MP Quitters

[Mercutio]

I think it would help if there was some sort of rating system. While I enjoy playing, even getting my butt kicked, I don't enjoy wiping out someone. It would help to see some in house system ranking who might be a player you would have a good game with. Of course new players would be a wildcard, but at least it is a starting point.

[Treefrog]

I agree on the rating system as I am a newbie.

I keep getting messages from Slitherine that I am enrolled in a MP game; I didn't actually sign up. How does one un-enroll?

[taffjones]

Hi Mercutio and Treefrog

If you look in the Multiplayer forum

SlickandJake has set up a ELO ranking system. If you post the results of your games. He will update the rankings and you could then PM a player with a similar rating to you.

Treefrog - If you are issuing open challenges (No Password) then any player can accept the game/challenge.

[celebrindal]

After mid Feb I could be up for a game. Just in the process of moving and heavy work schedule. I also host a discord server and folks are welcome to use that as well.

[El_Condoro]

Perhaps something like when we hit 'Unsubscribe' on an email - a tick box answer as to 'Why did you end this game?'
- Real Life intervened - sorry.
- You are killing me and I want out.
- etc.
Of course, these options would be language specific so non-English speakers can read them.

I definitely agree that SC games would benefit from a better chat system.

[ThunderLizard11]

ORIGINAL: taffjones

Hi Mercutio and Treefrog

If you look in the Multiplayer forum

SlickandJake has set up a ELO ranking system. If you post the results of your games. He will update the rankings and you could then PM a player with a similar rating to you.

Treefrog - If you are issuing open challenges (No Password) then any player can accept the game/challenge.

This is a good idea but it would make sense to have this as a built in feature where every player got a ranking based on their win/loss record.

[Sugar]

1. While watching the latest opponent turn, a message can still be posted in game before resignation.
2. After an opposite resignation I usually watch the last turn looking for a message.
3. Not every match is meant as a partition in tourneys/rankings, but for trying or training.

[Christolos]

ORIGINAL: taffjones

Hi Mercutio and Treefrog

If you look in the Multiplayer forum

SlickandJake has set up a ELO ranking system. If you post the results of your games. He will update the rankings and you could then PM a player with a similar rating to you.

Treefrog - If you are issuing open challenges (No Password) then any player can accept the game/challenge.

I'm not so sure how accurate a rating would be just based solely on the number of games won and lost, if I understand the ELO ranking system correctly, since this would also depend on the relative skill/experience levels of the two players in each game.
For example, some players may appear to have a high win/loss ratio simply because they happened (by chance) to play mostly against less experienced players. The converse situation could also skew one's rating in the opposite direction. I'm not sure how this can be controlled for.

C

[taffjones]

Hi Christolos

Yes I know the ELO ranking will not be perfect, as you say the players skill v their opponents could well give a false ranking initially.

But if people play others of a similar ranking in time it will even out their ranking.

I also think it would help Hubert and Bill with the "Balance of the Game" debate.

I remember in WiE there were many people saying it favoured the Axis, but when someone started the ranking system it showed the Allies were winning more games.

Also the ELO rankings are not a competition or tournament.

[Helsingor]

To return the original subject of the thread, I like the idea of a "roll of honor"--in other words an informal list of those who stuck it out against an opponent even when the end was clear. I have a few shining examples in mind. Anyone care to start a new thread?

[Sugar]

I really don't get the purpose of a thread named like this, don't we all play for fun? What's the purpose of forcing players to continue if they lost their joy to play? As already mentioned, there are many possible reasons for quitting, even technical ones, and imho it should be satisfying enough to achieve a decisive victory.

[ThunderLizard11]

ORIGINAL: taffjones

Hi Christolos

Yes I know the ELO ranking will not be perfect, as you say the players skill v their opponents could well give a false ranking initially.

But if people play others of a similar ranking in time it will even out their ranking.

I also think it would help Hubert and Bill with the "Balance of the Game" debate.

I remember in WiE there were many people saying it favoured the Axis, but when someone started the ranking system it showed the Allies were winning more games.

Also the ELO rankings are not a competition or tournament.

Sounds like a good approach.

ORIGINAL: Sugar

I really don't get the purpose of a thread named like this, don't we all play for fun? What's the purpose of forcing players to continue if they lost their joy to play? As already mentioned, there are many possible reasons for quitting, even technical ones, and imho it should be satisfying enough to achieve a decisive victory.

The idea of the thread was to discuss ways to allow others to know if a player is a quitter. Nothing worse than investing hours in a game and the opponent just quits with no explanation.

[pjg100]

In my mind there's a difference between (i) quitting with no explanation, and (ii) informing your opponent that you think he has won and that you would like to concede. To me, the former is really irritating; the later is perfectly fine, and is what I recently did in a game in which I had concluded by mid-42 that there was no plausible way for me to eak out a win against an opponent who had played a better game than I. I also typically will suggest to an opponent that we call a game at the point where I conclude that there is no plausible way for my opponent to win, as I don't enjoy continuing to play on either side past the point where there is any doubt as to the outcome. Just my two cents.

[HamburgerMeat]

I agree with pjg100, and think that, unless the players agreed to play it out to the bitter end beforehand, it is fine that one sides wishes to concede and offers a surrender (with an explanation) to the other side. I wouldn't want to play against someone that doesn't want to play any more.

[ThunderLizard11]

ORIGINAL: pjg100

In my mind there's a difference between (i) quitting with no explanation, and (ii) informing your opponent that you think he has won and that you would like to concede. To me, the former is really irritating; the later is perfectly fine, and is what I recently did in a game in which I had concluded by mid-42 that there was no plausible way for me to eak out a win against an opponent who had played a better game than I. I also typically will suggest to an opponent that we call a game at the point where I conclude that there is no plausible way for my opponent to win, as I don't enjoy continuing to play on either side past the point where there is any doubt as to the outcome. Just my two cents.

Just had another quitter (Narvik) after 5 turns with no notice.

Devs - can you implement some tracking system please!!!

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Maybe we could make a Leper Colony of scumbags? Or a character rating? Last year (when I played), I had too many games going at once, was guilty of that. My A-game wasn't always there. But hey, communication is king.

But the point is, don't be a D'bag. Write a message whether you don't have time or clearly doing to lose the game. Nothing wrong with admitting defeat.

One exception, if you die, not required to communicate with standard tools,
-Elvis JJ Rambo

[nnason]

ORIGINAL: Sugar

I really don't get the purpose of a thread named like this, don't we all play for fun? What's the purpose of forcing players to continue if they lost their joy to play? As already mentioned, there are many possible reasons for quitting, even technical ones, and imho it should be satisfying enough to achieve a decisive victory.

Sugar is right!!

I have left many games in the middle or suggested my opponent do so when the future is bleak. I always communicate why as it might help my opponent in his/her future play.

All players as a courtesy should notify their opponent if they are quitting and why.

As an aside, if you can't play for a while it is always a courteous idea to let your opponent know why. Especially in these days when you could be sick. This keeps the frustration down thus making playing more fun. As an example, a gamer I was playing notified me of a temporary halt while playing Fafnir saying, "he needed all his powers of concentration for that game." We will resume playing once the new patch is posted.

[fluidwill]

Join a club such as (shameless plug) The Wargamers Club for Gentlemen - find us on Google or Facebook. We have a Strategic Command League and I've yet to have an opp quit on me (possibly because I'm generally losing )