Know when you have lost, and then surrender.

When you have lost, you should know it.
When you know you have lost, you should surrender.
When your opponent tells you that they have won, you should listen.

It's not too difficult.


Thanks for reading.

Are you sure?

So if I ever play you, I should just tell you that I have won on turn 2 and voila, guaranteed victory!

Yes, because "listen" is a synonym for "accept without any critical thought".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olZLIC4T9uE

many of my defeats in the ladder (i have some auto defeats and stuff like that because i felt like it, but thats besides the point) are due to 2 early surrender, so i believe we shouldnt surrender just ebcause it might look like we are actually losing

stalling and not accepting surrenders are often useful for pissing off others. I noticed that sometimes if you do this, they eventually give up and you secure a vte or even a boot win.

You don't lose until you give up ...

Knowing that you've lost is a skill that comes with practice, so I'm not sure how useful a blanket statement about "you should know when you've lost" can be seen as universal.

The better at that particular skill you are, the less you will waste turns on pointless moves. On the other hand, the worse you are at that skill, the less you should trust your belief about whether you should surrender or not.

Since any game exists one time and not again, it's important to maximize your benefit from each game. Surrendering early because you think you lost guarantees that you lose. Sticking around until things get better or you can be sure about your lost position is therefore always the right course of action.

Intentionally dragging games out by waiting until just before the autoboot has nothing to do with continuing to play your turns, in case that is the actual thought behind this thread.

Knowing that you've lost is a skill that comes with practice

I agree, but as evidenced in the three comments above you, it is a piece of etiquette that is yet to be adopted, even by many of the top players. (Just to make it clear though, falcon isn't a top player. The nicest thing I would call him would be "mammal", but there is still the possibility that he is a highly-developed insect or reptile.)

The biggest issue here is that there is nothing you can say to people who have clearly lost. And I mean OBVIOUSLY lost. You try to explain to them with maths that they can no longer win. If they think they can still win at that point, it is an insult to my intelligence. But they still get offended, even though they are the ones at fault.

There is unfair advantage to be gained by dragging out games beyond their natural term, as noted by the knuckle-draggers above. Especially on the ladder. So you need to be careful with that.

@powderpuff - would you not mind if, in every single game you ever played, every opponent fought to elimination? You agree then, that there is a line to be drawn.

And don't give me that prescriptivist shit like "they can do it if they like, it's their right". You're also able to boot people 1 second after the timer hits zero, but it's considered bad etiquette because it makes the game suck and wastes everyone's time.

I'm approaching retirement (sorry qi) anyway, so I don't know why I even care. I'm just trying to make the game better for you, the humble and honest forum-reader. No no, there's no need to thank me.

In that case I generally agree with you, though I can understand how someone would find it rude to say "you should surrender because it's obvious you've lost."

I'm in a 2v2 tournament game right now where the one opponent got booted on distribution and the other elected to play it. Not a big deal, maybe they wanted to see if they could get a 1v1 and at least give it a try. Well then they lost one starting position and then their only bonus, and the game goes on. There's no reason for that, and in that case he should surrender.

I can't think of a good general rule that works in this case, because "you should know when you've lost" doesn't work very well for people who are bad at the game or bad at that particular skill. In the case of the person in my game, it's obvious to everyone. How to articulate that as a mode of play is difficult.

When some sad fuck wants to play a few rounds for sport when his teammate is booted, I don't mind indulging them out of pity. But yeah, when they have no bonus, it's labourious to have to track them down to the final territory. Then it's surrender time.

I don't believe it's a case of articulation. Needs to be a paradigm shift. I'm not even taking the general rabble into consideration, they will always boot at -1 seconds and put racial slurs and sexual references in game titles and so on. That's why I put this in the ladder forum - if you're a ladder player, you really have no excuse to do this kind of thing. And when you're called out on it, you shouldn't let it bruise your ego, you should take heed. Because you're the one who is fucking up by not surrendering in a timely fashion - whether through stupidity or malice.

Often it becomes malicious anyway, because people wield it like a weapon. They drag it out even longer when the feel they are justified in it. That's just trolling. gtfo my warlight. And I've done that before in the distant past. But ladder players = no excuse.

I intended to convey this in not-so-many words in the original post, but didn't I always know this thread was destined for quixotic and superfluous explication? Mostly I hoped someone else would come along and fight my corner for me.

Some inconsistent pronouns there. And labourious is british for laborious I guess.

Examples:

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=4207450
I should've surrendered a few days ago. I didn't because I was waiting on this:

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=4207452

and this:
http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=4111115

To be fair Frankdeslimste may have been waiting for me to do something stupid which wouldn't be out of character.

I want to look like a really cool guy so I am reluctant to surrender when I know that I can win a game then get a higher rating and then get a "highest ranking ever achieved = XXXX".

Another factor is "drunk nich reckons it's time to give up - he's an idiot so I'll just play the closest turn to what I think he was thinking then leave it for hungover nich."

I can probably give more embarrassing examples once I sober up.

There are times when you can't win not matter what you do. I have faced many opponents who want except they have lost when they indefinitely have. Sometimes people just have to surrender. And sadly they don't.

"The biggest issue here is that there is nothing you can say to people who have clearly lost. And I mean OBVIOUSLY lost. You try to explain to them with maths that they can no longer win. If they think they can still win at that point, it is an insult to my intelligence. But they still get offended, even though they are the ones at fault."

I've found this to be very common among members of {101st}. At least 3-4 times I have had to ask them via chat why they were still playing when my income was double theirs. One of those times the response was "The fat lady hasn't sung yet.", and then he continued to play for another five or so turns before finally surrendering.

Omniscient, you really enjoy long paragraphs dont you?

Easy solution to your problems, quit playing with noobs.

"Easy solution to your problems, quit playing with noobs."

Easy solution to YOUR problem:

Read before responding.

He's specifically referring to ladder games.

Guess what: You don't pick your opponents on the ladder.