End game quitting - bad form.

[james1974]

I hate when people concede once the last turn is announced, it would take 5 seconds to pick a route to claim and let the game finish and be scored. I wish that if people do this the game would reveal what their routes were and score the game rather than having to sit through a game replay to find out.

I sort of understand it if they know they have lost but I take too long to pick the optimum last turn (I don't know their routes aren't finished) So I understand that. But I feel it's a bit like being a bad loser otherwise.

Why is quitting penalised with bad karma, but conceding at this point is fine. What is the difference between quitting and conceding a two player game anyway?

[Jellby]

Conceding grants the full elo to the opponent, quitting grants only an amount proportional to the percentage of completion (which would not matter much at 99%, but does at 50%).

I would actually suggest that quitting/conceding should be a single button: concede in 2-player games at 50% or higher, quit with penalties otherwise. I see no (acceptable) reason to quit when you can concede.

[Nekojin]

Why is quitting penalised with bad karma, but conceding at this point is fine. What is the difference between quitting and conceding a two player game anyway?

Because conceding is acknowledging that they've lost, and is willing to accept that any come-from-behind victory on their part is unlikely enough that they don't want to dot every I and cross every T to get there.

What are you losing by them conceding? You're getting the full ELO, you're getting the victory on your record, and you've got more time to play other games (or more of the same game).

Why should they be punished for giving you the very things you're playing for?

[MadManMark]

Not to mention, every once in a while -- well, I think this has happened at least once for me -- someone concedes because they weren't dealing well, but had no idea that I was doing worse, they'd serendipitously blocked me out of completing a big ticket but did not realize.

I'm always happy to allow someone to concede, as pointed out by others, you get essentially all the outcome you are looking for from winning, and every once in a while, you may get a win that you might not have otherwise!

[Mathew5000]

What are you losing by them conceding? You're getting the full ELO, you're getting the victory on your record, and you've got more time to play other games (or more of the same game).

Why should they be punished for giving you the very things you're playing for?

Some people see every game as a narrative, its own story, and they like to play the whole game just like they wouldn't walk out of a movie if they know how it's going to end. Don't assume that everyone you face cares about nothing other than increasing their ELO or win percentage.

Of course you have every right to concede the game at the last move. I wouldn't go as far as the OP in saying that this is "bad form". But you shouldn't assume that there is something wrong with players like the OP who prefer that a game be played to its natural finish.

[speedypuzzlement]

Not to mention, every once in a while -- well, I think this has happened at least once for me -- someone concedes because they weren't dealing well, but had no idea that I was doing worse, they'd serendipitously blocked me out of completing a big ticket but did not realize.

I'm always happy to allow someone to concede, as pointed out by others, you get essentially all the outcome you are looking for from winning, and every once in a while, you may get a win that you might not have otherwise!

Agree 100%. Not to mention that it's quite easy to blunder an objectively winning position (I do it all the time ).

[Nekojin]

What are you losing by them conceding? You're getting the full ELO, you're getting the victory on your record, and you've got more time to play other games (or more of the same game).

Why should they be punished for giving you the very things you're playing for?

Some people see every game as a narrative, its own story, and they like to play the whole game just like they wouldn't walk out of a movie if they know how it's going to end. Don't assume that everyone you face cares about nothing other than increasing their ELO or win percentage.

Of course you have every right to concede the game at the last move. I wouldn't go as far as the OP in saying that this is "bad form". But you shouldn't assume that there is something wrong with players like the OP who prefer that a game be played to its natural finish.

Feeling the need to complete every game ever played from start to finish without accepting people conceding defeat is WAY more obsessive-compulsive than I am!

[Mathew5000]

The OP didn't say he wouldn't accept an opponent conceding defeat. He said he disliked it when an opponent conceded defeat after the final turn is announced.

And by the way, when I said above that you shouldn't assume there's something wrong with someone who likes to finish a game, I guess I should also have added that you really shouldn't ascribe psychiatric disorders to someone on a message board, even in jest.

[Yahyra]

Completely agree that these quitters are bad mannered/ bad form; I suggest you use your thumbs down and report to help our community improve. Best wishes.

[Kaladry]

Completely agree that these quitters are bad mannered/ bad form; I suggest you use your thumbs down and report to help our community improve. Best wishes.

Conceding the game because you know you lost is not a reportable offense. Just red thumb them if you don't like it.
You still get your full ELO points for your win and some extra time. They get some extra time and a little less of a loss to their ego by not seeing how much they lost by.

What I think is worse than this is when people know they lost so they just run down the clock on their last turn making you wait and wasting your time and then finally take their move in the last fee seconds before their time expires.