[GO] Unrated, Unranked, or No Points Games

[Metsfanmax]

Concise description:

• Allow active players in a game the ability to request a draw, with no points being awarded to any player if the draw is accepted

Specifics/Details:

• Each player would have a checkbox on their game page that allows them to request a draw. If, at any time, all active players have checked this box, the game is immediately declared a draw and ended. No points are awarded to any player.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Myself and many others in this forum have noted that this removes the abuse issue of other draw suggestions. However, there hasn't actually been a separate thread for this yet.

[40kguy]

I like the idea just a few suggestions

offten times when i feel like ending the game or making it a draw, It is a statement with some people eliminated. How about we spread those points out to the people who can still win. For example me tdans and jsnyder are in the game, but ljex blitz and lindax are eliminated, we split up those points.

[TheForgivenOne]

I like the idea just a few suggestions

offten times when i feel like ending the game or making it a draw, It is a statement with some people eliminated. How about we spread those points out to the people who can still win. For example me tdans and jsnyder are in the game, but ljex blitz and lindax are eliminated, we split up those points.

Again, this won't be happening. I've had to repeat this over and over and over again over the last few days. This is too easily open up for abuse.

[40kguy]

I like the idea just a few suggestions

offten times when i feel like ending the game or making it a draw, It is a statement with some people eliminated. How about we spread those points out to the people who can still win. For example me tdans and jsnyder are in the game, but ljex blitz and lindax are eliminated, we split up those points.

Again, this won't be happening. I've had to repeat this over and over and over again over the last few days. This is too easily open up for abuse.

OK then go back to his way.

[stahrgazer]

Concise description:

• Allow active players in a game the ability to request a draw, with no points being awarded to any player if the draw is accepted

Specifics/Details:

• Each player would have a checkbox on their game page that allows them to request a draw. If, at any time, all active players have checked this box, the game is immediately declared a draw and ended. No points are awarded to any player.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Myself and many others in this forum have noted that this removes the abuse issue of other draw suggestions. However, there hasn't actually been a separate thread for this yet.

The only potential concern I can see for this "no points awarded" variation is that freemium 4-game limit. This suggestion enables them to get out of a stalled game faster.

Personally, I think that's to CC's credit. I don't think it would cause a freemium member to choose "not to" purchase premium; and it might give a player extra incentive to support the site.

An added benefit to the suggestion is, it enables high-build games to end without anyone violating the rules about losing intentionally (i.e, reduces temptation/risk of player suicide or deadbeat.)

[Metsfanmax]

The only potential concern I can see for this "no points awarded" variation is that freemium 4-game limit. This suggestion enables them to get out of a stalled game faster.

This is true, but the number of times this will happen to the average player is rather small, since most of the time at least one person will be playing for a win and not a draw.

[patrickaa317]

How about any player that accepts a tie loses 5 points? Those who were already eliminated lose 0. It'd be enough to discourage a lot of ties. I'd do that on a regular basis just to make it so I don't have to take my turns and it sure beats deadbeating or just suiciding.

And I think it would have to be an option only once a game hits 100 rounds.

[KingBohica]

I don't know if this has been suggested, so if it has forgive me. But, instead of a "tie or no-tie" game option as previously mentioned, why not have a "round limit" option. It would be mandatory to pick one, but you could pick between say 50 rounds, 100 rounds, and 200 rounds or something like that. If the game exceeds the predetermined number of rounds, it is automatically a tie.

Or better yet, instead of a tie, whoever is the biggest (either most armies or territories) when the turn limit is reached is the winner. Would encourage people to do something rather that just squat.

[TheForgivenOne]

I don't know if this has been suggested, so if it has forgive me. But, instead of a "tie or no-tie" game option as previously mentioned, why not have a "round limit" option. It would be mandatory to pick one, but you could pick between say 50 rounds, 100 rounds, and 200 rounds or something like that. If the game exceeds the predetermined number of rounds, it is automatically a tie.

Or better yet, instead of a tie, whoever is the biggest (either most armies or territories) when the turn limit is reached is the winner. Would encourage people to do something rather that just squat.

Sometimes the biggest army isn't the best thing. Owning more territories/ bigger bonus may be the better thing in the long run.

[The Cheat]

This is a terrible idea ... if you don't like the standoffs, play escalating; if you don't like escalating, don't be the first to crack and attack in a Mexican standoff ...

[Army of GOD]

I like the idea just a few suggestions

offten times when i feel like ending the game or making it a draw, It is a statement with some people eliminated. How about we spread those points out to the people who can still win. For example me tdans and jsnyder are in the game, but ljex blitz and lindax are eliminated, we split up those points.

Again, this won't be happening. I've had to repeat this over and over and over again over the last few days. This is too easily open up for abuse.

wut



I remember this has been suggested before and the only way I was going to be for it was if it was a unanimous vote and no points were awarded, which Mets picked up. There is absolutely no way this could be abused (well, ok, maybe there is, like if two people who account sit for each other are in a 1v1 and one guy, who's losing, decides to log in to the other one and cancel the game, but that's pretty unlikely).

I fully support this suggestion.

[Victor Sullivan]

There's also terminator games. Points would have already been awarded in those games by the time the draw occurs.

-Sully

[Army of GOD]

There's also terminator games. Points would have already been awarded in those games by the time the draw occurs.

-Sully

I think a draw should give the points back.

[TheForgivenOne]

I like the idea just a few suggestions

offten times when i feel like ending the game or making it a draw, It is a statement with some people eliminated. How about we spread those points out to the people who can still win. For example me tdans and jsnyder are in the game, but ljex blitz and lindax are eliminated, we split up those points.

Again, this won't be happening. I've had to repeat this over and over and over again over the last few days. This is too easily open up for abuse.

wut



I remember this has been suggested before and the only way I was going to be for it was if it was a unanimous vote and no points were awarded, which Mets picked up. There is absolutely no way this could be abused (well, ok, maybe there is, like if two people who account sit for each other are in a 1v1 and one guy, who's losing, decides to log in to the other one and cancel the game, but that's pretty unlikely).

I fully support this suggestion.

I was referring to what 40kguy wrote, that in the result of a tie, the points from the eliminated players would be distributed to the remaining players.

[Army of GOD]

Oh, my beezy

[Metsfanmax]

There's also terminator games. Points would have already been awarded in those games by the time the draw occurs.

-Sully

I think a draw should give the points back.

Perhaps. In that game type there's no efficient way to collude, because only one of the conspirators can get points -- no sharing of the kill points are allowed, obviously. Another way would be to just change the terminator game type so that points are only awarded at the end of the game.

[vonraider]

I like the idea, I have to admit to cracking and mindlessly attacking out of sheer boredom, but I think this option would be abused OFTEN!

[patrickaa317]

I like the idea, I have to admit to cracking and mindlessly attacking out of sheer boredom, but I think this option would be abused OFTEN!

That's why my idea of -5 points is the best option out there. It'll avoid abuse and the only people who'd agree to are those truly in a deadlock. And it's better than just deadbeating out of it to get it over.

[Boler]

I like the idea, I have to admit to cracking and mindlessly attacking out of sheer boredom, but I think this option would be abused OFTEN!

That's why my idea of -5 points is the best option out there. It'll avoid abuse and the only people who'd agree to are those truly in a deadlock. And it's better than just deadbeating out of it to get it over.

Why would people need to lose points? Everyone would be happier AND it still could not be abused if everyone got 0. Or people got points, but only if the game has been going on for 100+ turns in Casual, or 300+ in speed.

Can someone put up a Poll? A group vote is the best solution to everything.

[patrickaa317]

I like the idea, I have to admit to cracking and mindlessly attacking out of sheer boredom, but I think this option would be abused OFTEN!

That's why my idea of -5 points is the best option out there. It'll avoid abuse and the only people who'd agree to are those truly in a deadlock. And it's better than just deadbeating out of it to get it over.

Why would people need to lose points? Everyone would be happier AND it still could not be abused if everyone got 0. Or people got points, but only if the game has been going on for 100+ turns in Casual, or 300+ in speed.

Can someone put up a Poll? A group vote is the best solution to everything.

0 points would be an easy way out for all parties. If all parties lost minimal points, it would discourage the amount of ties that would be selected but for those honest to god stalemates, it would be an option out.

[Boler]

You're worried that there would be too many ties? Remember, everyone has to agree if a stalemate should be called, and I think that as long as one player thinks s/he has any chance of winning s/he will not agree to the stalemate.

So as long as it is not a true stalemate the game won't be stopped.

[patrickaa317]

You're worried that there would be too many ties? Remember, everyone has to agree if a stalemate should be called, and I think that as long as one player thinks s/he has any chance of winning s/he will not agree to the stalemate.

So as long as it is not a true stalemate the game won't be stopped.

I think the tie option would be abused if there wasn't a small penalty behind it. I want ties to only happen in true to god stalemates. Not because players set up games to learn maps with friends, then after a few rounds, utilize the tie feature just to nullify the game so that noone loses points.

[Metsfanmax]

So where are we on this? Is there anyone out there that is actually opposed to having this option? I'd like to hear your thoughts if so.

[Boler]

No points, no problem.

It will work, and it will bring relief to people in stalemate games, especially for Freemiums.

My vote is Yes.

[greenoaks]

So where are we on this? Is there anyone out there that is actually opposed to having this option? I'd like to hear your thoughts if so.

i am opposed to it.

this would allow people to play and learn a map without losing/risking points, making the current scoring system pointless as it ceases to be a reflection of their skill/luck on ALL of the maps they have played and ALL of the games they have played.