[GP] Vote for a Draw in Team Game

[gulio]

If this is already sugested/on the to-do forgive me

One thing I dislike the most:

you are in a team game and your OPPONENTS team mate doesn't show... and is usually a "?" player.

I'm not playing for "points" so it really bothers me because you know, if your semi-competent, that 2v1 is an easy win.

Can there be an option that if all members of the game vote on "Draw" the game is drawn - no points are taken / awarded. - This can also be a good way for teams to practice.

Or another option would be if everyone votes for it - to substitute a new player for the dead beat, and the new player picks up where the deadbeat left off.

[lackattack]

Substitues aare a no-go for reasons I posted yesterday, but calling a draw could work. Everybody could have to click a "vote for draw" button and once all non-eliminated players vote, the game can be cancelled...

[Hoff]

I guess a vote for draw button would work, but i would neer vote for a draw if i had the advantage to win, im' sure alot of people would be like that too.

[gulio]

I guess a vote for draw button would work, but i would neer vote for a draw if i had the advantage to win, im' sure alot of people would be like that too.

Some people would play it out, however some like to play for the game, not for the win. I for one hate playing 2v1 games, except if you've eliminated the other player.

I"m playing a game right now (3v3) where team 2 has 2 deadbeats. How fun is that? They'll get eliminated and we'll win, weeee.... i feel sorry for the one guy left on their team.

[wicked]

I foresee a lot of disgruntled players and an increase in negative feedback with this option. I bet a lot of people would want the "easy" win and wouldn't want to stop the game. It's how a lot of people get their points, ya know. Wouldn't the changes in store for not allowing noobs to play team games cover this for the most part????

[shaddowfire]

I agree with wicked. Although I see another reason for having a draw button.

This other version of the draw button would only be available during everyone's 1st turn. Once the game enters the 2nd round the button is taken away. My reasoning behind this is because often when you are trying to quickly join a game with a partner, and you get in but your partner doesn't, you really don't want to play that game out. Everyone in the game would have to agree to end it. But unfortunately like wicked was saying this could end up with a lot of people recieving neg feedback, just because they wouldn't end the game. This might be deserved if they are took big an ass to end a game against an unorganized team.

[CreepyUncleAndy]

Substitues aare a no-go for reasons I posted yesterday, but calling a draw could work. Everybody could have to click a "vote for draw" button and once all non-eliminated players vote, the game can be cancelled...

Wow, this looks like a workable ammendment along the lines of what I suggested in post <a href="http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10310&highlight=draw">
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... light=draw
</a>



How about this suggestion?

Add a new button to every player's screen in each game:

The "DRAW" button is located somewhere on the page of each game. While your taking your turn (or waiting to take your turn), you can press this button, and it will disappear (to be replaced with a "withdraw DRAW?" button?).

Your vote will then be changed to "DRAW." -- Otherwise, your vote is set to "WIN" if alive or "LOOSE" if eliminated.

Once all active/surviving players have voted "DRAW," the game ends with nobody loosing (or gaining) points. (Should this point-loss-protection carry over to those already eliminated, whether they voted or not?)

[Molacole]

I foresee a lot of disgruntled players and an increase in negative feedback with this option. I bet a lot of people would want the "easy" win and wouldn't want to stop the game. It's how a lot of people get their points, ya know. Wouldn't the changes in store for not allowing noobs to play team games cover this for the most part????

I agree

[Lord_Belmont]

Would cause too many problems... I would say no to this just because... it's win or nothing.

[juventino]

I vote for a draw button in every game. I dont like having 10 games going on for 6 months. It is simple as that.

And why think about multis. It is not a surrender. It is a draw button. No points are given or taken.


Edit. ANd another reason. Have you played in a game going on for some time? The game log is really slow and is not fun to play that game one second. Sorry.

[tau]

Well... i guess i reached my limit... lol, can't handle anymore.
i'm fed up with those players who join team games and then just go on as deadbeats, or even worst, who play team games and attack their team mates !!!

I think that draw button is a good thing.
Although, I don't think that it should be on every type of game, but only on team games.

If you only play to get the points out of the game, i think you missed something from that game; the fun !
So, voting to end a team game can be very useful.

That's right that waiting forever in a solo game is not very fun, so i think you should have a surrender button... not a draw button.
But in a team game you should only have both, a draw and a surrender button.

So, the surrender button would not be a vote button but an instant button.

And on the other hand, the draw button should be a vote button, waiting for other players choice which must be on their next turn.
If they are deadbeats then the choice should be blank, i mean no weight in the vote, as if they were eliminated from the game.

[pel6412]

well i dont play for points so when i have a deadbeat partner i see it as a challenge to win the game anyway(even succeeded a couple of times), but if your concerned about your rank it's probably very frustrating, i like this idea, wining a game on a technicality is not fun.

[Kaze]

I have a suggestion to make everyone happy. Make it an option when you create the game to have the draw button or not. This way people know ahead of time whether or not people might vote for a draw or not if the game becomes inactive. If they don't want to play in that type of game, then they can play in another.

[sunshining]

I have a suggestion to make everyone happy. Make it an option when you create the game to have the draw button or not. This way people know ahead of time whether or not people might vote for a draw or not if the game becomes inactive. If they don't want to play in that type of game, then they can play in another.

i agree

[hotchocjunkie]

That's right that waiting forever in a solo game is not very fun, so i think you should have a surrender button... not a draw button.
But in a team game you should only have both, a draw and a surrender button.

So, the surrender button would not be a vote button but an instant button.

I think this would be more helpful than a draw button, for those that dont have the premium membership so cant be in more than 4 games at once, if all 4 games become inactive and you wanna move on to an active game currently you cant..

maybe to stop people using it excessively if you surrender you would lose double the points than you would usually?

[Forefall]

I liked the idea of a draw button, but for a different reason.

I'm in a 3 man stalemate; the game began 6 player. None of us want to move, and everyturn we're just building up again and again.

Truthfully, the game is basically a draw. It would be nice if we could all select the draw option, and if everyone agrees, we all get points based upon the players that were eliminated, but do not recieve a win.

[SirSebstar]

I thought of trouble with the draw button, but read again its only suggested for team games. not a 6 player stalemate situation..
in a team game i can see the sense though

[Anarchist]

I liked the idea of a draw button, but for a different reason.

I'm in a 3 man stalemate; the game began 6 player. None of us want to move, and everyturn we're just building up again and again.

Truthfully, the game is basically a draw. It would be nice if we could all select the draw option, and if everyone agrees, we all get points based upon the players that were eliminated, but do not recieve a win.

I agree, Im entering round 60 in a three way stalemate.
Anyone advances they get beaten back every time.

[BobHacket]

I was in a three man stalemate that went on forever...

The only way that it ended was when I sacraficed myself into someones country leaving myself weak...

In a draw game perhaps there would be no feedback, I mean no one wins, or maybe only neutral feedbacks are given? Just a thought.

I do fully support this simply for the fact that the new players to this site get to play 4 games, if one of those has deadbeaters or they run into a 3 man stalemate ext. that glogs up their ability to play games and more than likely cause them not to want to play here anymore.

[Anarchist]

You still deserve your positive feedback, just dont get as many points due to 3 way split and it hurts your precentage

[alster]

I guess a vote for draw button would work, but i would neer vote for a draw if i had the advantage to win, im' sure alot of people would be like that too.

I agree. If having the upper hand, I would not agree to a draw. Why? Well, because it all evens out in the end. You win some, you loose some.

Here, I would think that the most useful thing would be an abort button, through which people can give up their games. But that issue has been suggested so many times, and repeatedly been said to be a non-issue.

Except for true stalemates, a draw button serves little use I would say. But, games go into stalemates because people are not playing aggressively enough. Instead of a draw button, perhaps one could implement a function through which all games automatically ends after 10 rounds, and then all players still left in there would loose say 300 points each as a punishment for their non-aggressive game style.

[Genghis Khan CA]

Instead of a draw button, perhaps one could implement a function through which all games automatically ends after 10 rounds, and then all players still left in there would loose say 300 points each as a punishment for their non-aggressive game style.

10 rounds!

You must not play a lot of 6 player standard games - even in escalating the majority last more than 10 rounds with good players... that would not so much reward agressive play as poor play!

[Anarchist]

alster that sounds insane,

[BaldAdonis]

How about including the option in all games? I've played a couple speed games recently where something came up and another player had to leave. This completely changes the balance of the game, especially when the player announces they are leaving, so you can leave borders unfortified. I'd rather have a draw declared in these games, by unanimous vote.

The same thing can happen when speed games go on for too long, everyone has something else to do and would rather call the game off.

[rebelman]

How about including the option in all games? I've played a couple speed games recently where something came up and another player had to leave. This completely changes the balance of the game, especially when the player announces they are leaving, so you can leave borders unfortified. I'd rather have a draw declared in these games, by unanimous vote.

The same thing can happen when speed games go on for too long, everyone has something else to do and would rather call the game off.

agree big time althouh i do like the idea of being able to change a speed game to a normal game too if allare in agreement