[GP] Surrender/Resign/Forfeit Button

[waauw]

About 38%.

If an east-asian says so, it must be true. Everybody knows they're the best at math.

[Dukasaur]

it may be a while before it's tried again, but if it is, the core of old-timers that stopped it last time won't be there to stop it again.
I think that, although the surrender button has been defeated many times in the past, people should not give up. It is a logical idea that will eventually win.

i really hope you just stop and think how shitty this statement is on your part... not only shitty, but embarrassing... you would make an awesome politician...-Jésus noir

Nothing shitty about it. I see it at work all the time. There's some necessary improvements that need to be made, but some higher-up with obsolete ideas entrenched in his mind says, "nope, can't be done." Amazing, once the fuddy-duddy gets trundled off to the old folks' home, how quickly the impossible becomes possible, and the necessary improvements are made.

[Serbia]

it may be a while before it's tried again, but if it is, the core of old-timers that stopped it last time won't be there to stop it again.
I think that, although the surrender button has been defeated many times in the past, people should not give up. It is a logical idea that will eventually win.

i really hope you just stop and think how shitty this statement is on your part... not only shitty, but embarrassing... you would make an awesome politician...-Jésus noir

Nothing shitty about it. I see it at work all the time. There's some necessary improvements that need to be made, but some higher-up with obsolete ideas entrenched in his mind says, "nope, can't be done." Amazing, once the fuddy-duddy gets trundled off to the old folks' home, how quickly the impossible becomes possible, and the necessary improvements are made.

Continue ignoring the fact that it was already tried, and found to be a problem. Not all things desired by some qualify as "necessary".

Bollocks.

[Metsfanmax]

it may be a while before it's tried again, but if it is, the core of old-timers that stopped it last time won't be there to stop it again.
I think that, although the surrender button has been defeated many times in the past, people should not give up. It is a logical idea that will eventually win.

i really hope you just stop and think how shitty this statement is on your part... not only shitty, but embarrassing... you would make an awesome politician...-Jésus noir

Nothing shitty about it. I see it at work all the time. There's some necessary improvements that need to be made, but some higher-up with obsolete ideas entrenched in his mind says, "nope, can't be done." Amazing, once the fuddy-duddy gets trundled off to the old folks' home, how quickly the impossible becomes possible, and the necessary improvements are made.

Continue ignoring the fact that it was already tried, and found to be a problem. Not all things desired by some qualify as "necessary".

Bollocks.

It was tried without due consideration for the subtleties of how resigning works in multiplayer games, back when the site was brand new. We now know what the major problems are (aside from that actual experience, we have a lot of posts in the resign thread warning us of potential problems), and we can try it again with a better attempt to control its usage. If it doesn't work, that's fine, but it's really not possible to know ahead of time based on something that happened nearly 10 years ago.

[Dukasaur]

Continue ignoring the fact that it was already tried, and found to be a problem.

It was implemented without any safeguards, so it was abused. When abuses came up, instead of finding safeguards, lack simply cancelled the button entirely. He probably didn't have a lot of time and figured it was easier to just cancel the idea than refine it. That's understandable, but unfortunate. It would have been nice if he had some spare time to play with it and find refinements to cancel the abuses without destroying the basic concept.

Since then, hundreds of people have looked at the issue (see the multiple discussion threads) and thought up ways that it can be implemented without being abused. The simplest possible abuse, of course, is that it could be used for wholesale point dumping, and that abuse could be prevented by the simple expedient of not making the quit button live until round 10. Another possible abuse is that it could be used by cheaters to harvest points from their multies. That particular abuse could be prevented by not letting NRs have a quit button. And so on, and so forth. Name any method of abuse, and I can tell you a way to prevent that particular abuse.

Not all things desired by some qualify as "necessary".

True enough. I'm not claiming this is necessary, but it is a good idea. Every board game has a resign option, and rightly so. Playing out games when all sides know it's over is an annoying waste of time. It may be a very small annoyance, and it may be a waste of a very small amount of time, but there's no reason why we should annoy people needlessly.

[JamesKer1]

Hmmm I was hoping I wouldn't have to type this long mess out, but it looks like it is warranted with the amount of conversation.

We've gotten a vague amount of results on this previously, but that was a while ago, so an update is very nice

40% Yes, 20% No, and 40% "With Restrictions"

From "With Restrictions", we divided into several subcategories, and got a pretty split vote

1v1 Only- 20%
Multiplayer Games Only- 20%
Trench Only- 25%
Not Available in Clan/Tournament Games- 30%
Single Player (Non-Team) Games Only- 25%
Private Games Only- 15%
Bots Only- 15%

Users were allowed to select multiple options.

This division among the 40% of users who responded to the poll is a huge factor in why this button hasn't been implemented. There is no possible way for us to incorporate the button that fits every single need (this is what my earlier post was getting at).

The most recent proposal that I've seen that has gotten the most support would be a button available only to premiums, appears only after round 10, has some sort of troop/region ratio requirement, is not available in team, tournament, or clan games, and has a restricted amount of uses per game/month/player. Also there has to be some stat counting on your profile page as well as C&A guidelines set in place to establish "abuse".

Now, if you want to take the time to get the community behind a button and get more precise details laid out to everyone's agreement, I will be right behind you all the way. However, last time just the mods discussed it there were lots of issues- and I can't imagine unleashing those issues to the general community not having to deal with them. BW has stated in the past that he supports the resign button, but he doesn't support having to go to all the time and trouble of figuring out what restrictions are needed and so on. So if there are any volunteers to do that, I'm sure arrangements can be made to hook you up with the right people and get started. But as a fair warning, no one currently is taking on the task for a reason.

[Donelladan]

There is no need to have a common agreement of what the resign button should be. Obviously there is so many possibilities to define the restrictions that we will never find something for which everyone agrees.

There is some obvious stuff though.
It should be for 1vs1 only, poly (which is a kind of 1vs1), and maybe for multiplayers game if only 2 players remains.
I have no idea how in your previous poll 20% said resign button should be for multiplayers game only, but that's silly. Almost every players posting on the resign button always agree with the fact that no one should be able to resign in a multiplayer game. That's the most important and imo almost the only required restriction.

All the other possible restrictions actually do not matter. Just make a summary for bW and he decide what kind of resign button he want.

Best way to do it would be to implement a resign button with as few restriction as possible, and then see how that works, and if necessary, add restrictions.

[owenshooter]

Best way to do it would be to implement a resign button with as few restriction as possible, and then see how that works, and if necessary, add restrictions.

oh... You mean like how they did it the only time it existed and it was abused? Abused in a manner that it was decided the site could never have the feature? Great plan you have here... ...-Jn

[JamesKer1]

There is no need to have a common agreement of what the resign button should be. Obviously there is so many possibilities to define the restrictions that we will never find something for which everyone agrees.

We actually DO need to have a fairly common agreement. Because the feature has been removed from the site at the request of the community, we need a large amount of widespread community support in bringing it back.

There is some obvious stuff though.
It should be for 1vs1 only, poly (which is a kind of 1vs1), and maybe for multiplayers game if only 2 players remains.
I have no idea how in your previous poll 20% said resign button should be for multiplayers game only, but that's silly. Almost every players posting on the resign button always agree with the fact that no one should be able to resign in a multiplayer game. That's the most important and imo almost the only required restriction./quote]

THIS is the exact reason why we are having trouble. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as they should be, but their "obvious restrictions" are not the same as everyone else's obvious restrictions. Someone may say that blocking the feature to Freemiums and New Recruits is obvious to prevent abuse, or limiting it to just trench games is an obvious restriction because it isn't needed anywhere else.

I am behind a resign button myself, just to put that out there so you don't think I'm being too harsh against the idea. I think it would work well with few restrictions but heavy C&A punishment and oversight should abuses come up.

[Shannon Apple]

I'm with James on this. It needs heavy restriction because of the volunteers who work on this site. While it should be restricted to 1v1 or last 2 players left in a game, it should also have a round limit. How many rounds does it take to legitimately win the majority of games? That's the reasonable round limit that it should be restricted to. The quit button should only be there for a game that is dragging along with a clear winner past a reasonable number of rounds. It leaves no room for abuse, and so little or no problems for our multihunters. Nothing should be implemented that will raise the number of abuse complaints for volunteers to deal with.

[owenshooter]

the same ol' argument

i just don't see why it is so hard for you all to understand that it just can't happen. i don't see why you can't understand that it was abused in such a manner and will be abused if ever brought back, that it is never going to happen. dream away, it is not coming back. there was a small glorious window where it existed and it was abused and abused some more and then deemed such a liability to the integrity of the game, that it was killed and buried. leave it alone, it is not coming back. watching you all move from the same ol' initial statement from page one, all the way to what features this new feature will need by page four, is HILARIOUS... it isn't going to happen. the feature was abused the one time it existed. good luck with this... and like duk said, since you all aren't getting your way, don't surrender, you will eventually win... oh, wait... isn't that totally counter to what you are arguing here?!!! HA!! the irony...-Jésus noir

[Metsfanmax]

There is no need to have a common agreement of what the resign button should be. Obviously there is so many possibilities to define the restrictions that we will never find something for which everyone agrees.

We actually DO need to have a fairly common agreement. Because the feature has been removed from the site at the request of the community, we need a large amount of widespread community support in bringing it back.

No, the feature was removed because it just ended up being poorly implemented. The community may have been the ones who pointed it out, but that doesn't mean that it was owed to them that lack shut it down. At the end of the day, bigWham isn't really implementing things based on community support, except insofar as implementing something won't cause a riot. And the difference between whether the resign button occurs in trench games or not (say) is not a difference that riots will turn on.

[owenshooter]

[ At the end of the day, bigWham isn't really implementing things based on community support, except insofar as implementing something won't cause a riot. And the difference between whether the resign button occurs in trench games or not (say) is not a difference that riots will turn on.

yeah... kind of like the changes to freestyle... the powers that be didn't think that would cause much commotion... remember that? what did that do? about a 1/4 of the site vanished overnight... go ahead and put in a resign button and watch people quit when the cheating/abuse occurs like it did the first time... i love how the lunatic jr. mint mentality is finally manning this ship and all the ideas that the old guard shot down, are being put in place and continue to make the site crumble about our ears...-Jn

[enjoycocacola]

Yes!

[clangfield]

[ At the end of the day, bigWham isn't really implementing things based on community support, except insofar as implementing something won't cause a riot. And the difference between whether the resign button occurs in trench games or not (say) is not a difference that riots will turn on.

yeah... kind of like the changes to freestyle... the powers that be didn't think that would cause much commotion... remember that? what did that do? about a 1/4 of the site vanished overnight... go ahead and put in a resign button and watch people quit when the cheating/abuse occurs like it did the first time... i love how the lunatic jr. mint mentality is finally manning this ship and all the ideas that the old guard shot down, are being put in place and continue to make the site crumble about our ears...-Jn

If it were a request to a mod rather than a button, would that suffice? They could check for multis before implementing. If it were premium only that would guard partially against users creating multiple free accounts and resigning in those games; if it were only active after, say, 40 rounds, then it would obviate the set-up & resign abuse.

Or, if everyone were to GROW UP AND BEHAVE LIKE DECENT HUMAN BEINGS, we wouldn't have to worry about people abusing the system, would we?

[concrete]

Yes!

alright........

yes.................32
no..................8

[owenshooter]

If it were a request to a mod rather than a button, would that suffice? They could check for multis before implementing. If it were premium only that would guard partially against users creating multiple free accounts and resigning in those games; if it were only active after, say, 40 rounds, then it would obviate the set-up & resign abuse.

Or, if everyone were to GROW UP AND BEHAVE LIKE DECENT HUMAN BEINGS, we wouldn't have to worry about people abusing the system, would we?

there is no way that would turn into a mod responsibility. they are stretched thin as it is. they can barely monitor the forums, how would they be able to take this on? i just think there is a reason none of the owners have ever implemented it after lack did it the first time... probably some little secret folder they are handed when they take over with info like:

1.who/where is wicked
2.where is Dancing Mustard
3. Hyasi's real identity
4. the dice hack code
5. is owenshooter actually black
6. which facility is blitzaholic currently locked up in
7. why the surrender button can never be implemented again.
8. where the spare keys to the site are hidden

probably looks just like that...-Jésus noir

[DoomYoshi]

6. rhymes with coffee

[khazalid]

i'd bet my ass blitz is playing somewhere else.

is there a 'TOP 10 ELITE GREATEST RISK ATTACK PLAYERS OF ALL TIME' thread somewhere out there? someone do the digging.

[Insperatus]

Just a head's up to whoever's running this site, I'm abandoning you for dominating12 because they have a resign button. I just bought 3 months premium here previous to realizing there's no way to resign a game and reading you're firmly entrenched in your decision. I love this site...except for the lack of a resign button. I'm not interested in playing a game with no possibility of winning, just a waste of my time.

It's very easy to fix the problem with cards. Resigned players retain their cards, simple.

[SilverWill]

Yes!

alright........

yes.................32
no..................8

Just out of curiosity, are you counting the "yes with restrictions" as yes or just not adding them concrete?

Also I think if a resign button is added then I feel the following restrictions should be added or at least considered:

1) premium only with a maximum amount of uses of like 5 times a month
2) only after a minimum of 10 rounds, with the losing player having 3 or less regions and with less than or equal to 5 troops
3) only to be used in games with 2 players (1v1, poly when it is down to 1v3 or 4, etc)
4) have a feature in the settings page where it can be turned on and off but in order for it to be available, both players have to have it active before the game starts. If 1 player has it off then the resign button will not be available for that game.

No matter how I see it, not everyone is going to be happy with or without it but for a resign button without restrictions then my vote is a no.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

You only need 1 restriction.

After using the quit button, you are banned from joining or starting games for a week. Thats essentially what you are saying.

"I dont want to complete this game as I cant be bothered/cannot log in this week".

[Fewnix]

I vote yes -have been pushing for some form of " quit resign, surrender", call it what you will button, since coning to CC as a freemium tourist- checking out this Risky game site.

Can we take the vote as Yes - but the details have to be worked out.

[cowbuki]

I will not renew without a [Resign] option - even if it is limited to 2 player games. A competent player should know when a game is unwinnable. Imagine Chess or Go without resignation.

Resignation is a courtesy extended to an opponent.

If this is at all debatable, simply make resignation yes/no a game creation option. Then those that need this feature will be in a self selecting and easily tracked group.

[Yynatago]

Yess