[GP] Surrender/Resign/Forfeit Button

[Army of GOD]

The cons totally outweigh the pros.

If you don't feel like playing any more...just suicide.

If you already lost and are just waiting for them to kill you...just wait.

I've established that there are exactly zero cons.

Please don't make me invite saxi to this thread...

[Greegan]

Is it possible to add a surrender button to the game?
Give it consequences to use like 1.5 the point loss even if the winner only gets 1.0 times
In all board games you are able to call it quits and in cases where a player is in a speed game for example and doesn't want the missed turns to count against him this might allow a different rating of sorts. Also if its clear the player is going to lose and doesn't want to stick around for just one more turn, maybe one or both players are limited to four games and realize its a waste to make the other guy wait 24 hours...
And if the other player agrees to the terms of the surrender there could be a button for him that would prevent the point loss from being 1.5 and remain 1.0 times the loss.

- g

[Joodoo]

No thanks.

[TheForgivenOne]

Not happening. This was abused far too easily. Don't like your drop? Surrender. Don't like your first roll of dice? Surrender. There would be basically no game that would finish, except for maybe escalating games. Moving this to Rejected

[Boogey]

Concise description:

• Add a forfeit game button for speed games that consist of 3 or more people

Specifics/Details:

• Once a game is forfeited it would be the same as if the person had missed three turns and was kicked out of the game all their troops will be turned into neutral territories, they loose points to the game winner etc.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• There are times where we are playing speed games and something comes up where we have to leave the game this happens to everyone and is not a big deal but it is kind of a pain for others who are playing and don't want to wait 15 minutes during a speed game. The forfeit game button would essentially be a curtesy button where if you know you're going to be gone for the rest of the game anyway you can just leave. I understand that this could be abused but that is why it would not be available for games with only 2 people and people can abuse the game in the same way currently by just waiting 15 minutes i'm sure that abuse could still be regulated even if there was a rule like this.

[Queen_Herpes]

Suggested before, Rejected before. Reasons are for people throwing games. Might never happen, definitely won't happen soon. *Royally Rejected*

[TheForgivenOne]

Nice summary Queen. People don't like their drop? Forfeit. People get bad rolls first turn? Forfeit.

Moving this to rejected.

[Halmir]

Concise description:

• The idea of adding a Surrender button to all games has been done to death and needs no explanation, nor a rehash of the same arguments (where a large % of players want this, versus a large % that don't). However here's a new take on it

Specifics/Details:

• Add the option for a host to enable this facility during creating a game. New ones only, not existing.
• If You don't want it in your game then fine, don't enable it. Nothing will be different for you.
• If you don't want to play in such a game, fine also, avoid these types (perhaps even add this as an option in your Control Panel so you can "Foe" this option and you would never see these games!)
• If however you do like the sound of it, then click the Enable when creating the game. This would be displayed alongside the config of the game for game type,re-inforcements, FOW etc
• And if you want to play in such a game then you can choose to enter the game, or not, nobody is forcing you!

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Those that want to play games that can be resigned when it's an obvious outcome can now do so, and are generally happier - more chance of them becoming/renewing Premium membership, I'd have thought?
• Those that love dragging games out needlessly can carry on for weeks or months longer, and their fellow players can also revel in the tedium this brings It's no change for them so they won't be complaining
• Some limitations can easily be considered for this option e.g. no surrenders allowed within the first 5 rounds on any but the smallest of maps, no surrenders if you have 20% or more of the regions on the map, no surrenders unless you're the weakest player. Any of these work for me and could be enhanced further.
• To introduce this, add this as a Beta option and ask for one hundred volunteers to try it out for a while, then let the playtesters feedback comments. If it's proved to work ok then it can be rolled out to all 20,000 of us (or however members many it is these days!)

[jrh_cardinal]

multis

edit- and the beta thing wouldn't help. of course it's a good idea in theory, and the 100 people who sign up to be testers will be good members of the community. The problem is that not all 20000 members will use it honestly and correctly

[TheForgivenOne]

As jrh said, this would easily be used multi's. They sign up, go through said amount of rounds, resign.

And for the "Can't resign unless weakest player". Well, what happens if the weakest player refuses to resign? He thinks he can make some epic comeback in the game. All of a sudden, every other player that wants to resign, can't. And what is the fun in a game, when you watch every single player resign?

[PLAYER57832]

The only way for a surrender button to be used without abuse is to have it only activate after a VERY long time, so it would only be used by those who really are in "dead" games. It might, barely, be possible for multis to abuse that also, but if they are willing to put in 2-3 months of deadlock.. at some point, its not worth worrying about. (and if there were no points allocated... it would not matter anyway!)

However, that idea, too, was turned down.

[TheForgivenOne]

(and if there were no points allocated... it would not matter anyway!)

However, that idea, too, was turned down.

Can you please be more clear on what you mean by this? Because I really hope i'm reading what you wrote wrong.

[Halmir]

Glad to see some intelligent debate ( I was expecting at least one person to be abusive lol!). Further limitations could be added:
1) Premium members only or
2) Have to have been a member for at least 3 months

If the weakest player refuses to resign then I have no issue with that, that's their right to fight to the death. If the existing suggested restrictions were tweaked such that you had to have 10% or less of the regions or troops before being able to use this function, that could still work.

[Darwins_Bane]

its not just that the surrender button was revisited over and over, its that they had one, and had to remove it due to abuse. As well, if you're about to win a game, you come back for your final turn where you will crush everyone, only to find the game in the recently finished section, wouldn't you find that a little annoying? Perhaps an analogy that will anger some, but the surrender button is like communism, good in theory, bad in practice.

[Halmir]

More and more restrictions can be added to this until it's not worth the effort for the cheating lowlife multi player. Longer minimum turns, each player can only surrender once in every week across all their games, Premiums only, any surrender automatically is logged and reported to the Multi hunters on a special report, A player surrendering loses double points as a punishment (but the winner only gets the normal rate) etc etc. All this and more could be thrashed out in a pilot/Beta test and not implemented until sufficient safeguards were in place.

I take the point that a game where you were relishing the prospect of delivering the final crushing blow would be frustrating if they all gave up, but it's a win, and hey how often are you certain of such a thing? I have one now as it happens, and it must be a first this year. Even if they all lammed out on me I'm cool as it was a great battle to get this far.

[danes]

It would be nice to be able to end deadlocked games without having to deadbeat out of them

[alex951]

its to easy to abuse, no

[AgentSmith88]

More and more restrictions can be added to this until it's not worth the effort for the cheating lowlife multi player. Longer minimum turns, each player can only surrender once in every week across all their games, Premiums only, any surrender automatically is logged and reported to the Multi hunters on a special report, A player surrendering loses double points as a punishment (but the winner only gets the normal rate) etc etc. All this and more could be thrashed out in a pilot/Beta test and not implemented until sufficient safeguards were in place.

I take the point that a game where you were relishing the prospect of delivering the final crushing blow would be frustrating if they all gave up, but it's a win, and hey how often are you certain of such a thing? I have one now as it happens, and it must be a first this year. Even if they all lammed out on me I'm cool as it was a great battle to get this far.

Best way to deter multis, but it's the freemiums with only 4 slots that would want this the most. Any premium members don't have to worry about any games ending, and they can always suicide in deadlocked games if they want to give up that badly. I guess the point is that there isn't any way the usefulness of a surrender button would outweigh the amount of abuse that would go along with it.

[jrh_cardinal]

( I was expecting at least one person to be abusive lol!)

well seeing as one of the two 'abusive' people above this was a mod...
also, baiting much?


As Darwin said, this has been tried before, but it failed. I have yet to see a suggestion in this thread or any other that would not have problems with multis, allow everyone to:

Feel the thrill of victory as you crush your last opponent

, and successfully stop deadlocks. I mean, if you want to say option is only there after 250 rounds or something, fine. Much shorter than that and a dedicated multi could play 1v1 freestyle and get through it very quickly.

[pistolpete86]

could we have a surrender button added? especially for 2 player when you know its over it would be good if you could just hit a surrender button to forfit the game

[Masli]

could we have a surrender button added? especially for 2 player when you know its over it would be good if you could just hit a surrender button to forfit the game

this has been suggested like 10000000000000000000000 times.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=471&t=67152

[owenshooter]

it existed, it was abused, it went away to grandma's farm... it will more than likely never be back...-the black jesus

[drunkmonkey]

please take time to search for previous similar suggestions and, if possible, to check current and archived threads before posting something "new"

[TheForgivenOne]

Not happening. Rejected

[KoE_Sirius]

Not happening. Rejected

but,but,but.