Moderator: Community Team
nvrijn wrote:The rejection of "surrender" appears to have happened in 2006!!
InnyaFacce wrote:dakky21 wrote:InnyaFacce wrote:what is the penalty for using this option ?
NO
you just lose the game. everything stays the same.
the problem is this was discussed a lot of times before and it was always a no go...
There has to be a penalty of some type
Otherwise it is a bad idea
I can see it being used as a CHEAT if implemented
demonfork wrote:If there was a provision that would involve a certain threshold of ratios between army counts, then maybe the surrender button could be implemented with little risk of abuse.
Meaning, one couldn't surrender until their opponent had a 4 to 1 army ratio to their own army count. Or whatever ratio is deemed appropriate.
So if player A has 32 armies and player B has 8 armies then the system would allow player B to surrender.
concrete wrote:If the majority of the members want one, then we can vote on what kind exactly we need.
concrete wrote:yes...............24
no................ 4
Stephan Wayne wrote:Every day is Fool's Day on CC.
owenshooter wrote:concrete wrote:If the majority of the members want one, then we can vote on what kind exactly we need.
doesn't matter... the one time the site had it, it was abused to the nth degree... every owner has stated there will not be a surrender button... this is not going to change... pick better settings... in before the MERGE, with the rest of the "whiner/surrender button" threads... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir
JamesKer1 wrote:concrete wrote:yes...............24
no................ 4
"Conditionally" does not mean "yes", it means conditionally. There is a HUGE difference between the two, and that difference is actually why this hasn't been implemented.
These results are biased and therefore skewed. Just so you know.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users