How to avoid quitters and complainers?

[Alison MacPrickle]

Just had another game spoiled by a moaner who felt picked on by the robber. I already refuse to play with anyone who has less than 100% Karma, because I am fed up with people quitting just because they are losing. If I'm investing half an hour into a game of Catan, then so should the opposition. I choose who to rob based on who is my biggest threat, and / or who is most likely to have the resources I want. I keep coming up against pathetic moaning complainers. Is there any way of forming a group of like-minded players?!

[Shinobu-shi]

I haven't experienced a lot of quitting players but don't you get points either way if someone exits?

My thinking here is a little different. I want a way for people to vote to concede (as opposed to abandon where no one is the winner). When it's obvious someone is running away with the game and it's nigh impossible to catch up (even when everyone is ganging up on them), then the (losing) players can start a concede vote. If the others concede and there is only one player that didn't concede, then they can be declared the winner. So that this doesn't get too spammy, it could be limited to each player only being able to call for a concede vote once per game.

So there is still a winner and they're going to get their points but at least the losing players can move on to the next game. I know some players want to enjoy the high of obviously winning but I think you're only owed that time if you're friends. And even among friends, it makes sense to concede and declare the winner so you can get more games in by moving on. I mean this way, there's still a clear winner so there's no harm done.

(The only negative I can think of is this could make it easier for people to teamplay but I mean they are already team playing even without this.)

Personally, I wouldn't quit games unless I have an emergency but I also hate watching the salty losing players make troll decisions just because they're bitter and have given up. Sitting through that is agony. XD

[Panthergirl]

Just had another game spoiled by a moaner who felt picked on by the robber. I already refuse to play with anyone who has less than 100% Karma, because I am fed up with people quitting just because they are losing. If I'm investing half an hour into a game of Catan, then so should the opposition. I choose who to rob based on who is my biggest threat, and / or who is most likely to have the resources I want. I keep coming up against pathetic moaning complainers. Is there any way of forming a group of like-minded players?!

I stopped playing Catan because of this, but my partner still plays and it's a constant irritation (I know because of the stream of expletives coming from him regularly). The whining and crying in chat over the robber is downright hilarious, but also a way for people to use chat as a distraction and time-waster.

An option to mute the chat is high on my wishlist for BGA.

(sorry if this appears twice, forum posting has been very buggy lately)

[Alison MacPrickle]

I haven't experienced a lot of quitting players but don't you get points either way if someone exits?

My thinking here is a little different. I want a way for people to vote to concede (as opposed to abandon where no one is the winner). When it's obvious someone is running away with the game and it's nigh impossible to catch up (even when everyone is ganging up on them), then the (losing) players can start a concede vote. If the others concede and there is only one player that didn't concede, then they can be declared the winner. So that this doesn't get too spammy, it could be limited to each player only being able to call for a concede vote once per game.

So there is still a winner and they're going to get their points but at least the losing players can move on to the next game. I know some players want to enjoy the high of obviously winning but I think you're only owed that time if you're friends. And even among friends, it makes sense to concede and declare the winner so you can get more games in by moving on. I mean this way, there's still a clear winner so there's no harm done.

(The only negative I can think of is this could make it easier for people to teamplay but I mean they are already team playing even without this.)

Personally, I wouldn't quit games unless I have an emergency but I also hate watching the salty losing players make troll decisions just because they're bitter and have given up. Sitting through that is agony. XD

Thanks for this, interesting. Here's why I think that if you start a game, you should finish it:
You may think you are in a losing position, but given how erratic the dice are, all could chance. A good player will change tactics according to the dice rolls.
If we all were to quit every time we were losing, then no games would ever get finished.
You get very few points if it finishes part way through.
If you were winning, would you want the other players to quit on you?

[Alison MacPrickle]

Just had another game spoiled by a moaner who felt picked on by the robber. I already refuse to play with anyone who has less than 100% Karma, because I am fed up with people quitting just because they are losing. If I'm investing half an hour into a game of Catan, then so should the opposition. I choose who to rob based on who is my biggest threat, and / or who is most likely to have the resources I want. I keep coming up against pathetic moaning complainers. Is there any way of forming a group of like-minded players?!

I stopped playing Catan because of this, but my partner still plays and it's a constant irritation (I know because of the stream of expletives coming from him regularly). The whining and crying in chat over the robber is downright hilarious, but also a way for people to use chat as a distraction and time-waster.

An option to mute the chat is high on my wishlist for BGA.

(sorry if this appears twice, forum posting has been very buggy lately)

Mute the chat is a great idea! Yes, there is a tactic where people complain about the robber so that the other players are less likely to hit them with it. Personally, I like to hit them even more, just for complaining!

[Cos-]

"Mute the chat is a great idea!"

Very very strongly disagree. Just saying that to make sure people here know that the above is not a universal opinion.

If mute chat were added as a feature it would need to include the option to have tables where the mute option is disabled, and there would have to be the ability to avoid any table where chat may be muted. I would absolutely refuse to play at any table where muting the chat is possible.

[Shinobu-shi]

I haven't experienced a lot of quitting players but don't you get points either way if someone exits?

My thinking here is a little different. I want a way for people to vote to concede (as opposed to abandon where no one is the winner). When it's obvious someone is running away with the game and it's nigh impossible to catch up (even when everyone is ganging up on them), then the (losing) players can start a concede vote. If the others concede and there is only one player that didn't concede, then they can be declared the winner. So that this doesn't get too spammy, it could be limited to each player only being able to call for a concede vote once per game.

So there is still a winner and they're going to get their points but at least the losing players can move on to the next game. I know some players want to enjoy the high of obviously winning but I think you're only owed that time if you're friends. And even among friends, it makes sense to concede and declare the winner so you can get more games in by moving on. I mean this way, there's still a clear winner so there's no harm done.

(The only negative I can think of is this could make it easier for people to teamplay but I mean they are already team playing even without this.)

Personally, I wouldn't quit games unless I have an emergency but I also hate watching the salty losing players make troll decisions just because they're bitter and have given up. Sitting through that is agony. XD

Thanks for this, interesting. Here's why I think that if you start a game, you should finish it:
You may think you are in a losing position, but given how erratic the dice are, all could chance. A good player will change tactics according to the dice rolls.
If we all were to quit every time we were losing, then no games would ever get finished.
You get very few points if it finishes part way through.
If you were winning, would you want the other players to quit on you?

Ahh, if the points are less, that's why I'd want the feature above. I wouldn't want people to quit if I were winning, thereby invalidating my points. But conceding is fair. I get my points and my win is acknowledged with not too much time lost. This is my perspective as someone who plays a lot of games. For example, I play Magic the Gathering and I'd rather a table concede if they're no longer having fun because it's clear they can't compete anymore.

I realize it's possible to change strategies and that's what I would normally do. But it's also possible to get stuck in a table where someone has 7 points and everyone else is stuck at 3 because the losing players are throwing a tantrum and just trolling. I'd rather concede if everyone else is playing poorly because they lost hope. Case in point, there was this one player that kept putting the robber on their own hex or my hex just because someone was already at 7. They were at 3 and I was at 5. We definitely could have gotten a shot if he targeted the player leading but he just kept trolling. I'd rather not sit through that but I did and my blood was boiling. XD

If I move on, I can play a better game with better players at least. That is to say, if you have a proper group of players, then there's no need to concede because everyone's going to actually try.

[Alison MacPrickle]

"Mute the chat is a great idea!"

Very very strongly disagree. Just saying that to make sure people here know that the above is not a universal opinion.

If mute chat were added as a feature it would need to include the option to have tables where the mute option is disabled, and there would have to be the ability to avoid any table where chat may be muted. I would absolutely refuse to play at any table where muting the chat is possible.

Interesting, why do you feel that way? What problems do you envisage?

[Alison MacPrickle]

I haven't experienced a lot of quitting players but don't you get points either way if someone exits?

My thinking here is a little different. I want a way for people to vote to concede (as opposed to abandon where no one is the winner). When it's obvious someone is running away with the game and it's nigh impossible to catch up (even when everyone is ganging up on them), then the (losing) players can start a concede vote. If the others concede and there is only one player that didn't concede, then they can be declared the winner. So that this doesn't get too spammy, it could be limited to each player only being able to call for a concede vote once per game.

So there is still a winner and they're going to get their points but at least the losing players can move on to the next game. I know some players want to enjoy the high of obviously winning but I think you're only owed that time if you're friends. And even among friends, it makes sense to concede and declare the winner so you can get more games in by moving on. I mean this way, there's still a clear winner so there's no harm done.

(The only negative I can think of is this could make it easier for people to teamplay but I mean they are already team playing even without this.)

Personally, I wouldn't quit games unless I have an emergency but I also hate watching the salty losing players make troll decisions just because they're bitter and have given up. Sitting through that is agony. XD

Thanks for this, interesting. Here's why I think that if you start a game, you should finish it:
You may think you are in a losing position, but given how erratic the dice are, all could chance. A good player will change tactics according to the dice rolls.
If we all were to quit every time we were losing, then no games would ever get finished.
You get very few points if it finishes part way through.
If you were winning, would you want the other players to quit on you?

Ahh, if the points are less, that's why I'd want the feature above. I wouldn't want people to quit if I were winning, thereby invalidating my points. But conceding is fair. I get my points and my win is acknowledged with not too much time lost. This is my perspective as someone who plays a lot of games. For example, I play Magic the Gathering and I'd rather a table concede if they're no longer having fun because it's clear they can't compete anymore.

I realize it's possible to change strategies and that's what I would normally do. But it's also possible to get stuck in a table where someone has 7 points and everyone else is stuck at 3 because the losing players are throwing a tantrum and just trolling. I'd rather concede if everyone else is playing poorly because they lost hope. Case in point, there was this one player that kept putting the robber on their own hex or my hex just because someone was already at 7. They were at 3 and I was at 5. We definitely could have gotten a shot if he targeted the player leading but he just kept trolling. I'd rather not sit through that but I did and my blood was boiling. XD

If I move on, I can play a better game with better players at least. That is to say, if you have a proper group of players, then there's no need to concede because everyone's going to actually try.

Yes, I do take your point. I haven't come across this type of play (throwing the game to get out quickly), I just seem to get the whingers! I wouldn't mind so much if conceding meant I got my points.

[Cos-]

Interesting, why do you feel that way? What problems do you envisage?

Chat is the only way to communicate with the people you're playing with for anything beyond just the moves the interface allows.

This is important in general for BGA, to do things like ask if other people want to keep playing after kicking someone out for time violation (most times, I've found people do want to complete the game, and we do, but if nobody says anything, usually everyone just quits), or to ask about game rules you don't understand when you see a move happen that is puzzling, and more.

In Catan, it's especially important for trades, since the trading interface is so bad. You can't say "I can't give you a brick for that, but would you take either a rock or a sheep for it?" without offering each counteroffer one at a time and waiting for everyone to respond. You can't say "sorry I don't have any wood" when someone offers a second trade asking for wood, you just have to wait for them to try a third time if they think maybe there's something you'll take for wood. etc.

And, because I can't stand playing games where someone turns trades off, I always open tables with a message to join this table only if you will keep trades turned on. A few times, someone has just forgotten that, and turned trade notifications off, but when I reminded them of it and asked them to turn trades back on, they said oops sorry and did so.

For other games I can think of a number of other situations too where chat has been necessary for the conduct of the game. And often at or near the end of a game, people will talk about the strategy or moves they could've made (less so in Catan where that's less of a thing).

I think it's an absolutely essential part of a BGA table, and it * that the feature us kind of unreliable. I want them to make it better, yes. But removing it or allowing it to be disabled would result in some unplayable or really frustrating tables and I have zero desire to ever be involved in a table where someone can turn the chat off (or make it so they don't see it at all).

*Moderator edit: please refrain from swearing on BGA, this is a family-friendly platform.