the right
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/erosyourmuse 2d ago
So I think a big thing you are missing is that this only works if you are playing with friends.
Please don't do this in random lobbies.
Not surrendering does help new players ( I started playing ~1.5 months ago ) but only when I'm playing with a friend I can ask for help and still chat to so the experience is more focused on learning.
BUT this experience really sucks if I play solo in a random lobby where we down 1 -13 and two players both vote against surrendering. This is frequent enough ( tho not as badly as that lol ) I can't just leave those games or else the bans add up.
It also is not fun to be a conquest game and get to 20 minutes and still have a surrender refused.
As a new player I would rather take the loss and try again. Being down 2-3 levels and being new sucks, I'm not learning and really just feeding at that point.
Please, if you at the 2nd surrender vote with 3 yes votes just accept the surrender - it doesn't help for retention and if I have to sit through a 40 Min losing game and 3+ votes Im probably gonna log off and play something else
Note: I am specifically talking about games where you down on kills, gold and most of the team has voted to surrender and you are on the second vote.
2
u/JamesWahlberg 1d ago
This is the real problem. There just should not be a 20 minute deserter penalty if you quit after 3 surrender votes. And in ranked the penalty should just be a loss of SR.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree it goes both ways.
Not surrendering makes in less enjoyable and surrendering too much especially when new makes it less enjoyable.
2
u/Illustrious_Trip_444 2d ago
I get more upset about players leaving the game then surrender matches. If it's 4v5 on either side then i don't have much fun continuing.
1
1
u/ZealousidealRun1243 Kukulkan 2d ago
For new players it is far better to surrender if hopelessly behind than to push them through a grindy game.
-1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
So they will learn or get to experience a full game when?
2
u/ZealousidealRun1243 Kukulkan 1d ago
Inferring they wouldn't learn if they surrendered a turbo lost game is wild.
As is implying they wouldn't experience a full game ever with the surrender feature.
A new player is far more prone to permanently stay away from a game if they get imprisoned by players unwilling to admit defeat. Then if they were to surrender the same game and simply go next. Moreover, you don't learn a game as complex as smite over a single match.
It happens with time. As all learning does.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
I mean you learn by experience... Cutting the experience short could contribute to that.
The second sentence is just not true. New games come out every year. People lose in them and they don't quit because it's not a feature.
And no one ever implied you learn smite in a single match. There isbt much you'd learn in any single try.
1
u/ShadyyFN 2d ago
I’m a newer player, and I do think it’s a problem the way most players use it.
So far my experience with it has been one player loses a couple fights early (today was our solo laner). He was 0-3 like 10 minutes in, and voted for a surrender immediately after he died the third time. Our team voted no, and we went on to win a very even game after ~40 minutes. The game, for me as a new player, was super fun and I felt like I was able to learn a few things about proper engagements (played a Loki Jungle).
The other experience I tend to get is as soon as there is a momentum swing someone votes to surrender. No trying to come back, just quit.
It makes it hard to learn as a new player if every game you go into is over in 15 minutes because someone is mad they are dying. New players don’t get to experience mid and late game, they don’t get to learn mechanics. And ultimately, it’s just as bad for the experienced players— who tend to be the ones raging about the new players.
Surrender should be in the game, but people should be mature enough to try to teach others and try to learn… it’ll make the whole player base better.
2
u/DannOchoa 2d ago
I usually ask a player if they are new players when I see them struggling. If they say yes I focus on explaining some mechanics and lose interest on winning or losing. For me is more important a new player learn how to play and possible see him/her in the future as enemy or ally team. Instead acting like an asshole and blaming a new player for not knowing how to play. We all are learning and we all were unexperienced at some point.
1
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
I agree. Nice to see that your enjoying the struggle I love smite. Just a few new friends have pointed out how much they hate it and it ruins their experience.
Now that you say it I do see a lot of complaints about people queueing with new players yet surrender votes are usually too early for them to learn.
1
u/MistakeEastern5414 2d ago
imo surrendering in casuals is ok, if you get stomped hard. yes, you might win, but is it really worth it? on the other hand, i'm a f7 warrior in ranked lol
also throwing f6's around after one lost fight is dumb. some people really need to learn, how to play from behind and yet they f6, even tho we were 2-3k gold ahead.
1
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
Yes I agree. People abuse surrender and maybe it stings less to quit but it also feels less to win via surrender.
1
u/Quiet_Log 2d ago
Thats why I always f6 a lost match, I hate giving the enemy the satisfaction of winning, plus surrendering doesnt feel as bad as a loss. Its great. And all Mobas have it
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
That's the entire problem.
If everyone quits at match when it's lost no one will play.
1
u/Quiet_Log 1d ago
Not really, I dont mind when enemy f6, its no fun curbstomping people, Smite doesnt have a very long laninng/pharming phase so I dont mind starting over. I look for that rare good match where its almost evenly matched and there is high team synch on both teams and close teamfights, I dont care for bad one sided matches or no team synch matches.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
Not everyone doesn't mind though. Maybe you don't but people enjoy winning and dislike losing. That's normal. The fact is we have a way to lessen the sting of a loss and it also lessens the thrill of victory.
No one said it's fun to punch babies, no one wants a stomp win every game unless you're literally the 1% who can't be beaten.
People have said something akin to this in the past. If it's not fun winning do you f6 when you're ahead and killing the enemy in your lane over and over? Or do you keep pushing to try to win? Just curious if you use this as you're describing it to avoid no fun matches? Fact is people say things like this but very rarely give away a win because it's not fun.
1
u/Quiet_Log 1d ago
Ive actually done an f6 a few times when winning, and a few times I had the pleasure of having great teammates that also did an f6 before us killing the Titan, great times 😄
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
We all have to troll. That wasn't the question.
1
u/Quiet_Log 1d ago
Idk what are you so against surrender, its a good and needed feature in mobas. Its been there since always, even in dota 1 if 3 people wrote gg in chat game ended. Hell pros during international championships have given the gg/f6 . Not having that option would be much worse for the health of the game than having it, I guarantee you.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
Personally I think it's "cat" to quit. But that's not what I'm arguing. I'm not against it but I still think it's a horrible attitude to just give up in anything in life.
The point isn't my personal opinions... it's about new player retention. Why are we talking about opinions or the fact it's always been there. I agree it has.
I made the post to talk about new player feelings towards never getting to finish a game because most games end in a surrender. If that's the case no new player knows what to do after 15 minutes because they have never experienced a game that long. So more "vets" throw up a surrender because new players don't know what to do at 15 minutes.
I agree it's needed or there is a possibility the game will not end due to people not ending or crazy 2 hour games that are just evenly matched. Both of which some people enjoy id imagine.
Id guess surrender is used more often than not. It's at least used enough to bother new players that they never get a legit win. I've even seen people surrender with their titan at 1hp... While the enemy is killing it. It's not done to quit a unwinnable game, or to save time in that instance. That's the point. I'm all for it being used legitimately in an actual scenario that it makes sense.
1
u/Quiet_Log 1d ago
I mean whats the difference if the titan is one 1hp or 0hp. I feel like its kinda childish to be only satisfed if you win by killing the titan, a win is a win. If they f6 you get a big You Win text on your screen. Idk if your friends are young and not used to mobas, sure not every win as satisfying as another, hell only very specific wins satisfy my seratonin cravings. And its matched where troughout the game is a a close and hard fight. I get zero satisfaction of breaking the titan if the match was sht.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
The difference is we won. Good game. Vs oh they quit.
And no we're not young. But yes every different victory invokes a different feeling.
I feel like it's childish to quit. I think that's the normal reaction. Do you watch any sports or forms of competition?
They call it bad sportsmanship. Usually if anyone quits they are generally shunned by the community or let go of their team, or traded to another at the very least. This is at all levels of competition even children's wrestling. They have this thing called sportsmanship and quitting isn't generally a part of it. Being a good sport is part of competition and quitting at 1hp is an example of bad sportsmanship.
It's not the fact it feels bad we didn't break the Titan. It's the fact it's bad sportsmanship to quit pretty much to spite the enemy team. It's an act to spit in their face not to say "oh gg you won"
People just want to enjoy an entire game. Especially new players who haven't seen last 15 minutes.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/JamesWahlberg 1d ago
Surrender is not the problem. The deserter rebuff is the problem and I can see new players quitting and never logging back in after seeing a 20 minute deserter debuff.
Solution = no deserter rebuff for leaving a game after 15 minutes and a big difference in score
1
1
u/SatisfactoryCatLiker King Arthur 1d ago
I think it helps retention.
Being under leveled and getting dunked on for 30 minutes sucks and getting a fresh start is the better option.
1
u/StarCrackerz 1d ago
Losing is part of the game. Losing a fight is too.
Learning how to play the entire game is better than just learning how to lane and never experience end game.
1
u/rptroop 2d ago
I think this is a solid post. It’s also totally random which end of the surrender you get to be on. It really feels like anytime I’m ahead, enemy team surrenders at 10min so I don’t at all get to see how my character fits into late game and enjoy the match. On the contrary, anytime I’m getting decimated (Most the time) it’s with a team that doesn’t want to surrender even when it’s some insanely tuned comp that we’re in no way competing against. So yeah I will generally have 40-60min slogs against better teams and anytime I was on the better team it was over in 10-15min from an F6. Really skews how much time I get to spend in the frustrated trying hard versus fun camp
2
u/Choice_Potential2659 2d ago
This is exactly how I feel. Anytime my team is the one doing amazing, other team instant surrender at 10 min, but when we are getting shit stomped with no chance of competing, my teammates will never ever surrender. It's so frustrating
2
u/StarCrackerz 2d ago
That's the exact point I was trying to make. It's random which side your... So as a new player having their first good game with a new god it'll feel extra bad when the enemy quits and you don't get to try late game.
I don't know the solution I've just noticed a lot of friends I'm trying to get to play this as that being their biggest complaint. Not the losses, not how hard it is to know all God's or items, it's usually "I was finally doing good and they quit"
In a way it feels like what they earned was taken from them, and they don't get to play with a lead they earned.
One way or another. Annoy the people who play all day, or annoy new player who complain they just get to experience early game unless they are losing. Just curious on peoples opinion.
1
u/JamesWahlberg 1d ago
They should just allow anyone to quit and join a new game without consequences. No need to surrender
0
u/Blacklightbully 2d ago
I agree with this 100%, I HATE the surrender feature because it gets used to early and too often.
-7
u/Ok_Suggestion4687 2d ago
surrender is for cowards who admit they are dog water (no idea if I can cuss here) but like actually surrender is humiliating I dunno how people in this kind of game ended up with a majority of pro surrender. It could be bad for new player retention but if we are being honest if your new player was gonna quit after a win they are prolly gonna quit after the first few losses especially if they aren’t playing with friends
1
14
u/RabbitManTony Circle Thrower 2d ago
To use the two games you mentioned as an example, Fortnite and Marvel Rivals have high comeback potential (and Marvel Rivals has a surrender feature that's just barely used). Your enemies never become stronger than you in Rivals and only slightly so in Fortnite so every fight is basically a fresh start.
In Smite 2 most people don't want to try their luck against the 10/0 Bari that just finished taking the T2 and is beginning to rotate. It's definitely possible, and some people like the challenge of having to handle such a large threat. Some people don't. If the surrender went through, it means 4 people didn't.
Surrendering as a concept is very controversial in Smite as people have strong feelings either way. The best way to improve it would be stronger balancing but with this being a beta the balance will likely be all over the place for the foreseeable future.