A few suggestions

Hello there fellow D12 players, A few suggestions if I may : 1) A surrender button in 2 players game. In 2 players game, you often know if you're pwned after the first 3 or 4th round. A lot of time will be saved if we had a surrender button. 2) A default game in the "create game" page. The new interface is really pretty, but it's a bit annoying when we always create the same game. If all players could have their favorite game stored, so that they just have to hit the create button once on the page, it would be great. 3) Pre-set "Game chat" starters for specific games. It would be nice to have an introduction text in the game chat when playing special games. Namely : When playing capitals : This is a capitals game. If you lose your capital then you are dead and all your other territories and troops are then owned by the player who took your capital. Your capital is the territory with the white ring around it. For the love of Dominating12, keep your capital strong! When playing fog of war: This is a fog of war game. You can only see the territories adjacent to yours. Any talk about the position of other players in this window are not authorized. I know that admins rely on experienced players to warn noobies but let's not forget we're here to dominate. I hope this thread in the right part of the forum. Have a great day, Xixi2

I really like the idea of user-specific preset games on the create-game page. I'm used to clicking 10 buttons to start a game but 1-3 would be nicer.

Ok I don't know if this is where the idea of a "resign" button originated, but it is the first reference to anything like it I have found today. I think the resign button could be feasible as mentioned here, in 2 player games. However, I believe it is a [b]HORRIBLE[/b] idea in 3+ player games and that [b][size=16]use of the resign button should be disabled in [u]ALL[/u] fog games[/size][/b], [i][b]especially Capitals games[/b][/i]. I disagree with Xixi2 on the idea of giving information in fog games, as this can often be strategic, not only, as Xixi2 suggests, to "out" other players but also as part of a ruse to draw in an opponent or to cause them to attack another stronger opponent to weaken both, to your advantage. This is related to the issue of the "resign" button in fog games, specifically Capitals games. Feigning weakness leaves uncertainty, whereas a resign option lets all other players ([b]including those who would not have otherwise seen or known[/b]) that a player feels they are too weak to continue. An inevitable feeding-frenzy ensues, where anyone with even the most modest army nearby will attempt to take the player's capital before he/she goes neutral, which could deprive a player who may have devoted time and troops to get the weakened player to the current state, of the final reward for his/her efforts. Admittedly, I only learned of the implementation of the resign option yesterday (as someone mentioned it in the Live Game chat), but have already experienced a reduction in good fortune as a result of the use of the resign button. (SEE: [url=http://dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=263107]http://dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=263107[/url] ) I hope this is the proper thread for this subject, and also hope that either an "un-resign" option is also created (so that weakness can still be feigned for strategic gain) or that the resign option will be disabled in ALL FOG games. Also, note that the resign button's resultant [b][i][size=14]knowing[/size][/i] they [u][i]WILL[/i][/u] go neutral[/b] in 2 turns as opposed to missing turns resultant [b][i][size=14]thinking[/size][/i] they [i][u]MIGHT[/u][/i][/b] has a huge impact on game play.

Since the resign button is new I welcome any comments on how to improve it. There will never be an unresign button, however, because it isn't fair. If a player says they are leaving they don't get to come back. Imagine a 3 player game where one player leaves and the other two start attacking each other like it's a two player game. Then he unresigns and kills them both. That being said, at some point I will give mods the ability to unresign a player (like if they hit the button on accident) but they will have to ask for permission from the rest of the players. Disabling it's use in FOG capitals games is an option. Or we could change the way it works for those games. For example we could remove the player's white capital ring when they resign so that you would have to kill all their territories if you wanted their cards. Or they could just go neutral immediately. Any other ideas? It was also mentioned by bluebird005vis that a player could abuse the resign button by moving all their troops into someones region and then resigning so that they would be stuck with a bunch of neutrals in their way. My suggestion is that neutral troops should decay over time. For example the troop counts should be cut in half at the beginning of each round until it hits 3. For example 50 to 25, 12, 6, 3. This is better than the troop counts going automatically to 3 because that would give too big of an advantage to the player who goes next. They could easily take another region. I think it should be this way when a player misses their turns too. We have had this idea for years but have never gotten around to programming it. Now I think it should be moved up to the top of the priority list. I could have it programmed by the end of tomorrow.

Doesn't resigning automatically take you out of the game? So I don't see how people would be able to take advantage of it BEFORE that person resigned. I like vexers idea of just gradually decaying back to neutral threes. That or automatically reduce all territories owned by the resignee to three and redistribute to remaining players equally (although I imagine that would be hard to program, not knowing anything about programming lol). How does the resignation work anyhow? Does the player just go neutral or does it just skip the players turn for two turns and then go neutral? I've only seen it once, and there was just two players left and it was deathmatch with a clear winner, so IDK what happens. I'd wait to see if there's any egregious abuse of it before implementing something. There's plenty of things that will disadvantage you in a game, but that's different from people purposefully abusing the thing. Like that it costs tokens, but maybe have it so you can only resign one game per day? I know when I first started out I would have resigned TONS of games, and did just let myself time out a number of times, because I didn't think I had any way of winning. Now I know that persistence and patience pays off. Don't want too many people going 'well shoot, my game just took a turn for the worse, I'll just quit.' That can ruin not only a game that person might still have had a chance of winning, but can also, as spam said, disadvantage remaining players. Still SOOOO much better than people suiciding on you. Although that would suck if they suicided and then resigned... taking their cards with them lol.

Here's how it works: The button does not take you out of the game immediately. It just kills your timer when you turn starts and you go neutral after two turns. It's the equivalent of a player quitting without the wait. This way they can still be killed for their cards before they go neutral. For 2 and 3 player games you have to wait until round 5 before you can use it. 4p and greater you have to wait until round 3. This is to minimize players quitting just because they got a bad drop. The button's main purpose if for when you have to leave because the game took too long and now you have school or work or something. Players who use it for other reasons can be banned from using it if the Admins thinks it's an abuse. 2p games are different though. After 5 rounds sometimes it's quite clear that you have 0 chance to win so why delay it further. 1 resignation a day wouldn't always work. Sometimes players have to leave town unexpectedly to a place with no internet and need to resign from all their games all at once. Instead we will just ban abusers from using it at all. If someone suicides on a player and then resigns that is cause for an immediate ban from the site. But that can be hard to judge. Did they plan to suicide and then resign or did they try to kill you for your cards, failed, and then gave up and resigned? Guilt requires intent. So if they admit it in the chat then tell me and I will ban them from the site. Decaying neutrals is something that we planned to do even before the resign button. Actually I have already finished programming it. It was an easy one. I'm just waiting a day to see if someone has any last minute ideas about the way to implement it. Right now it's programmed to cut the troops in half once a new round starts.

I like the neutral 3's idea

Thank you Vexer for your response to my concerns with the resign button. Having to kill all the resigning player's troops seems a tad excessive to me. I don't have a very strong opinion on the idea of "decaying" troops, but I tend to think this adds unnecessary complexity to the game, that serves no real purpose in the vast majority of games. I [i][b][size=14]DO[/size][/b][/i] like the fact that the "resign" button is not immediately available, and would go so far as to say, I would be in favour of the time to availability being doubled. When I mentioned an "un-resign" button, I had envisioned it as a limited-time offer, available up to the time the player actually went neutral, not as a "resurrection" button perpetually available for the remainder of the game. I agree it is not the best solution to the "resign" button problem, but I wanted to throw it out there, just the same. [b][size=14]I still believe that Disabling the "resign" button in Capitals games, [i]especially Fog Capitals[/i], is the [u]best[/u] remedy.[/size][/b] ([i]I tend to think it should be disabled in all FOG games.[/i]) [i]I could definitely see preventing abuse of the "resign" button by [b]limiting daily usage, perhaps to 3 or 5 times.[/b][/i] In an unexpected situation where a player must go, even having used all their "resigns" for the day, a quick note in chat to that effect should be sufficient and then go neutral as usual. As with most "problems" here, social-Darwinism will gradually leave troublemakers without players who wish to play with them. As far as those who need to leave multiple Long-Term Games, a message to an Admin should suffice (or, again, go neutral the old-fashioned way). Having sat through my share of games where players went neutral for missing turns, I will say that though it has been a bit frustrating at times, I will miss the unpredictability of it. The resign button removes the guesswork of, "well, this player missed a turn. Will he/she be back in time for his/her next turn or are they quitting? How does my plan change if he/she quits?" Generally, I'm not a fan of the "resign" button idea, but I suppose, if implemented in an effective, straightforward manner, it can help impatient players get on with their game sooner, rather than waiting up to [i]a whole 10 minutes[/i] longer to play. I also (perhaps optimistically) think it might decrease the (allegedly major) problem of "suicides" in games.

Wow, I can't believe someone ressucitated this long dead post. To SpamFree. When I say no information, I don't mean something like : "watch out for X, he is getting stronger" but I often played games where people said "I only have 5 troops left here, here and here, come take my cards" or "X just took australia and he only have 6 troops on indonesia" I think those informations ruin FOG games. To all : When I was talking about a resign button, I only mentioned it for 2 players game. Indeed, when you play one vs one, it is very quicly obvious which player is going to win. For example, I had a few days ago a 1v1 on the US map when my opponent started with two complete regions. He used this additional troops to make me go below the 12 territories threshold. After the first round, we both knew he was going to win, but we still had to do the little dance of the "I resist with 3 reinforcment, you kill me with 10". My point is, I don't know how this resign button work on 3+ games as I only experienced it once, but in 2 players game, it is a blessing, and I wish it would be available before round 5. EDIT : Maybe it will be a good idea to allow surrender on every game when only two players are left ? Regards, Xixi2

With regards to fog games I think it would be interesting to have a "flare" option where once only in a game you can "set off a flare" for one turn and see the entire map like a normal match, perhaps only being able to see from after you place your troops to before you mount your first attack that turn. I too have no idea about programming so dont know how hard it would be to implement it but it could be a fun new way to get people to try fog games.

The flare idea is a cool one. Maybe you get one flare to start and one for each person you kill off. It'd give an incentive to attack. I like the decaying nuetrals. Especially the half life. Radioactive decay. Sweet. I still think an option for that in games would be cool too, it'd derail stalemates when people started losing troops.

I think the "resign" button makes more sense in a 2 player (and maybe a 3 player) game. As far as disclosing positions, troop counts etc. in Fog games goes, while it is generally frowned upon by most avid Fog players, I see it as another potentially valid strategy. However, it is a strategy that, if habitual, can cause social-Darwinism to take effect. Again, excluding known practitioners from future Fog games (at least those with players who are especially sensitive to these sorts of disclosures). The "flare" option seems [b][u][size=16]UTTERLY REPULSIVE[/size][/u][/b] as a default setting, but [b]I would [size=14]Not[/size] be opposed to it as a game creation setting [u][i][size=14]option[/size][/i][/u][/b] [i]similar to "[url=www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=631]Advanced Increasing" cards[/url] (once the password protected game limitation is removed, of course[/i] ;) ). However, as a default setting it would destroy the entire concept of Fog.

Haha I knew YOU would be the one to say that Spammy. As I was writing it I could hear a little SpamFree devil on my shoulder. Yes I should think it would be another option as opposed to default although if it was default I dont think it would "destroy" the concept as such as it would only be a one time thing and you may find others using it too early or too late to have any real effect on a game. I think in fixed or capped games it would have less of a negative effect. It could even be varied to be a sonar-like function where you can "ping" one single opponent instead of showing the whole board

What about a spy option for fog games? You get one spy per 10 rounds and you can send them to any territory to see what's there.

Sygmassacre, since I do enjoy fog, I tend to be a bit protective of it, and given a couple recent bad experiences with changes, I tend to lean toward slow, simple changes that don't virtually redefine the game. Vexer, I wouldn't be entirely averse to the idea of a "Spy" feature to scope a single territory every 10 rounds, as an option, of course.