Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/bugs
FrankJones
Posts: 2451
Joined: 30 June 2024, 00:24

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by FrankJones »

Acerbic wrote: 14 February 2025, 16:26 % of game completed has nothing to do with who's winning or losing, it's a simple measure of how far some global parameters have progressed. In TM, I assume it's just a measure of the 3 terraforming levels.
I agree that is how they do it - but that's a weak measure of how far the game has progressed. In TFM, of the 42 required Terraforming steps, sometimes 12-15 of them might be done in the 13th generation of the game; meaning the game was certainly more than 2/3 played. I'm not suggesting there's a better way, because...
Acerbic wrote: 14 February 2025, 16:26
It's not even remotely feasible to algorithmically determine who was on track to win the game. It's a gargantuan problem that depends on many factors including how the player who quit would have behaved if they hadn't left.
of that. There are so many factors, and the reason it's impossible to program a good AI opponent in TFM (or similar games) would make it similarly difficult to determine who is winning at any given moment. Heck, with real-time scoring disabled, I sometimes think I'm losing only to realize I'm way ahead.
Acerbic wrote: 14 February 2025, 16:26 Nor can you continue the game ...
Why can't the game be continued? Just skip the turns of the player who quit. Would this work in a game like 7 Wonders? Probably not. But in a game like TFM or Wingspan, why not?

Lastly - I'm still not sure I understand why an algorithm awards a percentage of the expected ELO points to the winner when a player quits or concedes. A win should be a win, with full ELO granted. Conceding a lost game should not detract from the gains of the winner.
User avatar
brh2113
Posts: 83
Joined: 26 January 2014, 02:25

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by brh2113 »

FrankJones wrote: 15 February 2025, 00:05 Conceding a lost game should not detract from the gains of the winner.
Conceding a lost game does not detract from the gains of the winner. See my post in https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41022 for details.
User avatar
xspuipuke
Posts: 221
Joined: 13 July 2021, 16:51

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by xspuipuke »

FrankJones wrote: 15 February 2025, 00:05 Why can't the game be continued? Just skip the turns of the player who quit. Would this work in a game like 7 Wonders? Probably not. But in a game like TFM or Wingspan, why not?
Because it‘s not in the rules: they just don‘t handle quitting.
FrankJones
Posts: 2451
Joined: 30 June 2024, 00:24

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by FrankJones »

brh2113 wrote: 15 February 2025, 00:11
FrankJones wrote: 15 February 2025, 00:05 Conceding a lost game should not detract from the gains of the winner.
Conceding a lost game does not detract from the gains of the winner. See my post in https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41022 for details.
My fault. I'm getting myself confused now among different threads. I now remember your helpful reply to me in that thread. Thank you for redirecting me back to it :)

So, the system mostly works. A concession saves everyone time and frustration while awarding the proper ELO.
A rage-quit early awards some ELO and gives a rather harsh penalty to the quitter (Harsh enough that doing it with any level of frequency will prevent that player from participating in any games created by people who know how to use the filters to screen out players with low karma.)
User avatar
Jellby
Posts: 3557
Joined: 31 December 2013, 12:22

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by Jellby »

FrankJones wrote: 15 February 2025, 00:05 Why can't the game be continued?
Even when it "technically" can be done (e.g. when players are allowed to pass, the obvious way would be having the absent player pass every turn), there are often rules changes depending on the number of players (which components to use, how many points you get, which spaces are available, how many rounds to play...). Also, the other players wanted to play an N-player game, not necessarily an (N-1)-player game, and their moves during the game were done based on having that extra player doing some actions, not passing every turn.

You could argue that it would be the same if the player was still at the table and simply passed every turn. Indeed, that could happen, would be legal, and the game would finish "normally". But from the point of view of how BGA handles the game's results, that's an entirely different situation. (And that player could get a few red thumbs too.)
FrankJones
Posts: 2451
Joined: 30 June 2024, 00:24

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by FrankJones »

Jellby wrote: 15 February 2025, 09:46

Even when it "technically" can be done (e.g. when players are allowed to pass, the obvious way would be having the absent player pass every turn), there are often rules changes depending on the number of players (which components to use, how many points you get, which spaces are available, how many rounds to play...). Also, the other players wanted to play an N-player game, not necessarily an (N-1)-player game, and their moves during the game were done based on having that extra player doing some actions, not passing every turn.

You could argue that it would be the same if the player was still at the table and simply passed every turn. Indeed, that could happen, would be legal, and the game would finish "normally". But from the point of view of how BGA handles the game's results, that's an entirely different situation. (And that player could get a few red thumbs too.)
Reasonable points. I tend to look for ways to give everyone the best overall experience while reducing unfair situations. AT times, this may present in the form of tweaks to a specific game, which I am getting the impression BGA is not a big fan of doing. Terraforming Mars is probably a rare 3-player game that can essentially continue with a player sitting out. And, as you noted, that would still not be without its flaws.

But, I do think that having the remaining players play an N-1 player game for the remainder is the least unfair solution compared to just giving everyone an equal win, since that will often not be the case. No solution is going to be fair to everyone all the time. Either way, it should even out in the long run, thus making the discussion relatively unimportant, I suppose. :)

I deal with it by mostly playing 2-player games; one winner and one loser.

For the most part, now that I've been playing consistently for two weeks, these problems seem very rare. I've yet to play a game of Terraforming Mars in which someone rage-quit in round 1 because I played some good cards. (Though, I play 2-player corporate era without preludes, so I rarely do much of anything in the first couple of generations anyway.)
aZesulfaMe K
Posts: 6
Joined: 13 February 2025, 19:14

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by aZesulfaMe K »

Well, finally, someone with common sense. Thanks, FrankJones.

They say up there that it's not decided and that there's no algorithm to determine it... oh well, I guess there has to be all kinds of people.
FrankJones
Posts: 2451
Joined: 30 June 2024, 00:24

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by FrankJones »

aZesulfaMe K wrote: 16 February 2025, 00:06 Well, finally, someone with common sense. Thanks, FrankJones.

They say up there that it's not decided and that there's no algorithm to determine it... oh well, I guess there has to be all kinds of people.
:)

I'm not a professional developer, but I do know how to write basic code in Python, Java and JavaScript.

So, part of me first thinks, "Well, surely this can be done", and then the other part of me remembers, its' not always as simple as it seems.

I just hope everyone here appreciates how much value we get for free, or for the very reasonable price of a premium membership, and appreciates how well the games are programmed, pretty much bug-free, and how dedicated the developers are. I hope everyone who plays regularly supports the site with a premium membership. I mean, it's the price of one dinner out. For a one-year premium membership.
User avatar
Solarman9
Posts: 56
Joined: 19 October 2023, 01:30

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by Solarman9 »

aZesulfaMe K wrote: 13 February 2025, 19:36 I have seen many different cases of kingmaking, but the latest one feels especially frustrating and unfair. The system should address the fact that, with 100% of the game completed in ranked matches, the lowest-scoring player can let the time run out to be kicked for exceeding the time limit, allowing another player to take their turn instead. As a result, the other two players end up with the same score if they have the same ELO and division, regardless of their final in-game points.
I'm sorry, a little bit confused. Are you mad because you won, but the victory wasn't enough because you didn't get more imaginary points then someone else?
FrankJones
Posts: 2451
Joined: 30 June 2024, 00:24

Re: Quitters at very convenient moments (Kingmaking when the game is already over).

Post by FrankJones »

Solarman9 wrote: 17 February 2025, 01:44

I'm sorry, a little bit confused. Are you mad because you won, but the victory wasn't enough because you didn't get more imaginary points then someone else?
I think that's what the OP is saying. People like to receive the points they earned. What makes you consider the points and less real or more imaginary than any other ranking system? Points in any system are a non-tangible thing. Does that mean people shouldn't care? I would think there's a sense of prestige and personal accomplishment being among the leaderboards on what might be the only site that rigorously keeps statistic for popular games.
Post Reply

Return to “Terraforming Mars”