surrender button?

[debilcina]

Ripe for Abuse, basically it becomes a way of cheating someone out of points when they beat you, thus your rank never goes down.


One way to fix that though is to have a chosen surrender dock you 100 points in addition to whatever the other person would win.

ofcourse, thats true, but whst if only that person can only surrender once agianst another person. say a multi plays one game together then the multi tries another game and neither one of them can surrender because one has already surrendered in a previous game. Just a thought. Nothing big. I just would like to have one right now so I can leave some games i'm in. since I'm losing and there are dead beats. It gets boring. Maybe CC should come up with something else to do for fun. Just a thought.

Yep, this is really good idea, you can do surrender only once against someone, so multies cant get some advantage, or if they are really psychos they would make 100 accounts lol

[rebelman]

Why not have the resign button mean you lose......then you lose the points anyway ?

this makes complete sense does not as long as it is not a terminator or assasin game

[Rocketry]

Why not have the resign button mean you lose......then you lose the points anyway ?

i agree with this.

a surrender/resign button may be open to abuse but i cant see that it would be much use to a multi. the fact that a multi MIGHT abuse it shouldnt stop the rest of the law abiding community from having this useful function.

Rocketry

[lackattack]

A surrender button encourages "game hopping" which is the opposite of good competition and is bad for the site.

[Minister Masket]

Where's your sense of pride!?
Surrender? PAH! Never heard if it!

FIGHT TO THE DEATH, YOU WHINEY LITTLE MAN!

[Rocketry]

A surrender button encourages "game hopping" which is the opposite of good competition and is bad for the site.

surrendering just ends a game that will take ages more quickly. i think it would make the site more user friendly. people would still compete for points - but if you have lost those points it may as well be now and not later. If people need to get out of a game they currently have to suicide or deadbeat - both of which could result in a legit negative feedback. A surender button would mean they could get out without risking a neg.

How about the idea of making the surrender button only avaliable to premium players? This would be another incentive to get premium and would mean free players are still as restricted as they are now.

Multis are unlikely to buy premium for their multis. Let me know on this idea if ya can lackattack.

Rocketry

[cleveridea]

A surrender button encourages "game hopping" which is the opposite of good competition and is bad for the site.

A surrender button would fundamentally change everything and should be considered a feature that could literally risk killing this site's mechanics completely.

Just think of how many losing efforts you've either turned around or had a hand in affecting the outcome of who eventually won. Take away those two inputs into games and everything changes.

Now a surrender button available for a premium player who is in a distant second in a two remaining players game wouldn't hurt much, but I don't see what it would help either.

[Rocketry]

A surrender button encourages "game hopping" which is the opposite of good competition and is bad for the site.

A surrender button would fundamentally change everything and should be considered a feature that could literally risk killing this site's mechanics completely.

Just think of how many losing efforts you've either turned around or had a hand in affecting the outcome of who eventually won. Take away those two inputs into games and everything changes.

Now a surrender button available for a premium player who is in a distant second in a two remaining players game wouldn't hurt much, but I don't see what it would help either.

But if you could turn the game around, or wanted to effect the outcome of the game, you wouldnt click surrender. It prevent that annoying backlog of games you know yer gonna lose but you have to keep taking turns gradually losing territory after territory. That is a waste of time and very irritating. Surrendering would resolve this - taking you to the same outcome but sooner.

Rocketry

[cleveridea]

A surrender button encourages "game hopping" which is the opposite of good competition and is bad for the site.

A surrender button would fundamentally change everything and should be considered a feature that could literally risk killing this site's mechanics completely.

Just think of how many losing efforts you've either turned around or had a hand in affecting the outcome of who eventually won. Take away those two inputs into games and everything changes.

Now a surrender button available for a premium player who is in a distant second in a two remaining players game wouldn't hurt much, but I don't see what it would help either.

But if you could turn the game around, or wanted to effect the outcome of the game, you wouldnt click surrender. It prevent that annoying backlog of games you know yer gonna lose but you have to keep taking turns gradually losing territory after territory. That is a waste of time and very irritating. Surrendering would resolve this - taking you to the same outcome but sooner.

Rocketry

So what you want is a "fast forward deadbeat button"? Except it's fast forward only for you and for everyone else remaining they cope with you surrendering at play speed (just like with a deadbeat).

Not everyone would have the same high-minded criteria as you before clicking Surrender. There are many quitters here and it wouldn't be hard for me to imagine that those sorts of people would at the first hint of the game not going their way clicking away at the Surrender button. And this would be exactly what lack, rightfully in my opinion, fears and expects.

[psychoidiot]

I would reallllly like that button right now in my freestyle 2 person game. I have 2 territories left, one with 6 troops on it, while the other player has the entire rest of the map. I don't see how to come back from that.... The other player probably going to take forever to end the game... and I'm bored right now.

Although as someone mentioned it would be sooo much coding for the CC staff people as you probably have to put a lot of restrictions on the button.

[EmperorOfDaNorth]

Too much coding? Look at all the effort that goes into the Greasemonkey scripts, which people do for free.

This site can have all the programmers it wants, and for free. (well, a free lifetime membership perhaps).

Indeed a surrender button would have to be reserved for premium members; ESPECIALLY non paying members with only 4 games maximum would be inclined to bail out and just join another game. And besides, people who know they can't win anymore sometimes to unpredictable things; people may hate that when it happens, but it IS an element in the game.

Premium members don't mind if some of their games go down to a crawl ; a surrender button for them is EQUIVALENT to just bailing out of the game and missing turns, but without aggravating everyone else at the lost time. And of course Premium members would rarely bail out in that way, and especially if there is a (slight) points penalty on surrendering then I think it will only be used in exceptional cases.

Note that in chess it's very common to give up when it's clear to everyone how the game will end.

Chess is of course strictly 2 players, so perhaps a more structured way of surrendering the game is needed, i.e. ALL remaining parties would need to agree in the same turn to appoint someone a winner. (so either agree with the surrender, or miss that turn.)

EDIT: And also: SURRENDER is a key aspect of warfare. So it adds realism too. Usually, the person surrendering is expecting/hoping for some kind of benefit to the surrender (like, not being cut into small pieces and fed to the dogs. ) In CC it could be a slightly less loss of points, assuming that the victor accepts the surrender. Any of that would have to be a selectable game option of course.


Just thinking out loud. Cut me in half and fry me to a crisp. (No dogs please)

[LSU Tiger Josh]

Actually could make the party surrendering lose an extra 50 to 100 points to the "game" in addition to the points that they would lose to the other player. This would highly discoursage the quitting. For the record though, I see no reason for having it.

[Rocketry]

Too much coding? Look at all the effort that goes into the Greasemonkey scripts, which people do for free.

This site can have all the programmers it wants, and for free. (well, a free lifetime membership perhaps).

Indeed a surrender button would have to be reserved for premium members; ESPECIALLY non paying members with only 4 games maximum would be inclined to bail out and just join another game. And besides, people who know they can't win anymore sometimes to unpredictable things; people may hate that when it happens, but it IS an element in the game.

Premium members don't mind if some of their games go down to a crawl ; a surrender button for them is EQUIVALENT to just bailing out of the game and missing turns, but without aggravating everyone else at the lost time. And of course Premium members would rarely bail out in that way, and especially if there is a (slight) points penalty on surrendering then I think it will only be used in exceptional cases.

Note that in chess it's very common to give up when it's clear to everyone how the game will end.

Chess is of course strictly 2 players, so perhaps a more structured way of surrendering the game is needed, i.e. ALL remaining parties would need to agree in the same turn to appoint someone a winner. (so either agree with the surrender, or miss that turn.)

EDIT: And also: SURRENDER is a key aspect of warfare. So it adds realism too. Usually, the person surrendering is expecting/hoping for some kind of benefit to the surrender (like, not being cut into small pieces and fed to the dogs. ) In CC it could be a slightly less loss of points, assuming that the victor accepts the surrender. Any of that would have to be a selectable game option of course.


Just thinking out loud. Cut me in half and fry me to a crisp. (No dogs please)

I think you have some good points there, especially those regarding it being usual to surrender in 2-player games such as chess. In 2 player CC games, surrender would be highly useful.

The vast majority of people here who have paid for premium intend to play properly. As long as surrender was avaliable only for premium players, the abuse would be low. Multis are unlikely to be premium and premium players usually put some thought into their stratagy and can see when its worth continuing a game and when to surrender.

Somerimes people join games and then cant play them. Things come up. It Happens. They currently then deadbeat, annoying other people, slowing a game down and getting a bad reputation. Surrender would resolve this.

I'm unsure about the idea of other players having to agree to your surrender though. This would presumbly prolong the surrendering process making it less effective. People may start using it as leverage in games. For instance, imagine a person that will lose internet access for the following week. The may be faced with situations like "I will only allow you to surrender if you suicide on my enemy this turn. If you deadbeat i will leave you a neg" - that kind of thing.

Even with a private surrender option, the outcome of a game could be affected but the same can be said for all kinds of things, including deadbeating and suiciding. Of the three options - deadbeating, suiciding and surrendering - i think many people would prefer to surrender causing the LEAST disruption to other players.

Rocketry

[EmperorOfDaNorth]

Thank you for distilling the points from my post that made sense and explaining them better than I did. My feeling is summed up exactly in your last paragraph.

[Rocketry]

Thank you for distilling the points from my post that made sense and explaining them better than I did. My feeling is summed up exactly in your last paragraph.

sorry lol - i was just elaborating on what you came up with. you had some decent points.

i reckon we should put this too the vote again in a a new thread and see what people think having read this.

Rocketry

[cleveridea]

i reckon we should put this too the vote again in a a new thread and see what people think having read this.

I think that some may agree with you, however make sure you call the feature: Fast Forward Deadbeat Button, because that's really the most precise description of what you're asking for.

[Nc_Hunt3r]

whatever you want to call it "fast forward deadbeat button" "loser button" "sucky player button" matters little to me.. I back this idea 100%

How about the idea of making the surrender button only avaliable to premium players? This would be another incentive to get premium and would mean free players are still as restricted as they are now.

Of course it has to be tweaked out to make it most fair to person being surrendered on and vice versa. Sometimes your next best move is to surrender.

[aKa__Uzi]

Why not have the resign button mean you lose......then you lose the points anyway ?

this should be done it is so needed !
just have a set amount of points to take off and for the winner to add on

[Rocketry]

Why not have the resign button mean you lose......then you lose the points anyway ?

this should be done it is so needed !
just have a set amount of points to take off and for the winner to add on

I think the amount of points won or lost should be calculated in the usual way. - As if the resigner was eliminated.

Thanks for the support man

Rocketry

[DeCaptain]

A surrender button isn't needed at all. If you're premium why would you really need to surrender? It's not like you only have 4 game slots. And if there was a surrender button less freemies would buy premium....On second thought I say lets do it. I want to make 50 terminator games and when it looks like im going to be eliminated I'll just surrender and lose no points. It's genius!

[Rocketry]

A surrender button isn't needed at all. If you're premium why would you really need to surrender? It's not like you only have 4 game slots. And if there was a surrender button less freemies would buy premium....On second thought I say lets do it. I want to make 50 terminator games and when it looks like im going to be eliminated I'll just surrender and lose no points. It's genius!

Firstly - remember we are suggesting the a resign button for premium member only. It would not effect free players (and if anything, increase the number of premiums bought).

As for why premium players need it - I dont want a backlog of games espcially ex-RTs, non-RT 1 v 1s etc etc building up. It get annoying and boring having to go back thorugh them, making one tiny move, prolonging the game for ages, when losing is certain. Secondly, have a read of my previous posts - in one i mention that there are times when you just have to leave a game and wont have access to a PC for a while. Its unfortunate, but it happens. In this situation - currently - you can deadbeat (annoying for others and results in neg feedback) or suicide (horrible for the guy you suicide on and also may result in neg feedback). A resign option would solve tis providing a way to leave a game quickly and with the LEAST disturbance to others.

Currently in terminator games you can deadbeat anyway and not lose any points (i think.) Although resign would make this easier, i think the problem lies in terminator, not in the surrender idea itself.

Rocketry

[DeCaptain]

It isn't needed for premiums. If you can't spend 30 seconds to just deploy and end then you must have some busy life. To be honest, I think it would be quite handy for a freemie because they only have 4 games. But as I said before less people would buy premium. I admit it would be useful for vacations but I fairly certain a vacation button is already in the works.

[Rocketry]

It isn't needed for premiums. If you can't spend 30 seconds to just deploy and end then you must have some busy life. To be honest, I think it would be quite handy for a freemie because they only have 4 games. But as I said before less people would buy premium. I admit it would be useful for vacations but I fairly certain a vacation button is already in the works.

I think I have dealt with these points previously - have a read back through the thread.

Rocketry

[wilderbeast]

This is a terrible idea in the sense that players would only stick around for games that they are doing good in, this wouldnt inspire people to try to pull out a tough win. just surrender again and again until the game where they get lucky, also not fun for whoever is dominating the game and looking to enjoy it.

[Rocketry]

This is a terrible idea in the sense that players would only stick around for games that they are doing good in, this wouldnt inspire people to try to pull out a tough win. just surrender again and again until the game where they get lucky, also not fun for whoever is dominating the game and looking to enjoy it.

the resign button would only be used when winning is just not gonna happen. if there is a chance you will pull a tough win - you wont click surrender.

Rocketry