First victory definition

[e1q3z9c7]

If someone overtime or quit, rest of players will be treat as winner after game. Which is not so bad, since they should get some elo for their precious time. But, the first victory worth more than elo, but 5 gift points plus, it should come after some real effort, not just for some emptily waiting time. So, please remove the first victory award from "absent victory", make the mechanism more equitable.

[N_Faker]

Too bad for those who put in some 'real effort' just to have their opponent quit or be kicked.

Why are you valuing the gift points so highly? The 'first win' gift points are effectively inconsequential incentives to pull players to the various games. This is a non-issue.

[e1q3z9c7]

Then why need a victory? 5 gp for every first game would be better? I don't think so, the satisfaction do matter.

[N_Faker]

So that it isn't effectively meaningless. If you only had to start the game there is no incentive to actually learn the rules or even play the game.

[Liallan]

This is something I've wanted to post about for quite some time, though it involves a lot more and I have not gotten around to it. I don't care specifically about the gift or prestige points either one. (OK, I like my gift points, but I'd rather truly earn them.) The part I care about is having a win on my record that I didn't get. I care about tying with people who are not at a similar level. Part of it is ethics - if I didn't win, I didn't win and shouldn't have that win. It's also annoying when your ELO is way higher and you have to share a tie.

But to put it in perspective, think about it from a turn-based point of view. In real-time, it's probably a LOT more likely that someone quits because they are losing and that you are nearing the end of the game, so people have put more time and effort into it. In turn-based, that is RARELY the case. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen that. People have quit Perudo once eliminated, but I think there may have been a bug in that process so I'm not really sure.

As usual, everything is applied to turn-based the same way it is to real-time, even when it's inappropriate. There's even a simple solution that would work well for turn-based, and would even work for real-time since it would be totally up to individual players: once someone quits or has their turn skipped, you have the option of quitting without penalty, so anyone who chooses that option simply doesn't share in the tied win. It even makes total sense - if you don't stay and finish the game with everyone, why should you share in the tie? But as it stands, you still do.

[N_Faker]

In most games, when a player leaves or a single turn is skipped, the balance will be completely off, which could unfairly benefit some players.

I would expect turn-based games to be conceded more frequently once the outcome is clear, considering how just going through the motions could take several days. It will depend on the game, I suppose, in many games it is nice to actually see the final tally and the origin of the points. While on others it is quite moot to continue.

[Liallan]

What you say makes a lot of sense, but I don't actually see the turn-based conceded a lot. That of course is just my experience, and sure it probably depends on the type of game it is. I think also people who are playing 50 turn-based games at once, and several of the same game, might not be paying as much attention.

[N_Faker]

On the point of first victories or even victories in general. Why not limit them to ELO ON games?
That would in addition eliminate the first victory win from using the hotseat function.