Conceding victory

[AKuras]

So you want me to waste ~couple minutes so you could see some number? If you won buy 10 points or 12? No thank you. I rather be sitting at another table already then waste more time looking at another guy waste time thinking whats The best move to win by max points. In real life į can go and get a drink, wc break or what ever untill you count. Here im tk play and i wont sit more than i need too.

No, not minutes, just seconds. Like I said I played yahtzee and people conceded when I had one roll left, it's 10-15 seconds at most to let me have that final turn.

Of course concede to save several minutes at a long and complex game, but like j said when we are talking seconds, just seconds, it's rude.

Now multiply those 10-15 Second by ~100 games lets say per week. How many extra games you could play. I would choose extra games Any day

[Blacktango]

Now multiply those 10-15 Second by ~100 games lets say per week. How many extra games you could play. I would choose extra games Any day

And so what ? Is there some record challenge ?

This topic seems endless.
IMO, there are some cases where conceding is perfectly fine or even necessary (if most of the players of this game agree).
But this can’t be generalized, as people have different opinions about this.

If you didn't agree together when you joined the table (for example the table creator might have put a "concede if you lose"/"play until the end" message on the table), then remember that your opponents may not agree with you, so don't concede too early/late to be nice to as many people as possible, including yourself.

[Ze Monstah]

This topic seems endless.
IMO, there are some cases where conceding is perfectly fine or even necessary (if most of the players of this game agree).
But this can’t be generalized, as people have different opinions about this.

If you didn't agree together when you joined the table (for example the table creator might have put a "concede if you lose"/"play until the end" message on the table), then remember that your opponents may not agree with you, so don't concede too early/late to be nice to as many people as possible, including yourself.

It's good that it's endless if people still think that conceding is possible in games of 3-or-above players.

Dude... What opponents?

Someone already told you: Concession is a thing possible only in games of 2! Only 1 opponent!

So the player who feels (s)he will probably lose, concedes and gives the other one the win, at 50% game-progress (instead of 100%).

So what are you talking about?

[Blacktango]

I totally agree with that, and btw I will (probably) never concede.

As I said, we can't generalise because there are 2-player games, 3+ player games, games with a final score, very short games, and so on.

[King Hrothbeort]

I just had an opponent concede as I was in the middle of making a move which was actually a terrible move, but looked like it might be a winning move, which I probably would not have confirmed after I examined the final position of the move. A few seconds later my opponent messaged me that they realized they shouldn't have conceded at that point. This wasn't intentional on my part, but it makes me think that a possible strategy against opponents who like to quickly concede is to bluff them with moves that look like winning moves but aren't really.

[VT1982]

I don't play many games, its usually Yahtzee and Backgammon, but it does frustrate me when people concede in the last few turns.

I believe you cannot concede until at least 50% of the game has been played. I feel that if you start playing a game, its polite to see the whole game through. Obviously it would be frustrating for someone who clearly cannot win early in the game to go through turn after turn but if there are only a few left, its just polite to finish it.

Maybe the solution is to only allow people to concede when more than 50% has been played but stop it and make it mutual agreement only after 95%.

Obviously there will be some that don't agree with this but i like to finish games.

[Blacktango]

Maybe the solution is to only allow people to concede when more than 50% has been played but stop it and make it mutual agreement only after 95%.

This suggestion sounds pretty good to me.

But, note that in many games, the percentage of the game isn't really accurate.
If there are a number of turns, it's very easy. But in a card game, for example, even if a player has a winning hand, the developer can't display 99%, because the other players don't have that information yet.

[Nullzone]

619 games on BGA with thousands of tables in progress and y'all are worried about whether or not one table is a "poor experience"

Just move on with life man

[uncreative username]

If I have 1% chance to win, I'll try to grab it.

If I got 0% there is o point staying in the game, wether it is at 51% or 99%.


Why complaining ?
You won ! GG !

Because it's satisfying to finish a game that's close to complete. Concede at 51% if you want but at 99% can't you at least wait a few seconds for me to finish and maybe see if i can beat a personal best, or just for good manners? You save seconds of time, just seconds. Let me finish the game!

I see this very differently. If I concede at/near the end, it’s because I know I’ve been soundly beaten. It’s the same as saying “d@mn, you really got me. It’s all yours! Respect!”

If your ego needs to see how many points you beat me by, that’s your problem.

[Blacktango]

If your ego needs to see how many points you beat me by, that’s your problem.

I read some messages from players on the forum who didn't want to know how bad they were in the final stats of the game.
So this ego problem is both sides