Board Game Arena

Hi.
There are too many people who suggest to quit a game as soon as they understand they won't get many elo or even right after a small mistake which won't allow them to get all points. They raise their elo this way but the fact is that they can play bad but because of their elo you can't know it until you start to play with such players.

Is there a possibility to limit an amount of times when you can quit games without loosing elo?

I like to play till the end and enjoy playing and when I deny to quit the game the other player often does mistakes on purpose to finish the game faster.

Thanks in advance.

Hi,

Not sure what you are trying to say... Whenever someone quits intentionally a game, he or she will get ELO penalty in any case (as if he or she lost the game).
Now I understand you may be referring to Hanabi players who want to collectively abandon a game which doens't match their expectactions (for whatever reason).
Alas I'm afraid there's nothing else than red thumb them so you won't play with them in the future.

Cheers,
Y.

Yorgad wrote: ↑18 July 2021, 13:57 Hi,

Not sure what you are trying to say... Whenever someone quits intentionally a game, he or she will get ELO penalty in any case (as if he or she lost the game).
Now I understand you may be referring to Hanabi players who want to collectively abandon a game which doens't match their expectactions (for whatever reason).
Alas I'm afraid there's nothing else than red thumb them so you won't play with them in the future.

Cheers,
Y.

Yes, thanks, that is exactly what I meant. I play only Hanabi and I thought there's an opportunity to collectively abandon a game in any games. I set red thumb them, but it becomes very popular and it doesn't allow to enjoy games.

Abandon in cooperative games should yield -10 ELO.

But limiting the amount of games you can abandon is a nice other approach to still allow a few abandon but not let them massively do that (up to half of their games is quite common). Maybe allow 5-10% and if above that give -10.

The problem is mostly that people who abandon massively have little understanding for people who want to play games to the end, no matter how many cards lost. I get into a lot of fights over this because I say no to the proposal. Isn't it supposed to go like that? After all everyone agreed at gamestart to play till the end... My hope is that it will become less common to suggest abandon if it loses ELO.

Another suggestion would be to make it an option in game settings so that at least Abandonners and Non-Abandonners don't get mixed into one game. But I guess that might make it more difficult to even find a game sometimes... (but I'd be happy to wait a bit longer in order to find like-minded players).

Black-thumbing seems to be not enough - there are just too many of them. Also some of them might change their behaviour later. I don't like banning people forever because they're abandoning NOW.

Agreed! They also go on about it being their right to quit and being held against their will to play... even though they could quit rather than abandon and take that karma elo hit. I try alas in vain to get them to read the game text telling them it says victory, to read the rules to see only 3 bombs is a loss but no its 30 or nothing for them. No interest in the more challenging hand. I think in times gone by the opening page of a game used to say accepting was a commitment to see the game to the end. Not sure why this gentleman's code of ethics was dropped, not that words are a deterrent to a serial abandoner mind. If limiting the abandoned games is not possible, perhaps we could have a quit rate under the elo of a player at table in game lobby. Currently you have to go to a player profile and look at games of Hanabi started v finished and that's something you are only likely to do if you have a fall out, it's not quick to do it before accepting then at your table.

pinkyandthebrain wrote: ↑19 July 2021, 10:31 Agreed! They also go on about it being their right to quit and being held against their will to play... even though they could quit rather than abandon and take that karma elo hit. I try alas in vain to get them to read the game text telling them it says victory, to read the rules to see only 3 bombs is a loss but no its 30 or nothing for them. No interest in the more challenging hand. I think in times gone by the opening page of a game used to say accepting was a commitment to see the game to the end. Not sure why this gentleman's code of ethics was dropped, not that words are a deterrent to a serial abandoner mind. If limiting the abandoned games is not possible, perhaps we could have a quit rate under the elo of a player at table in game lobby. Currently you have to go to a player profile and look at games of Hanabi started v finished and that's something you are only likely to do if you have a fall out, it's not quick to do it before accepting then at your table.

They indeed have the right to quit, but not a right to abandon, 2 very different concepts. Abandoning is not a right, but a privilege, one that has to be earned. You've worded it well. (I never played Hanabi, so I don't know the gameplay)

Yes, many players start to fight if I refuse to abandone a game, they can be even rude. Or they use 3 bombs. I understand that sometimes it's really necessary to abandone a game because something might have happened, but when it happens every other game it's not fair. That's why I have raised the question that it should be limited during the day.

Exactly Yulia, it's like the fable of Peter and the Wolf. If they decry abandon everytime, when there is a genuine emergency we believe their urgency to leave is fake. When I have had to suddenly leave a game either emergency or someone in the real world needs me I usually don't have time to explain. I quit, take the karma hit and if I remember I apologise later.

I've given a thought to this myself now and then.
The context is, as you've already pointed out, cooperative games (Hanabi, Forbidden Island, Pandemic, etc.).

General thoughts:

I think not abandoning games may encourage players to give their best and to be more focused. Yet, sometimes something in real life comes up or something out of the ordinary has happened in the table and players may have a legit reason for abandoning.

If a player tries to coerce other players stating they would ruin the game if the other players don't agree to abandon, I don't see much alternative than a red thumb. Reporting this behavior would take too much trouble.

Some ideas as to how this issue could be approached:

Limiting the ammount of abandoned games per month (for example) with no penalty. You would also have to consider that the mix of players in a table. Some may have used up their no-penalty abandoned games while others have not.

Another option could be incremental penalty. The first x games a player abandons give no penalty, the next game -1 elo, the next game -2 elo... (could be 0, 0, -1, -2, -3, -6, -10, -15, -21, etc.). So different players at a table could be in different situations.

Yet another option could be at set-up time: no abandoning possible. You either finish the game whatever the outcome or you quit with a penalty, with players knowing what to expect beforehand. These tables could award an extra elo in case of victory to encourage playing in this fashion.

Clearly showing the abandoning rate of players could also be useful.

A couple of additional ideas:

Maybe players could be reminded (at the abandoning interface) that instead of abandoning a game for good, the game could be turned into a turn-based game. This would be for the scenario of something coming up in real life preventing a player from finishing the game. In turn based games it would not make sense such reminder and if players want to abandon because of other reasons (misbehavior, ...).

One way to "pay a fee" for abandoning games could be playing and finishing another game of the same difficulty level for 0 elo in case of victory, so the elo which might have been won is the fee to pay for the previous abandoned game. The second abandoned game could take finishing two games, the third and subsequent abandoned game could take 3 games. A game lost this way will also count, being the elo lost the fee. The fee can also be the paasing of time, so this method could just apply for abandoning games in the last 2 weeks, for example.