Change 50% rule to give up for TacTile

[Kuijpie]

In TacTile it can be really frustrating if one player can quickly get a gain-push engine going that can force the other player into the corner. Progress on these games is very slow, but the gain-push engine player will easily win as they can buy more cards.
I just had a game like this, and my opponent wanted to give up (fair enough, there was absolutely nothing she could do), but could not as progress was only 20%. She left the game, and as a result of the low progress I gained only 4 elo, and she didnt lose any, while otherwise it would have been around +/- 20 probably, which I obviously was not happy about. I've had a game where I wanted to give up as well after misclicking twice early on causing a big advantage to my opponent, but could not until we reached 50% and my opponent, to my frustration, was in no rush to get there and the game lasted 10-15 minutes before I could finally give up.
I think for TacTile it would make perfect sense to change when you can give up. 50% progress does not make much sense as with the engine building you can hang around your own corner for ages while accumulating cards, i would suggest basing it on a minimum number of turns, like 10 turns or something.

[TacTileKing]

Yes I agree I already reached out to our developer to see if we can change that rule will keep you updated

[BrettsPeeler]

Maybe 26%, to make sure the game was played at least to the point that it is clear that one player is ahead significantly, i.e. they're more than halfway across the map while the other is cornered.

[Kuijpie]

Maybe 26%, to make sure the game was played at least to the point that it is clear that one player is ahead significantly, i.e. they're more than halfway across the map while the other is cornered.

But one player might have a great engine accumulating cards in the corner, while pushing back the other player to his own corner, making it that it can take a while to reach that %

[BrettsPeeler]

Maybe 26%, to make sure the game was played at least to the point that it is clear that one player is ahead significantly, i.e. they're more than halfway across the map while the other is cornered.

But one player might have a great engine accumulating cards in the corner, while pushing back the other player to his own corner, making it that it can take a while to reach that %

Yeah, I think you're right. Well, I guess it opens the opportunity for toxic harassment, too, resulting in a forced karma loss, potentially so yeah, I agree, maybe even lower then.

[TacTileKing]

My point of view is that people should be able to concede whenever - if you don’t want to play you shouldn’t have to play

I think this is separate from the discussion of when is a game truly lost (there’s always a huge catchup opportunity when your opponent scores a pawn) but that being said the game should allow you to give up whenever you want

[BrettsPeeler]

Another thought, I recently won a 2player (i.e., 1vs1) game in which the opponent got one disc in, and then i quickly pushed their last disc into a corner and then trapped them with two discs, which may be the same situation that Kuijpie described in the OP above, but basically I just gained tokens, bought cards, and sat there forever until I had enough cards to move and overdrive repeatedly into home all on the same turn. I wonder if an additional rule, maybe "checkmate" or perhaps allow players to overdrive with their two actions to push, idk... maybe that is still insufficient... In any case, it definitely is a way to force a win for the current moment with the current game design rules.

[BrettsPeeler]

3 moves could also prevent this, combined with a two actions->overdrive:push, as it's possible then for a player to push, then move, and then trigger cards to escape. However, 3 moves like that could fundamentally change the game. Or, alternatively, lol, sorry for the random thoughts, but maybe allow players to "bank" actions, or skip a turn for +1 action next turn, to save up for a 3-move bust-out-of-jail maneuver, while otherwise keeping turns to 2 actions.

[BrettsPeeler]

To be fair, though, one could delay sending one of their discs into the goal to prevent entrapment.

[Kuijpie]

3 moves could also prevent this, combined with a two actions->overdrive:push, as it's possible then for a player to push, then move, and then trigger cards to escape. However, 3 moves like that could fundamentally change the game. Or, alternatively, lol, sorry for the random thoughts, but maybe allow players to "bank" actions, or skip a turn for +1 action next turn, to save up for a 3-move bust-out-of-jail maneuver, while otherwise keeping turns to 2 actions.

I don't think 3 moves would be a good idea, it would break the game as your base turn becomes much stronger relative to your engine