@ raapers2 & sqrg.
My point is that such a 'surrender' button would be extremely useless, and even dangerous in some cases.
In over 200 games I played online, I've never felt the need of it.
Only one time it happened that a player was forced to put all hold last year because the game was basically over. In this
gameID=3810. Even then, I didn't feel the need of it: I just wrote something on the Forum about the Victory Condition of Duo. Actually, since in Duo there are 28 SCs and the half is 14, put the VC at 19 instead of 15 or 16 looks rather pointless. Duo (look at
threadID=23975) is the Variant with the harshest VC (68% of SCs) while is one of the maps with a lower SC Density: you need time to reach SCs in that ocean of non-SCs.
On the Forum, they told me that there is no reason to change the VC of a variant only because some lazy player doesn't want to bother putting all hold a couple of times: it takes 2 seconds. Well, they were right. So:
- How many times will you need the concede button? 1 out of 200? No, raapers says "very often". Mmmm. Who knows. Anyway:
- How much time would you save? a couple of seconds?
- My advice: when you play Duo put VC=16. Now you can do it in gamecreation. More in general, do not create/join a game with an idiot VC.
In multi-players games you can't put in all hold, it'd screw the game advantaging someone rather than someone else.
But in multi-players games, 'concede' is even more useless, because there's always someone who's fighting against the bigger power and who would not vote for concede.
Or there should be. If you think you can't win anymore, you should:
- Commit trying to set up a 'resistance' against the bigger power in order to achieve a draw. Even a small 1-unit power could be necessary (if it's too late to do it, well, then it will probably take 2 or 4 turns for the game to end: not a big issue). Also:
- Screw the guy who screwd you (my favourite plan 'B')
- in PPSC, someone could find interesting to fight for some more SC (and he would not vote concede)
So I believe that even when such a possibility exists, the chances that everyone but the winner would vote for it are extremely low.
It could even be dangerous because:
- the 'talk' of the game (either between players or in Global) could be focused on the concede vote while it could (and should) still be focused on setting up a resistance looking for a draw. If you are forced to play it till the end you'd surely be more cooperative. If you got the concede option and if you're not going to win, you could spend your efforts only to convice the other to vote it!
And what if someone who wants to start a new game and he can't because of his low RR, makes some blackmail like: "vote it or I'll put all holds until the end".
- I think I've seen all kind of noobs and I would not be surprised to hear from one of them, asked on why he CDed, this reply: "But I conceded!" - LOL
But most of all, it would be useless. As raapers said: "They CD because they don't care about the game." Do you think that someone who doesn't care would put any effort in convince the other to vote? I think he would CD anyway.
PS. raapers, if you are all for harsher penalties, could you please read this
threadID=24979 and after that, if you like, post your thoughts?