To hell with Sudden Death!

Does Sudden Death stink or not?

  • It stinketh

    Votes: 28 40.6%
  • Can't smell anything

    Votes: 31 44.9%
  • Meaningless 3rd comedy option that screws up the results

    Votes: 10 14.5%

  • Total voters
    69

Laivasse

Companion Cube
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
28
I've held a low-level dislike for Sudden Death for a while now - nothing like the kind of dissatisfaction that would compel me to make a thread about it, but in game I might occasionally feel like asserting "ah man, SD is SHIT" upon hearing the dreaded 'YOU FAILED!'

But after having 2 separate games of 2fort ruined by Sudden Death - once when my team had finally broken the enemy's flag room sentry defence after a long deadlock at 2-2, and once just microseconds after a huge personal effort to cap and pull the score to 2-1 - I can't hack it any more. F*CK sudden death. TO HELL WITH IT!

Sudden Death wipes out all your efforts prior to that point and turns the game into a tiresome game of team deathmatch. People get afraid of dying in a way that discourages team play - there's no point sacrificing your life to sap buildings if you don't get a second chance and the rest of your team are too scared to capitalise; no point trying to force the enemy back in a chaotic shootout if half of your team realised that they'd be more likely to survive by camping in their base as sniper or engineer. And let's face it, dying and having to wait 3 minutes to spawn while watching a bunch of campers have a snooze just isn't fun. There's only so many times that 'ah well, at least I can make a cuppa' can feel like a silver lining.

Map objectives get forgotten, the significance of dying is, I feel, overemphasized and the dominant or better team doesn't even necessarily have an advantage. I spoke with Kadayi in another thread about a game where we'd been on opposing sides. His team had been hammering mine on Well, but our team had proven belligerent enough to hold onto the final cap for quite a while. His team was clearly playing better as a team, having well placed teleporters, sentries to deter recapping, classes backing eachother up, etc. Our team just died, sped out of spawn and attacked in a frenzied enough way to stave off the inevitable for a bit longer - you know the pattern... I felt we could turn the fight around enough if we just had the teamwork to take out some of their key sentries, but that teamwork was nowhere to be found.

Instead it went to sudden death and our team, full of solo heroes, won. Not because we were better at working as a team, but because all the sentries got wiped out for us and we fought it like a team deathmatch, while Kadayi's team had already gotten used to the pattern of dying in order to preserve an advantage. So we won...but it wasn't very satisfying. We didn't play very well, we didn't cooperate enough, we ignored objectives, we had been dominated and forced back by good team play, but we landed the match in Sudden Death because, essentially, we had a few skilled deathmatchers knocking about.

I really don't see how it benefits the game at all... Some people say it's preferable to an infinite deadlock, but, assuming there is any such thing as an infinite deadlock, I don't agree anyway. In my experience the games which are locked quite evenly are much more enjoyable than games where one side easily steamrolls the other. I usually like those very even games to go on as long as possible.

I can understand why there might need to be a measure in place to satisfy people who get tired of the same map running for too long, but imo Sudden Death is an overcompensation considering how annoying it is all round. I'd rather just let the team with the most caps/points get the victory - and if no team has an advantage, wait for one team to get one before ending the match. That's what sudden death usually means right? For example, in quiz shows or penalties in football, Sudden Death means the game goes on as normal but the first side to slip up loses - not that the game itself significantly changes, which is sadly the case in TF2.

And if people really do find it so tedious to carry on playing a certain map, they could always...I dunno, maybe leave the server? Which is what I often do when an enjoyable game (which in many cases isn't even deadlocked) goes to the mediocrity of sudden death.

Thoughts anyone? Disagree? Does Sudden Death smell like the ballsack of a tramp, or an angel?
 

Absinthe

The Freeman
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
14,040
Reaction score
26
I view sudden death as a lesser evil, really. I've been in games where simply nothing happens for ages. I appreciate long, hard fought games. But there's a point where a stalemate can just become excessive. I'd prefer to just get a game over with instead of dragging it out for God knows how long.

And yet I really don't like it. This is because 60% of the times a game goes into sudden death for me, people switch to defense roles, turtle up in their base, and the game dwindles down to the final second with everybody being a loser. And watching people sit by their sentries or snipe from their base for another three minutes (if you're unfortunate enough to die) is extremely irritating. Especially since I think respawn times at 20 seconds are bad enough.

I'm not sure if the problem is with sudden death itself or if just needs to be altered in some way. If something was put in place to discourage camping, I wouldn't mind too much. But I don't know how that could be implemented without being too extreme.
 

scotland1

Spy
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
879
Reaction score
0
I like sudden death, when it's actually long enough to kill people.
 

Absinthe

The Freeman
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
14,040
Reaction score
26
What do you mean long enough? Sudden death gives ample time for everybody to kill each other provided they actually try to kill the other team.

If you're not killing people in the allotted time given, it's because you're being a pussy and holding back, being the very reason sudden death sucks so bad right now.
 

Laivasse

Companion Cube
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
28
...when it's actually long enough to kill people.
that's another reason I don't like it which I forgot to mention.

Twice now on 2fort I've been on a team that actually played Sudden Death quite well. We mounted a decent assault, we had medics, we smacked those camping engy bastards in the face, we got the int out and we made it back to our own base quite swiftly...

...and capped with barely any time left to spare. Well tell a lie, one time we capped with 5 seconds left, and the other time we were about to cap with about 14 seconds left when the final enemy died.

My point is that even with one team playing vastly better than the other, the time limit for 2fort in SD doesn't seem conducive to playing the map properly by aiming to cap. It made me wonder what tiny proportion of 2fort sudden deaths ever do end in a cap, and showed up sudden death for the team dm scrim it is. Considering that, maybe the camping engies and snipers are actually playing it right (at least for 2fort).
 

Para

Newbie
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
682
Reaction score
0
I think sudden death is nice as long as there as minimal amount of engineers involved as possible. It isn't the most fun ever but then again I think it's a good way to solve those stalemate matches, at least a lot better than just "MAP CHANGES NOW *LOADING NEXT MAP*".
 

Nitre

Spy
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
837
Reaction score
0
Personally i try to play as offensive as possible while still being defensive. I retreat more often, in other words. But yes, i've been on many teams where, like Laivasse, we've been getting slaughtered but managed to keep a cap point. Then, in sudden death we win. It's all a bit stinky really.
 

Shakermaker

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Sep 16, 2003
Messages
9,253
Reaction score
2
You specifically mention 2Fort. Bear in mind that that's the only map without an explicit time limit. And in my opinion, that's the reason 2Fort games have a tendency to drag on and on. In all the other maps you have the countdown counter that adds a certain pressure to reach your goals. I have played a lot of games that were decided in the last seconds, for the simple reason that the team decided to make one last big push. Of course there are still stalemates with sudden death (on Granary and Well especially) but they seem less prevalent.
 

Warbie

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
10,617
Reaction score
0
People tend not to attack on sudden death. The odd one or two push forward and get minced by the sentrys and other defenders. In the end you're left with engineers on both sides hiding behind their guns!

Sudden death sucks.
 

Crispy

Newbie
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
0
Sudden Death is simply abismal. It's clear Valve did a lot of playtesting to get TF2 as balanced as it is, I just really wonder wtf happened with SD. Did all of Valve's testers when polled admit to liking it? Surely not.

Sudden Death is an atrocious way to decide a close game. SD is basically purely about camping. If you camp you can't be the losing side (joint winner/loser maybe) and you have a chance of winning. If you wait for most of the enemy to die and then charge the remaining survivors you can often come through to win the round. If you actually play with some balls, some flair and some determination you are rewarded with a cold, wet slap in the face as the other team crawls over your gallant corpse to a gutless victory.

SD rewards the least sportsmanlike and least skilful method of playing an online shooter, and that's why it sucks harder than a crackwhore blowing for blow. If they really want to make it good they need to make everyone have half as much health or make it melee only or something that's fun even if it doesn't show the true tone of the match.
 

CyberPitz

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
24,818
Reaction score
7
meh, I hate it, but then again, it helps to end some rounds that would never end....

I usually just play on servers with no end time, so on 2fort, you play till you win, and other maps have their usual time limit anyway.
 

Crispy

Newbie
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
0
meh, I hate it, but then again, it helps to end some rounds that would never end....
So does a map timer. SD just shouldn't exist. Provided the map timer gives advanced warning at 5mins, 2mins and 50secs, you can still go for the final push if you want to win a round. If not it ends in a simple moral victory for the winners (who pushed the furthest) and the losers (who held out against the odds).
 

CyberPitz

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
24,818
Reaction score
7
So does a map timer. SD just shouldn't exist. Provided the map timer gives advanced warning at 5mins, 2mins and 50secs, you can still go for the final push if you want to win a round. If not it ends in a simple moral victory for the winners (who pushed the furthest) and the losers (who held out against the odds).
Why should final pushes matter? In retrospect, you should be doing those "final pushes" every time in order to win. Why should some timer dictate how hard you push?
The "sudden death shouldn't exist" is just an opinion, honestly. I think it has its places. You don't like it, then you don't like sudden death, not "it shouldn't exist"
 

Omnomnick

Retired Lead Content Creator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
1,125
i love the idea of sudden death, the time when everyone is engineer but you then you run nd destroy em, lol
 

Qonfused

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
9,506
Reaction score
6
Ban the use of the Engineer during Sudden Death and consider the problem solved.
 

delusional

Tank
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
2,577
Reaction score
0
I noticed if your team has a lot of medics, your team is more prone to be more offensive and take a risk since they can have a second try if they retreat. I don't have much of a problem with SD though, since when they do occur it rarely ends in a stalemate. I guess I'm just lucky.
 

SionST

Newbie
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Crispy, some servers do have a melee only sudden death, I played one 2 hour ago. Was funny watching heavies boxing and medics sawing. All the 125 health classes lost in the boxing, however how often do you see 10 man boxing matches?
 

Stigmata

The Freeman
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
15,911
Reaction score
371
I think Sudden Death should only occur under these conditions:

2Fort
If the score is tied.

Well, Granary
If the middle point is "unlocked".

Calling Sudden Death when one team is legitimately ahead of the other is stupid.

[edit] And just so everyone knows, you can switch classes safely during Sudden Death, but ONLY if you're in a resupply room.
 

Sam

Newbie
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
1,960
Reaction score
1
I think Sudden Death should only occur under these conditions:

2Fort
If the score is tied.

Well, Granary
If the middle point is "unlocked".

Calling Sudden Death when one team is legitimately ahead of the other is stupid.

[edit] And just so everyone knows, you can switch classes safely during Sudden Death, but ONLY if you're in a resupply room.
Second.

 

kupocake

Tank
Joined
Nov 26, 2004
Messages
6,127
Reaction score
11
I don't dislike it. It's the first thing I'd expect to see disabled for a serious, competitive game of TF2, but in 'for the fun of it' pub matches it can be a final, forced but somewhat entertaining climax to a game in which no one was the clear winner, and you just need to get the whole process of 'winning' out of the way. Since clearly, if either team was the winner, you would have already won.
 

Kadayi

Newbie
Joined
Oct 6, 2003
Messages
6,035
Reaction score
0
I spoke with Kadayi in another thread about a game where we'd been on opposing sides. His team had been hammering mine on Well, but our team had proven belligerent enough to hold onto the final cap for quite a while. His team was clearly playing better as a team, having well placed teleporters, sentries to deter recapping, classes backing eachother up, etc. Our team just died, sped out of spawn and attacked in a frenzied enough way to stave off the inevitable for a bit longer - you know the pattern... I felt we could turn the fight around enough if we just had the teamwork to take out some of their key sentries, but that teamwork was nowhere to be found.

Instead it went to sudden death and our team, full of solo heroes, won. Not because we were better at working as a team, but because all the sentries got wiped out for us and we fought it like a team deathmatch, while Kadayi's team had already gotten used to the pattern of dying in order to preserve an advantage. So we won...but it wasn't very satisfying. We didn't play very well, we didn't cooperate enough, we ignored objectives, we had been dominated and forced back by good team play, but we landed the match in Sudden Death because, essentially, we had a few skilled deathmatchers knocking about.
I recall that match, it was a titanic struggle and a real lesson for quite a few people I think, because we really pissed away our advantage at the end. We had a lot of engineers (maybe 5 or so) and come sudden death none of them changed class. Sudden death is such a short play period there really is very little need for more than 1/2 engies to put a dispenser or two down for healing. You are far better off to swap to medic to support or something offensive and mobile (soldier, pyro, demo). Personally whenever it comes to sudden death my attitude now is to try and convince the team to hold back and absorb the initial clash, hopefully come off better in that in terms of casualties than the opposition and then whittle them down with superior numbers.

I agree that SD is an annoying end to a round, but it's often the result of negative play on one teams part. There is a fine line in TF2 between having a team that can defend well and having a team that can defend well and push for capture points. If your on Hydro and you notice you've 3 snipers and few engineers and a brace of Pyros on your team, rest assured..you'll be heading to SD.....
 

Jintor

Didn't Get Temp-Banned
Joined
Dec 15, 2004
Messages
14,783
Reaction score
14
I think Sudden Death should only occur under these conditions:

2Fort
If the score is tied.

Well, Granary
If the middle point is "unlocked".

Calling Sudden Death when one team is legitimately ahead of the other is stupid.

[edit] And just so everyone knows, you can switch classes safely during Sudden Death, but ONLY if you're in a resupply room.
After a while you can't.

And agreed with the conditions.
 

Stigmata

The Freeman
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
15,911
Reaction score
371
After a while you can't.

And agreed with the conditions.
Ahh, I meant to say "within the first 30 seconds or so".

And I'm glad to see people agreeing with me, I knew it was an awesome idea as soon as I thought of it :D
 

Adabiviak

Space Core
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
4,235
Reaction score
22
Good to know Stigmata. I haven't seen one of these go sour myself, It seems like whatever team I'm on rushes out and either takes care of business or gets wasted. I haven't seen a camp fest like is described here.
 

Operational

Newbie
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,306
Reaction score
2
I'm not a fan of Sudden Death either because the defencive team always seem to win. I've been thinking about some alternatives, these are the best I could come up with for the moment:

1) No extra ammo - you have only what you start with, Ammo boxes are gone, Dispensers only heal and dead people's weapons disappear. It would force Engineers to choose between lvl 1 sentry or a dispenser which is good but classes like the Heavy which chews through a lot of ammo are at a disadvantage.

2) Change Sudden Death to a Tie Breaker - have three or five rounds, the first you force everyone to spawn as Soldiers, the second Scouts (or whatever), etc. However, the objectives would have to be forgotten and it forces people to be classes they may not like.

And just so everyone knows, you can switch classes safely during Sudden Death, but ONLY if you're in a resupply room.
I knew you could do it at the start of Sudden Death, but what happens if you do it later on when you are not on 100% health?
 

bam23

Newbie
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
I played on a server with melee-only sudden death.

That was fun, and I think should be official tbh :p
 

Cthrag Yaska

Newbie
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
97
Reaction score
0
Personally i love SD, although as mentioned above there are a few instances where it is very annoying. I cant think of a better way to move the game forward, ive been in some games for example on cp_well were both teams are fighting tooth and nail for the entire time neither team pushing a point in either direction, i can see it getting really tedious running out the whole map time in that stalemate situation.

As the game time progresses people are going to learn how to play SD (well i hope to hell they do), other then that you can only kick arse in SD and show your team how its done ;)!
 

magu

Newbie
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
There are maps where SD is 90% useless like granary , 2fort or well.
If the game was not decided during offcial time it is very unlikely to change in SD.
in the CP maps normally one team holds 3 points, the other 2. Everybody goes defense. thats it.
During the regular game already you can see how at least one side changes to 100% defense and then the game dies in agony.
It is less than 10% of all SD I've played that one team really can wipe out the complete other team or capture a point. 90% is stale mate anyway.
IMO a waste of time.
I've played a few servers where SD was set to 10 seconds...now that makes sense.

Melee SD sounds like fun, but did not come across yet @the servers I'm playing

cheers
magu
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
823
Reaction score
0
I'm always a Spy on SD. Cause anyone you kill can't reinforce their team.

My SD Spy targets.

Heaveys: Large health, that gun.
Engineers: Once they die so do their sentrys.
Snipers: Hurts my team bad
Soilders: Same as snipe.
 

Pesmerga

Newbie
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Messages
10,092
Reaction score
2
Why should final pushes matter? In retrospect, you should be doing those "final pushes" every time in order to win. Why should some timer dictate how hard you push?
The "sudden death shouldn't exist" is just an opinion, honestly. I think it has its places. You don't like it, then you don't like sudden death, not "it shouldn't exist"
No, it really just shouldn't exist.

Fact.

Engineers: Once they die so do their sentrys.
Not true. They persist through the round, although they are unabled to be repaired, if that's what you meant.
 

theotherguy

Newbie
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Messages
5,108
Reaction score
0
I love it. Its the only time my dispensers and sentry guns are actually considered useful.
 

theotherguy

Newbie
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Messages
5,108
Reaction score
0
No, it really just shouldn't exist.

Fact.



Not true. They persist through the round, although they are unabled to be repaired, if that's what you meant.
actually no, in the last update the engys sentries are destroyed
 

morgs

The Freeman
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
4,202
Reaction score
300
You DO realise that sudden death is at the end of the round? so if it wasen't there, all your efforts would go to waste anyway.
 

Jintor

Didn't Get Temp-Banned
Joined
Dec 15, 2004
Messages
14,783
Reaction score
14
*Trumpets*

CRUSH SUDDEN DEAAATH!
 

KennyJC

Newbie
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
113
Reaction score
0
i love the idea of sudden death, the time when everyone is engineer but you then you run nd destroy em, lol
Sudden death is never a concern for me since I play on a server that only ends when one team captures all the points. With a 6 second respawn you will rarely see the map getting won. But it's still fun and makes victories all the more sweet. I can't stand these 10 minute games. You don't feel like you're into it by the time it's over.
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2003
Messages
3,756
Reaction score
0
Sudden death should be a small, smokey, kinda dark room where people have one hit kills, make things quick and frentic :E
 
Top