Put 'Perfect or quit' in table notes

[Lara8818]

BGA is not going to introduce a preference setting for 'Must agree to abandon if max score isn't possible'. (Indeed, the fact that they wouldn't should highlight that it's unsportsmanlike play, but I digress.) But we can do custom table notes, so why not write your intentions in there? You'll never be troubled by honest players joining your tables only to refuse to abandon later, and said honest players won't get in a situation where they'll get bullied over the matter. Everyone's happier. Let's make this a thing, people!

[Vandaley]

It is unsportsmanlike to not agree to abandon if a max score is not possible? I would argue it is unsportsmanlike to abandon under most circumstances.

[Lara8818]

It is unsportsmanlike to not agree to abandon if a max score is not possible? I would argue it is unsportsmanlike to abandon under most circumstances.

I'm sorry, I might have worded my post badly. I agree that quitting because of an imperfect score is effectively cheating, and I would never sit down at a table where this was the stated policy. However, I've run into many many players who feel differently, getting angry/abusive or just bombing the game deliberately if you won't agree to abandon. And unfortunately, you can't tell until the game is already in progress who these players are going to be.

But if the host put their stance on imperfect games in the table notes, players like you and I would be able to steer clear, leading to less frustration for everyone.

[Vandaley]

It is unsportsmanlike to not agree to abandon if a max score is not possible? I would argue it is unsportsmanlike to abandon under most circumstances.

I'm sorry, I might have worded my post badly. I agree that quitting because of an imperfect score is effectively cheating, and I would never sit down at a table where this was the stated policy. However, I've run into many many players who feel differently, getting angry/abusive or just bombing the game deliberately if you won't agree to abandon. And unfortunately, you can't tell until the game is already in progress who these players are going to be.

But if the host put their stance on imperfect games in the table notes, players like you and I would be able to steer clear, leading to less frustration for everyone.

I agree. I have mostly stopped playing against people I do not know because of this. I like to finish games, one of my most memorable games was a 22 that was the result of near perfect play. It was an accomplishment to finish the game at all.

[Daredek]

I like the idea!
But too much work. (LOL)

O.M.G. I just spent two hours thinking about this issue.

[Silene]

It is unsportsmanlike to not agree to abandon if a max score is not possible? I would argue it is unsportsmanlike to abandon under most circumstances.

I'm sorry, I might have worded my post badly. I agree that quitting because of an imperfect score is effectively cheating, and I would never sit down at a table where this was the stated policy. However, I've run into many many players who feel differently, getting angry/abusive or just bombing the game deliberately if you won't agree to abandon. And unfortunately, you can't tell until the game is already in progress who these players are going to be.

But if the host put their stance on imperfect games in the table notes, players like you and I would be able to steer clear, leading to less frustration for everyone.

I also have been treated very aggressively for not abandoning. That's always an unpleasant encounter. At least quite often those people give me RT for how they say "holding them hostage" in the game so i won't run into them again. But I'd very much prefer a solution where they make it an option / make it visible before game start. Or even better: give -10 ELO for abandoning which I hope would stop them do it in most cases.

[Jakob5860]

Just make it a game mode - all or nothing. All I want to do is play Hanabi to completion, but I have no interest in playing an imperfect game (although it might not be fair when there are un-winnable decks). It’s boring and it loses my interest and in a co-op game, I don’t think the person that wants to complete a game is any more entitled than the person that wants to move to the next table. Just make it an option from the outset and be done with this.

[Stroom]

You would become a much better player if you'd play the tough decks to completion. These decks often offer much harder decisions for you that you have to play around so you develop better strategies overall.
This is why quitters never become good at this game. All I have seen so far is a quitter making a sub-optimal move that results in a card being lost. And then there's an immediate abandon request. No analysis, not trying to think how this situation could have been solved better, just quit and move on...
L2P

[Lara8818]

Just make it a game mode - all or nothing. All I want to do is play Hanabi to completion, but I have no interest in playing an imperfect game (although it might not be fair when there are un-winnable decks). It’s boring and it loses my interest and in a co-op game, I don’t think the person that wants to complete a game is any more entitled than the person that wants to move to the next table. Just make it an option from the outset and be done with this.

You would become a much better player if you'd play the tough decks to completion.

Personally I agree with Stroom - not only does it help you learn but it's more interesting, imo, to figure out how to wring the most points possible out of even a terrible setup - but I acknowledge there are people who feel like Jakob.

I don't have any personal investment in forcing those people to become better players by toughing through the hard games, or even whether ELO is a reliable method of assessing another player's skill - after all, if someone wants to cheat at a co-op game to boost their ELO, there are much easier ways to do that (just grab 3 friends, clue all cards in chat, and never lose!).

And I get their point about entitlement, but that's just the default way online games work - if you start a game, you are agreeing to see it through to the finish even if it doesn't go the way you like. That's why I agree with them that either a table setting - or, again, since BGA would likely not institute such a setting, it becoming standard practice to put 'all or nothing' in the table notes - would be a way to keep the two camps of players apart so both could be happier.

[HATFIELDER]

I do wish that when the deck runs out you could play two cards each rather than just one. It's amazing how often the second copy of the 4 you discarded in the first few turns of the game turns out to be the bottom card of the deck. At which point you finish with 34 points having worked extremely hard and what does BGA reward you with! -12 pts So very, very, very frustrating when by any stretch of the imagination even 34 is an achievement. Anything within 3 points of full marks needs to be seen as a win or you will continue to get high abandonment rates.