[GP] Surrender/Resign/Forfeit Button

[ubersky]

I think that if it's a Game Create option, then that would suit everyone. If you don't like it, don't join games that have it enabled

[cicero]

I strictly reject the SURRENDER BUTTOM idea.
I dont know why, i just want to reject it.

Btw, what is a buttom ?

bottom?

I have a confession to make.
My name is cicero and I'm a mod.
That's not the confession though.

My name is cicero and I'm a pedant.
That's not the confession either, but it is relevant to the real confession which is coming up shortly.

My name is cicero and this is my confession:
I have just gone through this entire thread changing "buttom" to "button".

Then I read the two posts quoted above and realised that perhaps I'm not the only one who noticed. And, more importantly perhaps, maybe it was an intentional typo at least by some people for the purposes of humour? Who knows.

My justification (though pedantry is really where it's at) is that anyone searching for "surrender button" will now be able to find this thread. Also that to my British eyes "buttom" looks like "bottom" and I couldn't take this thread seriously.

Cicero

[See you at next week's meeting.]

[bikinicowboy]

If we are thinking of the risk board game. I remember when playing and i was clear that i would not win. I could shake hands with my opponents and congratulate him on a great victory.

M y thoughts are: only in single games, only after round 12 (nice number) and only if you have fewer then 3 territories.

I think the 1 or 2 territories rule would be key. This would allow people to shake hands in surrender and move on.

Discuss.

[Rocketry]

If we are thinking of the risk board game. I remember when playing and i was clear that i would not win. I could shake hands with my opponents and congratulate him on a great victory.

M y thoughts are: only in single games, only after round 12 (nice number) and only if you have fewer then 3 territories.

I think the 1 or 2 territories rule would be key. This would allow people to shake hands in surrender and move on.

Discuss.

I'm in favour of a no-restrictions surrender button but this would be a fair compromise. What we need to discuss is whether a restrictions-surrender button would ACTUALLY sound any better to the mods. Would it stop gross-abuse? multis? giving up? It would certainly prevent people from just giving up at the start which it seems lack is scared of. Multis would have to play quite a few rounds before they could quit. ...you might have actually hit on someting good here.

Here's a few additional suggestions:
1) Instead of the surrender button only working if you have 3 terrotories or less, it should work it you have 7.14% of terrotories or less. This equates to 3 territories on the classic map (from memory.) By using a percentage, the surrender button would be equally effective on all maps including large ones like world 2.1 and small ones like doodle.

2) As for the button only working after a set number of rounds... its a good idea BUT, eight player games last a lot longer than 2 player games SO the surrender button should work after a number of rounds proportional to number of players in the game. For example it would work after 16 rounds of an eight player game, after 6 rounds of a three player game and after 4 rounds f a 2 player game.

Overall, the button would work if you had played at least the number of required rounds (maybe 2*no. of players) and also had left less than 7.14% of the maps territories.

Good ideas bikinicowboy

Rocket.

[jiminski]

i don't like the idea of a surrender button.. (i don't like the idea of conceding in Risk either, the joy of taking that last troop and seeing the world populated by your men, coast to coast in your colour! well that's what it's all about!)

But i suppose if there were the facility to Accept or Decline the proposal of surrender for the person dominating the board... well in that circumstance it could be just about ok.

[KernowWarrior]

Surrender is the last bastion of the weak, never surrender!!! Its never an option, so why bother with a button. Just the suggestion sickens me. Never surrender, never give up!!!!!

[jiminski]

Surrender is the last bastion of the weak, never surrender!!! Its never an option, so why bother with a button. Just the suggestion sickens me. Never surrender, never give up!!!!!

I agree actually but not quite for the same reason ... for me i would never surrender as i would not wish to diminish the pleasure of victory for my opponent... that genuinely is bad spirited.

[Rocketry]

i don't like the idea of a surrender button.. (i don't like the idea of conceding in Risk either, the joy of taking that last troop and seeing the world populated by your men, coast to coast in your colour! well that's what it's all about!)

But i suppose if there were the facility to Accept or Decline the proposal of surrender for the person dominating the board... well in that circumstance it could be just about ok.

Yup accept/decline for the other players would be a fair compromise as well. That would keep everyone happy surely...

Rocket.

[m3ta]

Concise description:

kick players for missing turns quicker

Specifics:

its very annoying to wait for some 1 to miss 3 turns, especially since they have to be in a row.

so the rules should be altered: simple alteration: make it so 3 missed turns in TOTAL count, not just 3 missed consequtive turns.

In my opinion, this still doesnt go far enough. so better yet, make it so player is kiccked aftr missing 2 consequtive turns or 3 turns in total.

OR and this is probably the best option - make it so, there is an option available to kick player after thye miss 1 turn. - again this will only enable an option to kick - and full unanimous vote of the other players required for person to be kicked.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

people who miss turns will be properly penalised for their annoying behaviour

[Sir Riddick]

How about 5 minutes the first round, 4 minutes the second round, and then 3 minutes the third round they missed.

I also agree they shouldn't be consecutive deadbeats. 3 in one game is alot of turns to miss regardless of if there back to back.

[GenuineEarlGrey]

kick players for missing turns quicker

I live in NZ, so getting to most people's places isn't an option.

its very annoying to wait for some 1 to miss 3 turns, especially since they have to be in a row.

I agree with you but you have to draw the line somewhere. Three conseutive turns has been written down in the rules for a while - why change it!

There is another way you can get around the problem - go premium.

[oVo]

This subject has been discussed at length and I doubt it will be altered. Do a search and you are likely to see all the arguements that have been presented pro & con. Missed turns were once used as a tactic before the "deferred deployment" was instituted which made it less of an opportunity.

I'm currently in a game that's been going for over a year and it is likely that several players might have been kicked IF three missed turns was the rule. There are a lot of 100+ round games and a few players missing an occassional turn is not unusual.

The current missed turns method is fine by me and the only alteration I would suggest is Kick out players who miss the first turn.

Suggestion: Kick out players who miss the first turn.
If the majority of players are kicked out in Round 1 ?
The game is voided and no points are awarded... (to prevent point farming & discourage cheats).

improves things by: Eliminating the wait for ? recruits who deadbeat.
Particularly those who visit the site, join 4 games and never return to play.

The first round is the only one where players are paged via email to come play,
so this might be a good spot to handle no shows who are a detriment to the playing
experience by pausing games for 72 hours (per deadbeat) each occurance.

[KernowWarrior]

Im not sure how being premium would stop people deadbeating on you.

Im 100% behind kicking someone out if they miss their first go.

Iv been banging on about brining back kicking out after 3 turns in total, as it was when I joined.

As for defered armies, thats a joke. Why should anyone get reinforcments for a turn they didnt take. If anything they should have armies taken away!

I still think deadbeats should be hunted down and given a public flogging, but apparently that would be illegal and too time consuming.

[Woodruff]

kick players for missing turns quicker

I live in NZ, so getting to most people's places isn't an option.

Heh. That one almost went over my head.

its very annoying to wait for some 1 to miss 3 turns, especially since they have to be in a row.

I agree with you but you have to draw the line somewhere. Three conseutive turns has been written down in the rules for a while - why change it!

There is another way you can get around the problem - go premium.

I'm premium, and I'm no less annoyed by deadbeats (particularly in speed games).

[Woodruff]

The first round is the only one where players are paged via email to come play

This definitely is not accurate.

[GenuineEarlGrey]

its very annoying to wait for some 1 to miss 3 turns, especially since they have to be in a row.

I agree with you but you have to draw the line somewhere. Three conseutive turns has been written down in the rules for a while - why change it!

There is another way you can get around the problem - go premium.

I'm premium, and I'm no less annoyed by deadbeats (particularly in speed games).

Sure, despite getting premium I find the deadbeats are annoying.

Getting premium will get you around the problem by allowing you to start more games.

[Woodruff]

its very annoying to wait for some 1 to miss 3 turns, especially since they have to be in a row.

I agree with you but you have to draw the line somewhere. Three conseutive turns has been written down in the rules for a while - why change it!

There is another way you can get around the problem - go premium.

I'm premium, and I'm no less annoyed by deadbeats (particularly in speed games).

Sure, despite getting premium I find the deadbeats are annoying.

Getting premium will get you around the problem by allowing you to start more games.

Which, in some cases, will only INCREASE the annoyance of it. <smile>

[oVo]

This definitely is not accurate.

You don't receive an email saying, "Your patience has paid off and your game has begun." ? ¿ ?

[Lord and Master]

How about introducing an extra option in the game start menu?
I mean we have the option now for either Speed game (5min rounds) or Casual (24hour rounds) why not have an extra option (or even more) for 12hour rounds or something similar?
Maybe even have a drop-down menu so you can pick the hourly-round-rate?

[ender516]

This definitely is not accurate.

You don't receive an email saying, "Your patience has paid off and your game has begun." ? ¿ ?

The inaccuracy is in the statement that the email only comes on your first round. I get email indicating that it's my turn in round n of game #######, where n is greater than one. I don't know if I get them for every turn, or just the ones where the game has been waiting for me for a while.

[Woodruff]

This definitely is not accurate.

You don't receive an email saying, "Your patience has paid off and your game has begun." ? ¿ ?

Absolutely. I also receive an email for each turn for every game (when it's my turn).

[Sir Riddick]

Delay the start of the speed game by a minute to give players time to see the game has begun. Then kick
the first round deadbeats is a winner.
Casual games just kick the first round deadbeats.

[Woodruff]

Delay the start of the speed game by a minute to give players time to see the game has begun. Then kick
the first round deadbeats is a winner.
Casual games just kick the first round deadbeats.

For casual games, I'm not in favor of kicking first-round deadbeats...life does impact us all and I think for casual games, consideration should be taken.

However, for speed games...there is no excuse. Get their butts out of the game ASAP, as far as I'm concerned.

[The Neon Peon]

Game 207959 is currently on Round #887.

Greycloak has missed 2 turns in the game: one turn every 444 or so. Under your suggestion, he would have deatbeat because he missed, what? 0.2% of his turns. Seems a bit unfair, doesn't it?

1. Do a search to see this has been suggested a thousand times
2. Look at the results to see this has been rejected a thousand times
3. Use logical reasoning with steps 1 and 2 to figure out that this will never happen

[m3ta]

Game 207959 is currently on Round #887.

Greycloak has missed 2 turns in the game: one turn every 444 or so. Under your suggestion, he would have deatbeat because he missed, what? 0.2% of his turns. Seems a bit unfair, doesn't it?

1. Do a search to see this has been suggested a thousand times
2. Look at the results to see this has been rejected a thousand times
3. Use logical reasoning with steps 1 and 2 to figure out that this will never happen

Ok fair enough, from this comment and others above it seems that the only (credible) argument for not kicking deadbeats quicker is that there are times when this might be unfair. (i.e. in the game above, or/and when people live in remote locations etc)

However, it is also clear that the above argument does not hold in the majority of cases. Usually (from my experience and it seems that of a lot of other people) deadbeats are those who don't give a damn, enter a game, never turn up to play etc.

So surely it is possible to have a system which protects the first kind of deadbeats and eliminates the second kind.

My amended proposal therefore, is to add options to game creation screen, about rules of elimination - with options - leave everything as it is. to perhaps amend it so, even 1 missed turn leads in player being eliminated.

Alternatively, and probably a better solution, is to make it so deadbeats are aliminated when they miss a turn BUT in the game creation screen, time given to make a move should be altered from 24 hours max (currently) to 48, 3 days or a week. or even 2 weeks. That way, those players who need more time would have games available to suit their needs.