Board Game Arena

I am working to roll out a new game concession mechanism over the next month or so. Because it involves database changes and changes to options, I am doing this carefully so as not to upset long-running games.

There will be a new option called "Conceding the game", which will have the following choices:
* Concede by unanimous agreement of non-leading players (default, recommended)
* Concede by majority agreement of non-leading players
* Concede by unanimous agreement of second-place players
* Concede by majority agreement of second-place players
* Concede by unanimous agreement of last-place players
* Concede by majority agreement of last-place players
* Concession is not possible

I realize that these options are redundant with respect to 2- and 4-player games, but I have to write the rules to work for larger tables with more teams and more partners per team. (Think a ten-player table with two teams of 5, or a 12-player table with 3 teams of 4.)

This option will obsolete the current "Early end of game" option, which will only be retained in a deprecated manner because it is in use by long-running games. It will continue to work in already running games, but will become a noop in games with the new option.

Concession will be limited as follows:
* only available with at least 51% game progress (i.e. not before round 3 of a 4-round game)
* second place must be behind first place by at least the value of the bonuses of a complete contract+1 clean meld
* concession button is only available to a player when it is their turn, they are among the configured eligible voters,
and all the other limitations apply
* any individual player may only propose concession once per round
* asking for a concession vote means the initiating player is voting for concession, and is automatically counted as such
These rules are in place to limit abuse of the option.

Comments on the scheme are welcome.

Thank you for the update Raving Wanderer!!

I'm a little uncertain of why you have included:

* Concede by unanimous agreement of second-place players
* Concede by majority agreement of second-place players

and to some extent

* Concede by unanimous agreement of last-place players
* Concede by majority agreement of last-place players

Obviously in an ideal world players will set-up the game properly, however I can see that in non-standard (ie/ not 2 or 4 player) games, the above 4 options may be subject to "abuse".

And I'm not quite seeing them as necessary.....

Happy to discuss further

Thanks again for the update and for continuing to work on the game!!!

Just had a quick question with the majority option at what % is it a majority?

ie in a 2v2 would both members be a majority, or could one force the concession?

Thanks

A majority would be at least 51% of the eligible voters. If two players are eligible to vote, both would have to vote yes. If four players are eligible, three would have to vote yes.

RavingWanderer wrote: ↑13 March 2026, 19:36 I am working to roll out a new game concession mechanism over the next month or so. Because it involves database changes and changes to options, I am doing this carefully so as not to upset long-running games.

There will be a new option called "Conceding the game", which will have the following choices:
* Concede by unanimous agreement of non-leading players (default, recommended)
* Concede by majority agreement of non-leading players
* Concede by unanimous agreement of second-place players
* Concede by unanimous agreement of last-place players
* Concession is not possible

I realize that these options are redundant with respect to 2- and 4-player games, but I have to write the rules to work for larger tables with more teams and more partners per team. (Think a ten-player table with two teams of 5, or a 12-player table with 3 teams of 4.)

This option will obsolete the current "Early end of game" option, which will only be retained in a deprecated manner because it is in use by long-running games. It will continue to work in already running games, but will become a noop in games with the new option.

Concession will be limited as follows:
* only available with at least 51% game progress (i.e. not before round 3 of a 4-round game)
* second place must be behind first place by at least the value of the bonuses of a complete contract+1 clean meld
* concession button is only available to a player when it is their turn, they are among the configured eligible voters,
and all the other limitations apply
* any individual player may only propose concession once per round
* asking for a concession vote means the initiating player is voting for concession, and is automatically counted as such
These rules are in place to limit abuse of the option.

Comments on the scheme are welcome.

I've modified this proposal a bit. I've removed the following options:
* Concede by majority agreement of second-place players
* Concede by majority agreement of last-place players
Also: if players are playing individually (rather than in teams), then it will be forced to the default option (unanimous vote of non-leaders).
These changes should further limit abuse potential.

Thanks for the update!

Why can’t we concede a game

Maxxthecat wrote: ↑16 April 2026, 03:26 Why can’t we concede a game

Probably because one of the conditions described above isn't met, or the game you are playing has the option disabled.

For a typical 4-round game with a 2/2/1 contract and traditional 500/300/1500 meld bonuses, the conditions translate to:
a) the game must be in the third round or later
b) the score differential between first and second place must be at least 3600 points (1 wild @ 1500, 3 clean @ 500, 2 dirty @ 300)
Analysis of games a friend of mine did show that most teams do not overcome a 4000-point deficit in one round.

For 3-round arena games with 2/2/wild as clean, the differential floor is 3100 (1 wild @ 1500, 2 clean @ 500, 2 dirty @300), and the
option will not become available until roughly midway through the deck in the second round.

If you are in a game with only 2 players why can’t you concede if you are the loosing player. Did you consider games with only 2 players? seems like you looked at game with more than 4 players.

Why did you change the rules on conceding a game? I think most players will either quit or concede a game when they are behind with no win in sight I
Think some players are unaware of the concede after half the game is played, they quit instead Did you ask the players their opinion or was it a few who didn’t like it when people quit. People quit/concede for many reasons. Some quit/concede when they have to do something and have run out of time. Who cares why they quit. I play only game with one other person. Why don’t care what happens in our game