Board Game Arena

I don't see how you can say a red thumb isn't a punishment. It is a paradigmatic example of punishment--it is designed to communicate the message "I will cause bad consequences for you because you did something displeasing to me." That's the very definition of punishment.

Red-thumbing is punishing. If you haven't thought so before, then (however innocently and well-meaningly) you've been mistaken. It's there for you to punish people. If you're not intending to punish, then please do not red-thumb.

There are no "bad consequences" from a single red thumb. There are bad consequences from a lot of red thumbs. If someone has a lot of red thumbs, I'm pretty sure, as I said, that the problem comes from him.
I understand your point of view, but I don't share it.

Coin-coin le Canapin wrote: I understand your point of view, but I don't share it.

Okay, but mine's the correct point of view Your argument that there are no consequences from a single red thumb fails for the same reason arguments against voting (because a single vote makes no difference) fail.

Speusippus wrote: In Chess and Go, (the board games I was born and raised on,) it is actually rude not to concede.

I wouldn't have say "rude", but I agree with that. With abstract games, when the victory is obvious, there is no need to finish the game, that's why I referred to my Reversi game. Although I think you won't concede a chess game one move away from defeat, usually you know you 're losing several moves before.
Let's have a game some day, you have very low odds earning a red thumb, and we may both enjoy the game.

Speusippus wrote:To be frank, your reason for red-thumbing doesn't make a bit of sense. A win is a win is a win. The score does not matter. If it matters to you, you're doing something other than playing the game in front of you--which is fine, but you cannot expect your opponent to be doing the same. They're there to play the game, not to do... whatever it is you're doing.

The fun in Seasons comes with the combos you make with cards. By conceding just before the last card I had to play before the game ended, he took me a part of it. He could have waited 30 seconds more for me to end the game.

I red-thumbed him because he obviously conceded for bad reasons (in my opinion, which sure may differ from his). I don't mean to punish him, I mean to remember that I don't want to play with him anymore, that's the reason why red thumbs have been designed originally.

I am a not a red thumb giver away, I think I gave at most 10 of them to others. I green thumb every player I have a first game with (several hundreds, i guess), unless their behaviour during the game does not suit me. Beating me is not a part of it, conceding a game isn't either, but conceding 1 move from the end is.

I currently have 16 red thumbs, I don't know what I did to earn them and I don't care as long as they don't forbid me to access a game.

I'd like to say a few words too, if I might. If the conceding player excused himself and politely said goodbye and left with explanation, I think nobody could object to his/her conceding. However, when a player quits before the last turn, I imagine a child that is so frustrated with losing that he/she angrily flips the board and stomp out of the room.

If there was any serious reason to finish the game, it should finish after an agreement of all players. Rage quitting is not polite at all and IMO it deserves red thumb.

pejsek wrote:I'd like to say a few words too, if I might. If the conceding player excused himself and politely said goodbye and left with explanation, I think nobody could object to his/her conceding. However, when a player quits before the last turn, I imagine a child that is so frustrated with losing that he/she angrily flips the board and stomp out of the room.

If there was any serious reason to finish the game, it should finish after an agreement of all players. Rage quitting is not polite at all and IMO it deserves red thumb.

I can get on board with this.

Speusippus wrote:Okay, but mine's the correct point of view

If you say so.

hemhel wrote:With abstract games, when the victory is obvious, there is no need to finish the game [...]
The fun in Seasons comes with the combos you make with cards. By conceding just before the last card I had to play before the game ended, he took me a part of it.

I don't play much abstract games, but I think I agree with your opinion.

pejsek wrote:I'd like to say a few words too, if I might. If the conceding player excused himself and politely said goodbye and left with explanation, I think nobody could object to his/her conceding. However, when a player quits before the last turn, I imagine a child that is so frustrated with losing that he/she angrily flips the board and stomp out of the room.

If there was any serious reason to finish the game, it should finish after an agreement of all players. Rage quitting is not polite at all and IMO it deserves red thumb.

And same here

Hi everyone,

If can add my thought, there it is :

- Firt of all, just remember that we are playing online games that are real game board. Most of players here (I hope so...) are (old) gamesboard player.
So , do you resign on real board game ? Most of th time, never...And i believe that players here wants the same when they play.

The conceding option was introduce only when you cannot finish the game: for example when you have to go for an emergency. (tht's my point of view)

Anyway, i would not put a red thumb to someone concededing, but i can understand why some people are frutrated and so...they give you a red one to eliminate it

Regards

julius_cesar wrote:Hi everyone,

If can add my thought, there it is :

- Firt of all, just remember that we are playing online games that are real game board. Most of players here (I hope so...) are (old) gamesboard player.
So , do you resign on real board game ? Most of th time, never...And i believe that players here wants the same when they play.
Regards

In multiple players game, I never concede (for real... and online...)
But in 2 players games, yes, I can concede, even for real. I do it often in chess, reversi, or others games, when I see that's not interesting to continue. So, I don"t agree with you. For real or online it's the same... just the number of players counts...

The conceding option was introduce only when you cannot finish the game: for example when you have to go for an emergency. (tht's my point of view)

Absolutely not. I was one of them who asked for it and it was very clear that is was for recognizing other player's victory, and spare time to play another... If you have an emergency, the cancelling of the game was (and still is) available.

Hmmm I would like to add my opinion here too .

I think all of the elements of "Why did I get a red thumb for conceding a victory ?" are now in this thread. So... basically everything I'm going to say has been said already. I'm just gathering things together.

First, we're, indeed, playing actual boardgames, even if it's online. With different boardgames comes different "cultures". In a go game, it's really common to conceed the victory as soon as both players realized it's a one-way game. Keep playing to reach a score of 50 against -60 is nonsense for this game. Though, it might be pedagogical (somehow) to at least play more moves to see how it would have turned out in some areas.
Let's take another example with an actual BGA game : Quoridor. I think everyone will agree when I say that often, around mid-game, you already know who'll win. Then where is the fun, or even the pedagogical part in spending the rest of the game to place walls and move a pawn, when you know you lost ?
Now, let's take... hmmm Troyes, or Seasons. Both the games are played in different parts. Both are games in which what you played in the very beginning will/can affect the very end of a game. And it take some time to set it up. Thus, you can never really say what'll happen until the very end of the game (like... the last 2 rounds for seasons for example). Then, conceding is rude, and also kind of useless, unless you're in a hurry.

I mean... can you really imagine playing a Monopoly game to the very end when you got nothing left but 1 000$ and your opponent owns 3/4 of the board, and your chances of winning a close to 0% but actually lose for good will take an other hour of playing ?

So... it's not only a matter of abstract game or not (I can't really see the logic in conceding the victory in Gomoku for example... can you ?). Or even multiplayer game or not. If I'm getting raped by Arcano Leeches, Frigrim, Fairies, Titus, Kairn, or whatsoever, and i can't even develop my game, I don't care if we're 2 or 4 around the board. If it becomes impossible to win, then I'll concede the victory.

Now there's an important point. What I said earlier is not even objective. Everyone might feel it in a different way.

Then (cause it's kind of the point of this thread) there's a simple solution not to get a red thumb for conceeding.
And it's called... COMMUNICATION ! Yeah I read that word on the internet once...

Since everyone is different and you can't get to know everyone... just ask.
"- Ok I lost, is it ok if I concede the victory ?"
It's as simple as that. Some people will agree and thanks you. Some won't... then do whatever you want but you know the consequences. Some won't answer...
Well, to me those one are not worth playing with but that's only my point of view =). Again, if you decide to concede to someon who didn't answer you, I think you can expect to ged a red thumb...

Like it was said before... conceding is often see as "leaving" for a lot of people. So it's normal if it feels like a rage quit if you just concede the victory without saying anything. Even though it's a regular way to win .

I hope this helped.