[GP] Surrender/Resign/Forfeit Button

[The Fuzzy Pengui]

Sending to Suggs and Bugs, but this has already been suggested and rejected MANY, MANY times.

[Deadly intent]

Sending to Suggs and Bugs, but this has already been suggested and rejected MANY, MANY times.

Rejected many times eh!! This is a shame as i believe its a great idea

[wasny]

So was a new country to fellow pilgrims and pioneers, but here we are. ( addressing how many times it takes to get something done)

[lancehoch]

So was a new country to fellow pilgrims and pioneers, but here we are. ( addressing how many times it takes to get something done)

This is true, but the pilgrims did not have a country, abuse the country, have it blown off the map by the king, and then have it returned.

[wasny]

Now your talking about logistics, politics, economics,etc. I should not have used that example. My point is simply that with perserverance almost anything is possible.

[lancehoch]

Now your talking about logistics, politics, economics,etc. I should not have used that example. My point is simply that with perserverance almost anything is possible.

The problem is that it was a feature of the site two years ago. Some people were abusing the feature and a lot of other people complained about it so lack got rid of it. The likelihood of lack restoring the resign button is next to nothing. As has been stated, this thread pops up about once a month and a mod or an admin will come in and give this same statement. The thread will die for a bit, then it will be brought up again. There really is no chance that this will come back.

[Elijah S]

Not everyone lives in CC Forums.
To suggest that someone do a topic search whenever thay have an idea on ways to improve the site is a real stretch. -Hence, I don't see any reason for anyone to get their panties in a wad if they come across a new thread which happens to suggest something that has already been posted. And to be sarcastic or condescending about it seems just a little immature.

IMO, Mods should be the beacon of respectfulness, and encourage, rather than discourage members from possibly making suggestions that might very well improve CC.

I think a resign button is a great idea, and if its been previously rejected maybe someone who's aware of why could merely post the reason instead of making the OP feel stupid for not having searched the topic before posing the question.

[lancehoch]

I believe that I did explain why it was removed in my last post. And it was rejected for those same reasons.

[Johnny Rockets]

And perseverance is a wonderful thing.

Perhaps a poll? What could possibly be detremental about adding a resign button?



J

[Natewolfman]

And perseverance is a wonderful thing.

Perhaps a poll? What could possibly be detremental about adding a resign button?



J

some examples...

Assassin games - you quit then all the targets readjust just like if someone deadbeats and ruins the game
Escalating games, say you have 3 players with lots of large stacks, one player gets sick of it and quits, suddenly we have an overabundent number of neutrals blocking, not to mention the player with cards suddenly quit whare as the next turn another player could have taken them out, gottent he cards, and won.
Team games - someone decides they dont feel like playing in this team and quits, the team is suddenly a man down and they didnt do anything wrong, so you effectivly ruined the game for them

[Elijah S]

Nate- Thanks for those scenarios, now I see the flipside.
Before your post, there was really no adequate reasons in this thread for opposing the resign option.

And perseverance is a wonderful thing.

Perhaps a poll? What could possibly be detremental about adding a resign button?



J

some examples...

Assassin games - you quit then all the targets readjust just like if someone deadbeats and ruins the game
Escalating games, say you have 3 players with lots of large stacks, one player gets sick of it and quits, suddenly we have an overabundent number of neutrals blocking, not to mention the player with cards suddenly quit whare as the next turn another player could have taken them out, gottent he cards, and won.
Team games - someone decides they dont feel like playing in this team and quits, the team is suddenly a man down and they didnt do anything wrong, so you effectivly ruined the game for them

[a.sub]

I tried to search for it but i didnt see anything, if this is a re post, my sincere apologies.

the concept is simple, if you want to sirrender, you send PM or e ticket to a certain moderators, and they can give them the surrender option, OR say something like
-U surrender too much, so NO
-i think ur deadbeating, so NO
-its too early for you to just surrender, so NO
etc.
the reason this is good is because some ppl need to deadbeat. like me, i need to end a game i had just begun (my fault) so i can join the games of a tourney. if this was implemented, ppl who wouldnt abuse the system can use it, while still filtering those who would.
what do you think?


(NOTE: i

[ManBungalow]

Does this need a form ??

At any rate it's a good idea, although it would be hard to find mods that are willing to check out so many games in this way...it would probably mean recruiting more mods for this purpose. :\

[a.sub]

Does this need a form ??

At any rate it's a good idea, although it would be hard to find mods that are willing to check out so many games in this way...it would probably mean recruiting more mods for this purpose. :\

well since it has to be checked by a mod i doubt many ppl will try to abuse it. but thats just me. i figure since if they do try, they will get caught, so they wont try.

[The Neon Peon]

I disagree with this. mods have a way better use of their time.

[ManBungalow]

I disagree with this. mods have a way better use of their time.

Probably, but I'm saying that if we could find a few people willing to play the part of checking these games it could work...

[The Neon Peon]

I disagree with this. mods have a way better use of their time.

Probably, but I'm saying that if we could find a few people willing to play the part of checking these games it could work...

1. Who?
2. Have you noticed how often we get a new mod?
3. The system would be entirely up to the mod, no real rules.
4. Is it such a huge problem to wait a few hours or days?
5. This makes less people get premium since they can resign some games, thus have room for more games in the same amount of time.
6. Multis can still be a problem, just as long as they do not drop games too frequently.

[ManBungalow]

I disagree with this. mods have a way better use of their time.

Probably, but I'm saying that if we could find a few people willing to play the part of checking these games it could work...

1. Who?
2. Have you noticed how often we get a new mod?
3. The system would be entirely up to the mod, no real rules.
4. Is it such a huge problem to wait a few hours or days?
5. This makes less people get premium since they can resign some games, thus have room for more games in the same amount of time.
6. Multis can still be a problem, just as long as they do not drop games too frequently.

1. Anyone who can be bothered trawling through games nearly incessantly

2. Yup : it's not often

3. True, hence we need trustworthy and fair mods; and I realise that it would be near pointless to start making up new rules

4. For freemiums, it can be annoying having to wait all day

5. Exactly, that's a good reason against this sort of thing

6. I don't understand what you're saying here to be honest

7. Maybe this thread should have a poll, to see what other people think

[The Neon Peon]

2. I think this would need to be something very special for lack to decide to get a new team of mods (there will probably be many mods needed for this sort of thing)
3. This is really the problem. Every time someone becomes a mod, they gain access to some information and other things that are not available to the public. (Wicked got banned for giving away some of this info.) To get a good deal more mods is a problem, but to get ones that lack will trust is an even larger one.
4. I have been freemium until the past few weeks. I did not notice any problem. Sometimes I would only be able to take 1 turn a day, and let's face it... $2 a month is a very small price. This is just an extra way to get around the fact that you choose not to pay.
6. The reason the surrender button was taken away is because too many multis would just surrender in games with themselves. Even if it is moderated, then multis could surrender, all that means is that they could do it less often.

[a.sub]

i added a poll thx for the idea

[ManBungalow]

i added a poll thx for the idea

I would have to say "I'm not sure"

Could we have that as an option ?

If you're going to change it it is a good idea to change it before you get loads of votes

[ManBungalow]

Any more thoughts here ?

It'll be helpful to hear from people other than Neon Peon and I . . .

[oaktown]

Any more thoughts here ?

If would be nice to find a way to get out of games for one reason or another, but I agree that this is a really poor use of moderator time. It would mean keeping a log of ALL players - not just freemiums - to determine whether or not somebody is abusing the privilege, and having to check the logs and make a determination every time somebody makes a request. As a foundry mod I wouldn't have anything to do with this, but I'd rather see my comrades spend their time hunting multis than checking the surrender history of users who won't pay for the use of this site.

What's more, when a player withdraws from a game, it effects every player in the game. At least if a player deadbeats the other have three rounds to think about it before the territories go neutral, completely changing the landscape of the board.

There are other, more practical ways to solve this problem:
1. Drop $25 for a year of premium membership. Maybe ask Santa to give it to you for Christmas?
2. If you don't consider premium an option, be more selective about the games you join.

[johannG]

I think there is no point of this because sometimes you might have a chance to win even if you are being beaten badly. Vote:NO
Aren't Suggestions supposed to be smart? no offence

[blakebowling]

but I agree that this is a really poor use of moderator time. It would mean keeping a log of ALL players - not just freemiums - to determine whether or not somebody is abusing the privilege, and having to check the logs and make a determination every time somebody makes a request. As a foundry mod I wouldn't have anything to do with this, but I'd rather see my comrades spend their time hunting multis than checking the surrender history of users who won't pay for the use of this site.

The feedback system was removed because it was taking up too much of the moderators time.

Furthermore, the surrender option was removed to abuse, and there is no system that makes the users happy AND is abuse-proof. I can't see this idea being approved.