Players Quitting

[shparks79]

I think that it should be possible to concede any game at any time, regardless of number of players or how far into the game you are. Then people would not have as much of a reason to just quit. I don't do it, but I can definitely understand wanting to quit a game when you are so far behind that it seems pointless to continue.

[Jest Phulin]

It depends on the interactions of the players. In a marathon, for example, one person who stops running doesn't affect the runners at the front. I have no problem with them conceding. However, what if it were an automobile race on a track? Handling lapped traffic is a concern for the leaders, and does affect the outcome. Even if the leaders are not close, there may be other racers who are benefiting from drafting that racer. For the integrity of the sport, they keep going. Similarly, for the integrity of this site, quitters should have some penalty if their game actions influence the other players' actions.

[RedSam]

Hi,

Thanks for your feedback & ideas.

At now, the % of games that finish with everyone on board is 98%, thanks to the quitting penalty system.

Considering some quits are unintentional (ex: Internet problem), I consider that the current system is quite efficient, and probably best than any other website.

If you want to be sure to avoid the quitters, you can also restrict your table to players that don't quit tables.

The system can probably be improved... but again it is quite satisfactory at now.

Hi sourisdudesert. Thanks for your information. I agree that the system is generally satisfactory. Still, there are a couple of key changes I would suggest:

• The ability to leave red thumbs for people who leave games inappropriately. I recently played a game of Quoridor where my opponent played through the final move of the game and quit on the move where I was about to win. The game is here: http://en.boardgamearena.com/#!table?table=10464039. When I tried to give him a red thumb it said that I couldn't leave feedback because I had not played with him recently! In fact, your "report a player" page even says we should leave red thumbs for opponents who quit games rudely. But I can't. Can we change it so that abandoned games count as playing and I could leave a red thumb?
• Second, I know you're concerned about imposing a stiffer penalty on quitters because sometimes there are just computer problems or it's an accident. But even still, I just think that if you leave a game for any reason (even if accidental) it should just count as a loss. At least in a two-player game. It's not trying to be harsh, just the reality of it.

Just my two cents. Thanks for all of your work.

I completely agree with you, especially for the impossiblity to give a red thumb.
About the 98% of finished games, i'm surely unlucky with 6 Nimmt.
I started about 5-10 6 Nimmt since I came here (around end of Auhust) and still, I have in my stats : 0 (zero) games played !!!
I never succeeded to finish a single game !!
I still have a game (Gomoku) unfinished just before the last move, but i can't give a red thumb because he's Newbie/never played against him, but this player played many games since...

BTW, it''s a very good site, here !

[Liallan]

It depends on the interactions of the players. In a marathon, for example, one person who stops running doesn't affect the runners at the front. I have no problem with them conceding. However, what if it were an automobile race on a track? Handling lapped traffic is a concern for the leaders, and does affect the outcome. Even if the leaders are not close, there may be other racers who are benefiting from drafting that racer. For the integrity of the sport, they keep going. Similarly, for the integrity of this site, quitters should have some penalty if their game actions influence the other players' actions.

(Don't know how I missed these posts.)

Agreed. Someone leaving a game does affect the integrity of the game, or even playing lousy on purpose to end a game quickly, can affect the outcome of it, which is not fair to the people who are left, regardless of who is winning. Some games cannot be finished properly, and some games would just be ruined and become unfair. So I can totally see not allowing people to concede multi-player games. There are a few which might not be affected, but they would have to go through and decide which ones that would work for. (Can't Stop for instance, although that is not one I'd ever decide I was too far behind to do anything about it, so bad example.)

As to that wonderful 98% satisfactory rating... NOT in the turn-based. Over half my games are abandoned, and that is absolutely not satisfactory at all. And that is even considering that I have learned my lesson and try to stick with ones that are restricted, but still over half are abandoned.

[Babz]

Hi

I quite agree with the annoying part of a game stopped by a quitter. I totaly disagree to put in the same bag those who quit on purpose and those who are disconnected .
Unfortunately I am sometimes disconnected (maybe because of my location) (Hopefully for my reputation most of the time when I am to win ).

My suggestion about it would be :- In a real-time game when someone quits for any reason after the proper time for expelling the player an option should be offered.
Either cancel the game or the Game becomes turn based .
If after becoming turn based the same player doesn't play in the proper time, we are now sure it is a bad player so he should be directly banned.**

In any case everyone even the "quiter" should be able to thumb down.

IMHO, the 98% of games reaching the end tells more that the BGA community is mostly a great one rather that says the thumb system is efficient.

** if that is possible to do, a great option would be to propose in a real time game to turn it into a based turn (with agreement of the players). That would cover when you ve started a game that last more than planned or any "good" reason of real life to have to stop playing.