Game abandoned

[pablocg]

This has happened a couple times already while playing turn-based Through the Ages.

One of the players is doing really bad so he just stops playing, blocking the game until someone decides to expel him.

But then, when he is expelled, the game is canceled, the others can't finish the game and you can't even give the afk player a thumbs down because "You did not play with this player recently, so you can't change his/her reputation".

Very frustrating...

Game should be allowed to go on without the expelled player and the players should be able to give feedback about the quitter.

[Jest Phulin]

I'm not sure about continuing the game with a zombie player (as computer moves, and even no moves affect other players in several games), but I do agree that thumbs should be able to be given to any player within 48 hours of the game being abandoned, not within 48 hours of their last move (or if the cut-off is that no thumbs are allowed on an abandoned game). This has happened to me several times on turn-based, 1 move / 2 days. I can't give them a thumb, because I haven't played with them. I haven't played with them, because they just didn't make a move.

[pablocg]

here is another even worse case:

http://en.boardgamearena.com/#!table?table=8997145

guy sees he cant win, so he stops playing

none of the players kicks him, since the game is near the end, and we hope he will come back...

a few days later the game is canceled and the only penalty the afk guy gets is the timeout, not even a leave, and we cant finish the game or give him a thumbs down

[Liallan]

There needs to be some kind of consistency with this.

If the game continues without the person and we actually finish it, then I can leave the red thumb. Unfortunately I've had to do that twice in a row, and wondering when it'll tell me I've left too many. (It's not my fault these people are leaving.) But when the player is expelled and the games does not continue, then I can't leave the red thumb.

I can kind of understand not leaving a red thumb if the theory is that they already have a "black mark" since they get an overtime and/or leave mark. If someone had too many game abandonments, I don't even really care about the red thumbs anymore. But this somehow needs to be consistent, regardless of how it's done.

I think people also need to be careful to expel someone rather than abandon the game. It may be if it's abandoned by everyone, then it's only going to show the person over time and not having left the game. If you expel the person first, it should show that they left. (I'm making a bit of an assumption there.)

And there needs to be some better logic about what games will continue after expelling someone and which won't, and whether ELO could still be applied. I suppose this could always be left up to a vote among the remaining players.

But there's a whole other thread on all this:
http://forum.boardgamearena.com/viewtop ... f=3&t=4586

[Liallan]

Speaking of consistency... when a player got expelled from Stone Age, the game went on, affected by losing a player, including one player who got start player two rounds in a row.

But I just expelled someone from a Yahtzee game and it automatically got cancelled? Yahtzee? Are you kidding me?

Stone Age - screwed up but let's keep playing.
Yahtzee - affected in no way whatsoever but got cancelled.

Makes zero sense.

[E_Slumb]

i will just redirect you guys to this post : http://forum.boardgamearena.com/viewtop ... f=3&t=4586

It's a problem that seeks solution, but not without some discussion 1st.. At least maybe the post will enlighten some of us on why it's the way it is