TL;DR: At 24 rounds in Competitive and after the first overtime (30 rounds) in Premier, the whole lobby votes on whether to continue playing overtimes. If 1 player votes 'no', the match ends in a draw.
Back when I tried Valorant long ago, one thing I thought was an objective improvement over CS was overtime veto votes.
Basically, when regulation resulted in a draw (12-12), Valorant would have everyone vote on whether to play overtime. I think if even 1 person voted 'no' the match would conclude as a draw.
In CS2 I've experienced matches where I found the forced draws in Competitive (12-12) or Premier (15-15) to be unsatisfying; while also needing to escape never-ending FaceIt matches that went into four or five overtimes (or more). Example of a FaceIt match that brought me suffering.
I would prefer it if Valve set the precedent by introducing an overtime veto vote for Competitive at 24 rounds (regulation) and Premier perhaps at 30 rounds – where the game would normally end in a draw after a single overtime in Premier.
I would find it more satisfying if someone actually voted 'no' on overtime as opposed to it just ending by default, and to potentially have an escape from endless FaceIt games (should FaceIt choose to implement a similar feature).
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
EDIT: /u/filous_cz has a good idea too. With the first overtime being MR6, the next overtime would be MR4, then finally MR2. Increasing volatility each time.
13 Comments
there used to be a vote for rematch, i don’t see why not have it for OT
or just make it where OT keeps going like normal
It’s unrealistic to believe premier can ever be treated as professionally as any form of third party competitive matchmaking but having an OT that keeps going is severely underrated and is a lot more fun than bringing a game to OT just to still end up at a draw.
Imo premier just should have infinite OT until there is a winner, like there is on faceit.
If Valve is concerned about the length, they can make the ots 1 round per side after 15-15 to get the winner faster. Its so anticlimatic to play for 1hr to not win or lose anything.
So long as you can lose points for drawing I am on team infinite OT.
Extra server time = more costly for Valve = not happening
Forget about this and 128 tick, we still didn’t get the “spectate a friend” feature back yet.
Too much effort for something that happens way too rarely to matter. Not only is a 15-15 draw rare you also need all 10 people to agree to continue playing which is going to be even rarer.
Premier is a competitive mode for the regular audience, you can’t expect them to have infinite time to play a potentially infinite round match.
> Basically, when regulation resulted in a draw (12-12), Valorant would have everyone vote on whether to play overtime. I think if even 1 person voted ‘no’ the match would conclude as a draw.
I can see why people would want this, but I’d only support it if it’s triggered by someone abandoning the match. close overtime games have been some of the most fun I’ve ever had playing CS and voting to draw should be penalized
It’s almost guaranteed that the team who didn’t close out after match point will vote to draw. I don’t know what could motivate players to continue OT unless you lose elo if you draw I guess.
Personally I’m happy with the current setup, I don’t log in hoping to play a 1 hour match.
With the switch to cs2 this is what made the least sense to me. Why not just vote on continuing OT and if theres 1 or 2 people that dont want to just draw the game. Having a full cs game end in a draw feels like a waste of time
Most people in here sound like they feel a tie is a waste of time
I personally think OT is a waste of time. Its not serious enough to run it another 15-30 mins. If neither pug could get 13 rounds it is what it is
Screw OT, let teams vote for a 2nd map and double the points!
in valorant, the number of ‘no’ votes needed to force a draw decreases per two rounds of OT played. I believe the first vote is a majority, and it goes down 2 less each time (6 votes at 12-12, 4 at 13-13, etc)
i would always vote NO, we really dont need that.