Login  |  Register

Author Topic: cancel instead of force resignation  (Read 326 times)

Offline mbsq

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
cancel instead of force resignation
« on: 20 August 2020, 06:43:14 PM »
I think if a player times out before either has made a move, the game should be canceled, rather than having it count against someone’s rating.

Offline josh bornstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
Re: cancel instead of force resignation
« Reply #1 on: 22 August 2020, 09:36:52 PM »
mb
Why do you feel this way?  Given the hyper-competitive nature of some players, what i am concerned about is:
1. Player X (overly competitive) matches with Player Y (a normal, decent chap)
2. Cards are assigned randomly by the game.
3. X does not like this set.  He refuses to take a turn, thereby (under your system) getting a "free" avoidance of cards that she does not like/is not skilled at playing.

I'll note that your proposal would give a HUGE advantage to the player who gets to go first.  He would have the power to end the game with no penalty, while player #2 would be forced to play with 'bad' cards.
I'll also note that this first player could also force this end-of-game if he did not like his opening hand.  Say, a 5 (or 2 draw) in a kingdom that had no 5-value cards.

Offline bajo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: cancel instead of force resignation
« Reply #2 on: 06 October 2020, 06:25:54 PM »
I totally support what Josh said, but I would also want to add this:
IMO the 4-minute time alottment for each move is massive. I know that accidents happen: you may have lost your internet connection, ran out of battery, got an important phone call, you even may have had to stop your kid from hurting itself -- sure. In many instances, you have the time to forewarn the opponent  of your impending idleness before it happens. Sometimes you don't. Tough luck... but that's an infinitesimal number of cases, I believe. What you will normally come up against is a ruffian who, seeing they are bound to lose, will just leave the game rather than resign honourably. If anything, I'd be more happy to see the rating punishment for forfeiting on time be very tangibly higher than a normal ratings' loss resulting from a loss.

Offline Megas_Droungarios

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: cancel instead of force resignation
« Reply #3 on: 11 October 2020, 04:50:39 AM »
The problem with bajo's suggestion is that forfeiting on time usually happens not because a player left in a huff, but because of a bad connection or, what I like to call "real life getting in the way of playing games," an urgent phone call, the baby needing attention, the huge delivery from Whole Foods or Waitrose (depending on which side of the Pond you're on) arriving an hour early and needing to be put away before the frozen food melts,...

Offline mrfiat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: cancel instead of force resignation
« Reply #4 on: 23 October 2020, 05:09:35 PM »
The system should be changed to the way Isotropic did it.  Show the cards and the player that you are matched with before the game starts.  You hit ok or cancel.  Yes, that allows people to cherry pick sets they like, but so what?  You already can blacklist cards anyway.  Sometimes it takes a while to match me up with someone and I'm in another tab so I end up with a loss which is lame.