For The Record - Rage Slow, Again

[-- Tobias --]

Here's a 14+ hour (game clock) contest versus PlayerID 433663 (aka Grill, Poff?, and other, more familiar names) where I dropped with 9 minutes remaining and the victory failed to get recorded.

http://sfcon.demoszenen.de/dcrec/2012-05/1v1Random-2012-05-27_14.36.zip

An observation about this game:

1) After his entire navy was eliminated, 433663 utilized the "rage slow" technique. If you've lost your entire navy and your opponent still has 8 or so carriers, the game is decided and it's just a matter of time. Most people recognize this as a special situation, and many just say "gg, get on with it" and disconnect; others stay along for the ride. But intentionally going 1x speed to drag it out and lag the server is a real bore. Really, these players need to be banned.

An observation about some defcon players:

1) It seems to me that there are some players that just can not accept defeat gracefully. Here's a perspective for them to consider - initial deployment and tactical selection are critically important, and the higher the level of defcon play, where tactical execution is generally on par, the more it is about luck than it is about skill. Sure 433863 began with what turned out to be a noob blunder, but there are only a limited number of tactics one can adopt given any particular territory configuration. In this game I chose to attack in one way, he chose another (then quickly transformed into hiding below his silos). No matter, we could each have chosen differently. The combination of your territoriy, deployment, and tactical selection, and those of your opponent, is luck. Sometimes the combination is in your favor, sometimes not. Win some lose some np.

So, instead of calling me an "asshole" because I take your fleet, and then proceed to drag out the game via "rage slow," take comfort in the fact that maybe next time you will draw the favorable combination of territories, deployment, and tactical selections, and please don't drag out the server (causing players to drop and others to be unable to utilize the server).

I won, this one. Have a nice day.

[kudayta]

I think you meant this game. The one you posted was between you and Castle Bravo. The proper ID is 433863.

In the recording, it's difficult to determine why, but three times he states "AFK" in alliance chat. He calls you an asshole once, after stating he was AFK (again, in alliance chat, not sure why he did it there). And he calls you an asshole again in alliance chat after he's down to one carrier. And he didn't keep it on 1x for the bulk of the game, just during engagements. And at the five hour mark in-game, your subs are still out of position, and not moving towards a firing spot. At 5.5 hours, they begin to assemble, but not at the logical spot off the Hong Kong coast to fire behind his silos. And he's put it at 3x at this point in the game. At 7 hours, you're cycling bombers around, subs still not in position, and you fire one silo, one time. At seven and a half hours, again you fire one silo (a different one), but three times this time. The game drops to 1x at this point, and you begin to move your subs. Grill states he will now wait for hours. At 8 hours, the message "Speeding up Grill who seems to have left the computer" is issued, and then immediately it drops back down to 1x.

I'm not saying that what Grill did here was cool, but you brought this on yourself. You didn't press his navy, you dithered around after his navy was destroyed, then you trickle launched. Then after fucking with this guy, you quit before the game ends. No, I can't blame Grill at all here.


All of this is assuming that you're brad, and that this is the correct game.

[-- Tobias --]

Yes, I posted the wrong game, and yes you have posted the correct one.

I'm surprised you endured the lengthy recording, but I appreciate it.

The "he didn't keep it on 1x for the bulk of the game, just during engagements" statement is incorrect (for it was I that went 1x at engagements and 2-3x otherwise - and it certainly was not I that kept it at 1x for much of 8 or more game hours after I had cleared his naval, nor was it I that kept putting game speed back to 1x after the computer sped up Grill).

I'm also not sure how you consider my tactics to maximize points (cycling bombers) and minimize sub damage (firing one silo at a time) can be considered to be sufficient to "bring [rage slow] upon myself." I thought he still had at least 4-5 subs left, so I took precautions. Not having any subs at all makes his behavior even more remarkable! There was simply no way he could have won no matter what I had done.

Dunno what all that afk stuff is all about, and in any case it is irrelevant since the game was decided soon after defcon 3 with his sunken navy. I'd guess that his inability to accept defeat progressed from some form of afk excuse making to outright rage slow, with the explicatives thrown in for good measure along the way.

Also, any statement as to the effect of him deciding to "wait for hours" is disingenuous if it is he himself that creates the wait. No, it was rage slow plain and simple. Again, rage slowers should be banned.

Lastly, I did not quit. At 9 mins remaining the lag had built up to the point that my system was simply unresponsive.

[kudayta]

Why did you bother with maximizing points? He had 110 million kills (give or take), and you could easily have got 130 with your subs and silos. Even if he had four or five subs, you still had the game in the bag. It's that kind of turtling that really pisses people off. Maybe cover your launches with bomber patrols next time instead of cycling them through the airbases to hit cities that are already at 0.1 population. Hell, take your own advice and accept defeat if he maxes out points with his subs and wins by a point or two. You insist that the game was won after his navy was crushed, then WIN IT. This wasn't some arrogant noob you were up against, it was a halfway decent player. Show him some respect.

And let me be absolutely clear here: I'm not bitching at you for the sake of bitching at you. I like you as a human being. You're funny, smart and you've got some serious skills at this game. These are the harsh comments of a friend that wants to see you do well.

[-- Tobias --]

Why did you bother with maximizing points? He had 110 million kills (give or take), and you could easily have got 130 ...

So don't you (Hatfield) dare butter me (McCoy) up only to bash me!

a) while I do not like it myself, score differential matters on sfcon servers re: rankings, and b) unlike most experienced players, I have never embraced the population/score metrics, never view population stats, and discussions of anything in terms of population numbers are meaningless to me.

(As an aside, I once had an in-game discussion with hooru regarding population statistics and scoring. I fully understood the metric, fully appreciate its significance, and recognize that players who have integrated it into their active mindset while playing, such as hooru and perhaps yourself kuda, gain an advantage. It is just a matter of personal preference for me that I choose not to pay any heed to population numbers at all, and I apologize therefore for not making any decision which I perhaps should have made based on consideration of populations.)

I still maintain that my behavior, given all considerations and intentions, was less ass-holish than his!

[cza]

While were on the subject of Hatfield & McCoy, and given the holiday yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV3q4klpYJE

[hooru1]

lol

[Forever Young]

Here's a 14+ hour (game clock) contest versus PlayerID 433663 (aka Grill, Poff?, and other, more familiar names) where I dropped with 9 minutes remaining and the victory failed to get recorded.

http://sfcon.demoszenen.de/dcrec/2012-05/1v1Random-2012-05-27_14.36.zip

An observation about this game:

1) After his entire navy was eliminated, 433663 utilized the "rage slow" technique. If you've lost your entire navy and your opponent still has 8 or so carriers, the game is decided and it's just a matter of time. Most people recognize this as a special situation, and many just say "gg, get on with it" and disconnect; others stay along for the ride. But intentionally going 1x speed to drag it out and lag the server is a real bore. Really, these players need to be banned.

An observation about some defcon players:

1) It seems to me that there are some players that just can not accept defeat gracefully. Here's a perspective for them to consider - initial deployment and tactical selection are critically important, and the higher the level of defcon play, where tactical execution is generally on par, the more it is about luck than it is about skill. Sure 433863 began with what turned out to be a noob blunder, but there are only a limited number of tactics one can adopt given any particular territory configuration. In this game I chose to attack in one way, he chose another (then quickly transformed into hiding below his silos). No matter, we could each have chosen differently. The combination of your territoriy, deployment, and tactical selection, and those of your opponent, is luck. Sometimes the combination is in your favor, sometimes not. Win some lose some np.

So, instead of calling me an "asshole" because I take your fleet, and then proceed to drag out the game via "rage slow," take comfort in the fact that maybe next time you will draw the favorable combination of territories, deployment, and tactical selections, and please don't drag out the server (causing players to drop and others to be unable to utilize the server).

I won, this one. Have a nice day.

LOL! i have no problem to lose a game, but if a player is using 1xspeed without happenings and plus without a reasons for hours, i have a big prob with you. also it was not for the first time with you! i really don`t like to play with you. and that asshole was for private chat. that must be a mistake. sometimes i am writing in private chat for rec.
you all can check it. i wrote in that rec asshole for 2-3 times plus motherfucker! i wanted to say "asshole" in private but sometimes it is changing to public in an automatic way(lag?).
i really hope many players will watch it. i say sorry for that asshole, but i really don`t want to play you again. i don`t want to waste 5 hours for 1 game without a reason!
btw, you only won that game because i thought i play a noob.
edit: you are not the only player with a slow down strategy. there are minimum 3 players around at the moment and it is not funny to play with these players. this has nothing to do with losing or a win!

[Noryb]

Why did you bother with maximizing points? He had 110 million kills (give or take), and you could easily have got 130 with your subs and silos. Even if he had four or five subs, you still had the game in the bag. It's that kind of turtling that really pisses people off. Maybe cover your launches with bomber patrols next time instead of cycling them through the airbases to hit cities that are already at 0.1 population. Hell, take your own advice and accept defeat if he maxes out points with his subs and wins by a point or two. You insist that the game was won after his navy was crushed, then WIN IT. This wasn't some arrogant noob you were up against, it was a halfway decent player. Show him some respect.

I'm just watching the rec now. Totally agree. I'm probably not the best person to criticize slow and cautious play, but there seems to be a trend for some people to drag out games that have already been clearly won in order to make it look like a slam dunk win. A bit useless as the final score frequently fails to indicate the quality of the game. Plenty of very hard fought and balanced games end with very lopsided scores. If it's not a tournament game the score differential is not important at all. Wringing every last point out of someone who you have already beaten is quite disrespectful, especially if you waste everyone's time doing it. If for some reason you do need to move subs around or cycle bombers in late game, which in some cases can be a totally valid move, then at least do it as at high a speed as possible. That's not directed at anyone, just a general thing.

Also, I have always felt that a game played under an alias doesn't really count anyway. Seems like a common sense thing. If you want a game to go down on your record it should be played under your own name, instead of changing it at the last second in the event of a win. Also there can be a very real in-game advantage to using an alias. People tend to deploy rather differently against a [DEMO]NewPlayer than an established top player. Doesn't exactly matter in this case since you were both doing it, but it does underscore how meaningless this game was and how inappropriate it was to just slowly grind out points. Though, in response to FY's comment in alliance chat, if people use aliases it's harder to avoid the ones who you know it will be no fun to play.

That really was a horrible game.

[Forever Young]

yeah, it was a horrible game. he only won because he crushed my fleet at start. that is why i will never count those games for my ranking.

[-- Tobias --]

This will be my last post to this topic.

FY, it was YOU who were the "player ... using 1xspeed without happenings," not I. With fleet, and bombers, and suspicion that you had subs, I not only had "happenings," but kept trying to go 2x or higher. You, with nothing, had none; yet you kept it at 1x for spite alone. Sure people place differently for noobs, I understand. But that changes nothing. Man up when you lose, simple as that.

[cza]

I'm probably not the best person to criticize slow and cautious play, but there seems to be a trend for some people to drag out games that have already been clearly won in order to make it look like a slam dunk win. A bit useless as the final score frequently fails to indicate the quality of the game. Plenty of very hard fought and balanced games end with very lopsided scores…Also, I have always felt that a game played under an alias doesn't really count anyway.

Last point first: As I've said before, if you have no idea who you are playing against, assume it's someone like zoro's dog. Relax your game accordingly as events reveal a weaker player. If you lose because you thought you were playing someone else, that is entirely on you.

I don't see the opposition to maximizing points. It's the nature of the game, and among the "bosses" and the pros just below them, tourney or non-tourney, that is standard practice. You clean. I can't speak for others, but I still am up and down on the quality of my cleans, especially in 1v1. It is something that requires practice. If a player does not want to sit around for cleaning, then they can leave the game if they have nothing left and don't care. Also, I sit through plenty of games when players are on slow in the early and mid phases when I think there isn't a great reason to do so; I feel no obligation to play fast later in the game just because they ran out of units. If I need to go slow, I go slow.

On a philosophical level, I don't get the assertion that a wide disparity in points might conceal a quality game, rather than a slam dunk win. In the end, the points are what matters. a lopsided score by definition is a slam dunk win. Watch my last game against Tobias. I noobed up some strategic calculations, but within that, we still had a nice, tense battle early on. I also kept battling to get what I could from him. In the end, however, it was a slam dunk win for him courtesy of my failure. I don't read a lot into scores in the sense of, "wow, x lost by 100 points, he must suck," but it does tell me who had more failure and who made more of their own luck. One can fail beautifully, with great honor, and one can fail ugly, but the score can't tell you which. Perhaps this is what you're saying.

[tllotpfkamvpe]

.

[Forever Young]

This will be my last post to this topic.

FY, it was YOU who were the "player ... using 1xspeed without happenings," not I. With fleet, and bombers, and suspicion that you had subs, I not only had "happenings," but kept trying to go 2x or higher. You, with nothing, had none; yet you kept it at 1x for spite alone. Sure people place differently for noobs, I understand. But that changes nothing. Man up when you lose, simple as that.

bullshit! the first circa 45 mins you used 1x speed! i was nearly always on top speed. after a few hours i have slowed down for making coffee(3 times lol!!!), went out in garden for the dogs, cleaned the kitchen, logged in public chat server,
played a minicom game and so on. and i say it again, it was not the first time with you with a slowing down tactic from your side without a reason. sure a reason is to search for subs, but not for(4)hours.
btw, i am not sure if this will be my last post here. maybe a good idea to post our last 6 matches here. so can everybody make an own picture to your slow down tactic.
lol, if i remember me right, in our last matches, you left a game in def 4 without saying something, another game you dropped(it was already lost for you), then you rejoined and said you will lose because of the drop. that is all no prob for me. also i lost games to you before that but i don`t like to waste my time for nothing. a drop or a quit is okay for me but not a slow down tactic.

[hooru1]

fight fight fight!