So in one of my early matches I allied with a player and we stuck together all game. In the end, he was the superior player, so in order to avoid having the game drag on for a long time (he was only L1), I resigned. We were the only two players left, so I got second place, happily, and moved on.

Now I'm seeing a lot of games where hosts are asking for very few or no resignations. I don't think resignations are always a bad thing. In many video games (especially RTS games, like StarCraft), resigning when you know you're beaten, rather than dragging on the game is the honourable thing to do.

What should players do in this situation to avoid having their profiles mislead others about their play?

I totally agree with you. I had a lengthy discussion about this topic here in the forums and it looked like I was totally alone with my point of view. I have no idea why. I guess the only thing you can do to avoid this at the moment is just don't resign.

Resignation is almost never encouraged. Take a look at the last couple days of the first Video Exhibition match where Braxo was able to eliminate Roadk even though it looked like Braxo was at his end. You never know what can happen that can drastically change the entire face of the game. Turtling is a viable strategy in forcing players to adjust when you've been outnumbered or outmatched.

The only time resignation has been a factor for me is when I got into a game and 2-3 players auto resigned or automatically resigned at game start and it would have negatively effected the game balance. At that point, resignation makes sense if agreed upon by the others to just end the game and jump into another one that would be more balanced and fun.

My original post may not have been clear. I don't advocate resignation when you just feel like you're out. I've had games where I consolidate my forces, make a new ally and change the course of the game.

I mean when it's just you and one other player left. All others have been eliminated or have resigned (which is commonplace in casual games). If it's you, and one other player, and in 12, 15, or however many hours, they will collect enough Neptunium to win, and there's actually just nothing you can do about it.

Rather than having to wait for that game to end to start a new one (remember, L1 players can only have one game at a time), resigning as the silver medal winner (and I have L2, so I don't care if the game runs long) seems like the much nicer thing to do than to force an L1 player to wait all those hours before starting their next game.

I wouldn't be surprised if we're losing players because they're stuck waiting for a game to end like this and they lose interest in that time.

I just wish that my good deed didn't make my profile look like I rage quit.

Apologies if I'm being thick here, but can't we simply announce our good intentions in general chat before taking a bow?

toekneegee wrote:Apologies if I'm being thick here, but can't we simply announce our good intentions in general chat before taking a bow?

You can do that, but then your profile will show that you have resigned and right now, the majority of people see resignations as a purely bad thing.

That is a very interesting issue. I didn't think that would have that much of an effect on an L1 player but that makes sense. If I was L1, I'd resign early as well. But in reality, I'd just buy the game if I was really that excited about getting into another game that quick.

It's worth the purchase!

I've tried to convince a few players to buy it. I think I've succeeded with a few of them (and got another to try the beta Android version because he didn't want to buy it until the battery issues were resolved).

Realistically though, I'd expect a large portion of players will be L1, trying out the game before deciding to purchase. Their experience should be good enough to want to purchase the upgrade rather than holding them hostage until they purchase it.

Yeah, I also wanted some sort of honorable resignation, hence this earlier post: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=949

It never honestly occurred to me that L1 players may want to resign for expediency.

It still does frustrate me, though. There's nothing less satisfying than launching attack, only for your opponent to resign an hour later. I mean, I win, but there's no fun in it. There's no battle of wits, there's no struggle, there's no brilliant attacks and counterattacks. It just kills the fun, ya know?

I guess that makes me sound a bit like a maniac ("You have to savor the kill"), but that's not how I mean it.
The fun in the tactical aspect of this game is mostly in the wars. I rarely have more fun playing this game than when I'm trying to find a way to turn the tables in a losing battle. I don't think the game is that fun when I'm preparing for a war, and the fun of launching the attack is mostly from the anticipation of a war to come. I think anyone who resigns right off the bat is missing the point of playing, honestly. Try to win, but that's not why you play. You play to enjoy yourself.

Now, resigning to concede the game to your ally is another matter. Perhaps the devs should implement a "vote for game winner" function? In a very Diplomacy-esque manner?