Surrender

Zephaniah · Post by **Zephaniah** » August 17th, 2005, 5:31 pm

Hello, could there be a proper method of resigning a multiplayer game? I mean instead of just quitting, you click Actions -> Surrender -> Are you sure? etc, and then the other guy gets notified and you can save a replay. Maybe for team games all team members would have to agree to it through some pop up box. Doesn't seem like there's an official way to end a game at the moment (other than saying so and bailing out). I think it would be nice anyway

darksteel · Post by **darksteel** » August 17th, 2005, 5:52 pm

I honestly don't think a surrender button would help the game.

I see what you mean it's better than bailing out, but it just dosen't seem realistic or needed in the game. (at least not now I suppose)

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » August 17th, 2005, 6:47 pm

I'd say this would be a nice feature if the opponent had the option of refusing your surrender. It would be a good way to formalize the negotiation.

Kafka · Post by **Kafka** » August 17th, 2005, 9:45 pm

Even if you didn't make a surrender button, whouldn't it be nice to give notice to all the players when you quit, instead of just the person running the game? It sounds like a good idea to me. Especially if you could save before getting kicked out of a game for the person running it leaving.

Zephaniah · Post by **Zephaniah** » August 18th, 2005, 2:22 am

Elvish Pillager wrote:I'd say this would be a nice feature if the opponent had the option of refusing your surrender. It would be a good way to formalize the negotiation.

If a surrender was refused, wouldn't the losing party just quit anyway though? I mean if someone wants to leave the game, they will. Would be nice if it could be formalised though.

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » August 18th, 2005, 10:48 am

In general, one player will say "Blaah, I'm losing, let's quit", but at least when I've seen, if the other player says "no, let's continue", then they do. If they really have to leave then they can say "I really have to leave" before surrendering, and at that point, declining the surrender is impolite.

Ardonik · Post by **Ardonik** » August 18th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote:I'd say this would be a nice feature if the opponent had the option of refusing your surrender. It would be a good way to formalize the negotiation.

If a surrender is accepted, the player's units should disappear and a dialog should say something like "Hot shame burns in your eyes as you lay down your arms and sign the instrument of surrender. The enemy grants your forces safe passage from the battlefield." After that, their status should change to that of a simple observer. Of course, if the last enemy ally offers surrender, the enemy is victorious.

If your surrender is rejected, a dialog should pop up saying "No quarter!" and you would have no further chances to surrender.

It's an uncomplicated change to the combat UI that would enhance the game's immersiveness. I like it.

Zephaniah · Post by **Zephaniah** » August 18th, 2005, 8:35 pm

Hmm, in my mind you can't really refuse a resignation... but I'm not too bothered. It would be nice to see it implemented in some form.

Titou · Post by **Titou** » October 19th, 2005, 5:54 pm

It may be cool to have a "surrender" feature like the one in Warcraft II.

Wesnoth 1.0 rocks, thank you all for this nice game

Post by **Dragonking** » October 19th, 2005, 9:14 pm

darksteel wrote:I honestly don't think a surrender button would help the game.

Actual server stats:
runing for 3 days 19 h
aborted: 2533
game over: 589

I can only guess how many of those "aborted" games were actually really aborted, and how much of them were just finished because of clear winner. I think that "surrender" option is really nice idea.

Elvish Pillager wrote:I'd say this would be a nice feature if the opponent had the option of refusing your surrender. It would be a good way to formalize the negotiation.

I agree tottaly

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » October 19th, 2005, 10:05 pm

Ooh, I have another idea: If a player on a team surrenders a game, then the control of his side passes to one of his allies.

dtw · Post by **dtw** » October 19th, 2005, 11:00 pm

I think surrendur would be nice if for nothing more than a formal admission of defeat

Post by **Dragonking** » October 19th, 2005, 11:23 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote:Ooh, I have another idea: If a player on a team surrenders a game, then the control of his side passes to one of his allies.

This is something like "breaking alliances idea" and I'm against that.

Loki · Post by **Loki** » October 20th, 2005, 5:25 am

Dragonking wrote:
Elvish Pillager wrote:Ooh, I have another idea: If a player on a team surrenders a game, then the control of his side passes to one of his allies.
This is something like "breaking alliances idea" and I'm against that.

Care to elaborate? I can't think of why passing it to your ally would be at all bad.

Also, people would probably hate it, but what about passing the player's units to an AI?

Post by **Dragonking** » October 20th, 2005, 9:25 am

Loki wrote:
Dragonking wrote: This is something like "breaking alliances idea" and I'm against that.
Care to elaborate? I can't think of why passing it to your ally would be at all bad.

Also, people would probably hate it, but what about passing the player's units to an AI?

Argh.. I missreaded. (dunno why thought that surrender side's control goes to opponent :-/ )

Actually EP's idea is good.

The Battle for Wesnoth Forums

Surrender

Surrender

Surrender tells who has won