50% progression rules for some game doesn't make sens

[Lou06Lou]

Hello,

I feel like sometimes you can have a very very bad start at some games and honestly the 50% rule doesn't make sens at all.
I agree you should prevent people from giving up on round 1, but maybe in this case the oponnent could agree that the game is already lost ?

What do you think ?

[Ceaseless]

The 50% rule should be removed from all games and permanently banned from usage. Its only use is to abuse the platform.

[RobertBr]

What do you think ?

I think you have misunderstood why the 50% rule is there. It is designed to stop shill accounts rapidly boosting the Elo of a main account (set up a game, then concede, set up a game, then concede). While the Concede is central the measure of progression is I believe set by the developers so could (isn't but could) in principle (not sure how easy it is in practice) be tailored to the game.

It is true that this can cause problems but if you want to concede on the first turn of a game frequently then you are probably actually rage quitting and you should use the correct option for that. To reiterate the options available to end a game prematurely (which are numerous) ...

Concede (at 50%+ progression, to prevent abuse) because your opponent cannot lose without making a mistake (perfectly normal sportsmanship). Result measured as normal and no penalties.

Quit (at any point) because you no longer want to play. You take a penalty on Karma and Elo is measured as a function of game progression (to prevent abuse). Use this plus a red thumb if you really don't like the opponent, or if you are the type of player who likes to rage quit early in games. The karma penalty is trivial as long as the option is used occasionally.

Abandon (only by common agreement, to prevent abuse). This cancels the game. It is primarily of use in groups of friends or for exceptional circumstances. You are never entitled to use this and it is perfectly reasonable for an opponent to refuse and insist you quit or conceded instead.

Timed out. You let your clock run over and an opponent can then time you out. I think, but am not sure, this works the same as a quit.

Inactivity. Simply do nothing and the game will eventually be abandoned. Its about 4 weeks for turn based, and I believe I've seen suggestions of about 6 hours (but somebody else may know) for real time. I believe this works essentially the same way as a collective abandon.

So, no, the 50% progression limit on just one of those is in no way at all an inconvenience or hindrance to you leaving the game. I am sure others can fill in/correct some details, and agree that there are possible tweaks that might improve certain aspects, but it is basically a pretty sound system.

[Jellby]

Each developer is responsible for programming a reasonable progression in the game. Some games are buggy and stay at 0% all the way. Some developers want to allow conceding at any time and either set 50% since the beginning or add a button/action for conceding. The problem is not the 50% rule, but when is 50% considered to be reached.

[Lou06Lou]

I didn't miss-understood, your points were in my head already. About rage quit I do not like to rage quit especially, but some games when you have lot of experience, you can take a high risk / high reward turn and either you win or either you lose after this turn.

To prevent elo feeding abuse, there are plenty other solutions, many gaming website found other solutions than 50% progression.

Time out : This is what I do some times. Last time I was completely loosing in Arena mode at 30% progression, I had to let my clock ran out. Because you cannot quit in Arena mode. Which is honestly really bad, wasting my time and my opponent time. My opponent even agreed that the game was lost at this point for me. I mean it was living forest and I had 10 varans cards against zero at this point.