Please Let Me Concede

[Archisian]

Some games you can easily see your opponent has a winning hand from the very get go and no matter how you try to catch up, like 'fetch', it's just not going to happen. For a game like Terraforming Mars, where it can take over an hour to get to 50% in a 2 player game, please just let me concede early. Right now the options are: hang in there but suffer for an hour when you know it's pointless or quit the game and get a massive karma penalty. If you let me concede, I'd do it and take the elo hit; the karma one seems unfair when there isn't another option and it impacts joining other games.

Just let the player enjoy the game and victory. I would not quit a game in real life and I would not do it here

All the while you are bored and unhappy going through the motions, rather than trying another game again that might be more enjoyable?

It isn't the losing player's job to give the winner the win they feel they deserve. If a winner player feels they are owed that, that says that their ego matters more to them than the actual outcome of the game. Enjoyment is self-derived. Expecting another person to entertain you until you are satisfied like they are a miserable dancing monkey is peak selfishness.

[FSKFSK]

The reason they make you wait until 50% to concede is because otherwise, some people would multi-account and milk it for easy elo.

In some games, 50% is calculated wrong. For example, in Splendor, the "% complete" is "current leader score divided by 15", which is misleading because points per turn are scored faster at the end of the game. If Terraforming Mars uses "percent max terraformed" as the completion percentage, then it's actually more than 50% of the game, because more terraforming happens per turn at the end of the game.

[FrankJones]

There are games where you know there is absolutely no way you can make a comeback. If someone wants to bow out of that, then I think they should have the right to do so. I don't see how the losing play continuing to stay in the game past the final turn benefits them in any way.

But the issue here is someone suggesting that a losing player should be allowed to concede at less than 50% and stick the winner with a small percentage of the deserved Elo.

[FrankJones]

The game was just past the 50% mark. I told them they could concede and move on, but they told me they wouldn't, because "It would diminish my win and it's not what they do." It was one of the strangest things I think anyone ever told me on this site. They would be staying in this game... to boost my win? They were doing it FOR ME? It seemed kind of arrogant, like I just didn't understand the personal sacrifice they were doing by continuing to stay in a game they had no chance to win. Like... okay. You do you. But I'm not going to see this as this grand, chivalrous gesture that will touch my life forever. Why people care about what random people on the internet think of them never ceases to amaze.

What !?

The player was losing, and decided to continue the gam to the end out of consideration of consideration for the possibility that maybe you might have some reason to want the game completed... and instead of being appreciative on some level, you complain and label the person arrogant?

Wow, sometimes there's just no pleasing people.

[Archisian]

The game was just past the 50% mark. I told them they could concede and move on, but they told me they wouldn't, because "It would diminish my win and it's not what they do." It was one of the strangest things I think anyone ever told me on this site. They would be staying in this game... to boost my win? They were doing it FOR ME? It seemed kind of arrogant, like I just didn't understand the personal sacrifice they were doing by continuing to stay in a game they had no chance to win. Like... okay. You do you. But I'm not going to see this as this grand, chivalrous gesture that will touch my life forever. Why people care about what random people on the internet think of them never ceases to amaze.

What !?

The player was losing, and decided to continue the gam to the end out of consideration of consideration for the possibility that maybe you might have some reason to want the game completed... and instead of being appreciative on some level, you complain and label the person arrogant?

Wow, sometimes there's just no pleasing people.

I told the player that I didn't care if they conceded or not. What matters at the end is the W for me. I don't care how I get there. But this other player decided to impose something on me that I didn't ask for. They said they were staying in the game for me. Like, whether I wanted it or not, they were going to do this self-sacrifice for some reason that I don't get because I wasn't asking or demanding them to stay in the game.

Think of it like this. I'm an atheist. So when I hear Christians tell me that I should accept Jesus Christ because he died for my sins, well, I didn't ask for it. Why do I then owe eternal fealty?

That is an extreme example of the same thing going on here. I didn't ask for the player to stay. If they wanted to stay, I didn't mind. But it was their response that they were "doing it for me" that rubbed me the wrong way.

[FrankJones]

"Decided to impose"?

The player decided to continue playing. Nothing was imposed upon you. This is absurd.

[FrankJones]

Think of it like this. I'm an atheist. So when I hear Christians tell me that I should accept Jesus Christ because he died for my sins, well, I didn't ask for it. Why do I then owe eternal fealty?

Well, to use a perhaps ironic metaphor... you're preaching to the choir on this.

[tbhp]

I told them they could concede and move on, but they told me they wouldn't, because "It would diminish my win and it's not what they do." It was one of the strangest things I think anyone ever told me on this site. They would be staying in this game... to boost my win? They were doing it FOR ME? It seemed kind of arrogant, like I just didn't understand the personal sacrifice they were doing by continuing to stay in a game they had no chance to win. Like... okay. You do you. But I'm not going to see this as this grand, chivalrous gesture that will touch my life forever. Why people care about what random people on the internet think of them never ceases to amaze.

I would think your reaction to what they said would appear even stranger, even for people who don't agree on the whole conceding or not conceding thing. I mean, the way you write it, it's like you can't possibly conceive that people may have other people's interests in mind when they do something.

When you see a sand castle on the beach, do you trample it for the fun of it? Or do you refrain yourself because you know someone built it and would be saddened to see it destroyed? Not a crazy idea, I think. The idea that it's weird for someone to care about a stranger's well being is what is weird.

Some people don't care if they win or lose.

None of what they said or did suggests that they don't care about winning or losing. Probably most people hate losing here. This doesn't mean that any basic decency they have for their opponent suddenly goes out of the window when they lose. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

[Archisian]

"Decided to impose"?

The player decided to continue playing. Nothing was imposed upon you. This is absurd.

So you think the whole "I'm doing this for you", even though I didn't want nor desire something like that from, is unproblematic?

[FrankJones]

"Decided to impose"?

The player decided to continue playing. Nothing was imposed upon you. This is absurd.

So you think the whole "I'm doing this for you", even though I didn't want nor desire something like that from, is unproblematic?

Yes, that's exactly how I view it.