Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

what are your guys' opinion on concession? I find it bothersome as there is often still a chance of winning, as well it robs the oppenent the satifaction of landing "the Killing Blow" that wins the game. you just win remove the models with out the chance to see if your killing stroke would have worked

If I feel like a game has reached a point of inevitability, I will often ask my opponent how he feels about it. If my opponent still thinks I have a conceivable chance of winning (or wants to beat me badly enough that he's willing to lie about it!) then I will keep playing. As you can see in this game, sometimes there's even the possibility of a miracle comeback! If there is absolutely NO hope, I will just concede regardless, but it has to be absolutely ridiculous first. Like in this game, where my opponent still has almost an entire army and I was reduced to a single Ravager.

If I've lost all my synapse and all I've got left is stuff with IB: Lurk, the only way to win the game would be to roll so amazingly that it doesn't matter who I was playing. At that point it's no longer fun for either player - either I'm not having fun because all I get to do is wait for the 25% chance to rout my troops to happen, or he's not having fun because of my invincible gants.

I'd rather concede and chill for a bit (at a tournament) or see about another game (at the LGS).

I have similar thoughts to Jim there. We went through all the trouble of meeting, setting up terrain, rolling missions and traits and powers etc. I'd be kinda miffed to do all that and play less than a 3 turn game.

We have a TFG who has conceded on turn 1 before, because he lost two poorly placed vehicles by a good ordnance scatter.
He has also conceded in the middle of a neck-and-neck situation near the end of a game. Dunno if he saw something I didn't, but it was a serious coin flip there. Any real player would be on the edge of his seat watching the dice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the attitude matters a lot.

"I think you've got this one in the bag mate" and "I've got an emergency at home, I'll have to throw the game." are a LOT more acceptable than:
(throws hands in air after some dice come up badly) I GIVE UP! (throws models in box.)

I went up against an IG armored company in a tournament. Thanks to his Beast Hunter Shells I lost my Riptides and commander within the second turn and most of my suits, while my Icarus Lascannon at BS5 missed one of the two Vendettas that were lined up to hit my last remaining suits.

I conceded because it wasn't worth my time picking up models that had no chance of hurting his scoring units, while he was effectively immune to every one of my units.

I don't mind conceding or think there is anything wrong with it. Is it really any more fun for your opponent to just breeze through a game than it is to turn the tide so drastically in his favor that his opponent concedes the inevitable? I've seen games where an unlucky warpstorm roll removed 75% of a person's army on turn one. I wouldn't expect that guy to go through the hassle of trying desperately to make it entertaining for his opponent.

To clarify: my answer only applies to friendly games! When it comes to tournies, I play to the bitter end. Even if I only have a single model left, my defeat my be inevitable, but the strength of my opponent's victory (which often has a large effect on the overall tournament score) may still be up in the air.

I accept people conceding whenever they offer. I don't want to force them to keep playing if they don't want to.

As for me, I usually fight it out to the bitter end. In part because of some hope of a turnaround, perhaps, but also because I don't want to deprive my opponent of the satisfaction of completely destroying something. Plus, sometimes I'll feel vindictive, like, looking down at my minis and saying in my mind "Oh, so that's how you're going to fight this time? Well guess what, I will not accept surrender this game. Enjoy getting slaughtered you little pricks."

I think I have offered the sabre on a few occasions, but I think they've only been in cases where a game has dragged on for a long time and it's getting late, or if my army's been all but tabled and there's no possible hope of me really even killing anything anymore, much less pulling out any fancy moves.

I'd never concede (unless we are running out of time.) If it seems inevitable that I will lose, I will at least try to slay as many enemies as I can before the game ends.

In a game that can take hours to play, allowing your opponent to concede is kinda important. If it's obvious the battle isn't going to go your way, throwing in the towel so you can move on to the next match is a good call.

To me it's really only necessary if the players are crunched for time, like they planned to end at 10pm and it's 1am. In terms of friendly games at someone's house at least.

Otherwise it seems like a waste, since part of the fun of tabletop games is playing them. Even a losing battle can have memorable moments or turnarounds.

It comes down to the context to me, for the player, the game situation and the real-life situation.

As people have said already, there's a world of difference between "you got me" and "I quit! <model dump> ". And really, if someone wants to back out, I'll allow it more often than not, especially in a game that is clearly out of hand on their end. While I like fighting to the bitter end, there are days where I know I'm beat hands down and I'll offer my hand and congratulate my opponent.

I never push an opponent to concede, but if they mention it, I always tell them that it is their call. And I accept any gracious surrender with grace of my own. I don't make a scene of it, nor do I beat my chest in triumph.

That said, I admit to a guilty pleasure last week of getting a guy to concede after he spent the whole game trash talking....ahem... >_> I'm only human.

You can't really 'make' someone keep playing a game just so you can have your glory move go off.
That's kinda selfish and rude to someone you presumably will want to play again with sometime.
Time is your most important commodity and if you spend it or conserve it wisely you can maybe get in a second game?
After all a Win is a Win.

Personally I like to see the games through to the end where ever possible but not at the expense of friendship and comradery.

When you're without scoring units in an objective game and also see that what you have left can't take out the opponent's scoring units to force a draw... Nothing wrong in saying "you win, let's move on to the next game".

 Ailaros wrote:


As for me, I usually fight it out to the bitter end. In part because of some hope of a turnaround, perhaps, but also because I don't want to deprive my opponent of the satisfaction of completely destroying something. Plus, sometimes I'll feel vindictive, like, looking down at my minis and saying in my mind "Oh, so that's how you're going to fight this time? Well guess what, I will not accept surrender this game. Enjoy getting slaughtered you little pricks."

That's right, you can't afford to take crap from them or they will walk all over you and just sit around eating sandwiches in all future games. Gotta reinforce the fact that there is no desserts till AFTER the battle is won, and you can watch them fight their little hearts out.



I have never conceded yet - never seen a point to it, the only times that it has been that one-sided is when my opponents only has a few moves left to table me anyway, so I can wait all of 15 minutes to make sure everybody gets a satisfying conclusion.

When 1 group of lootas blew thru all of my 11 Void shields and then the Stompa blew up my 3 Void Shield buildings with the D.

My Warhound got 1 turn of firing and knocked down 4 of his voids. My Jokearos and other firing knocked down another 4. He had one left. He got back 6 of 8. I knew it was over there.

His titan blew mine up next turn. I called it. No way i'd even get thru all those voids. Sometimes you might as well call the game.

I have a rule, if I know I'm going to lose, I go out in a blaze of glory. Charge the gaunt swarm with one cultist? Sure why not! Because sometimes, whatever crap I'm trying works, and it is awesome.

I only call the game if it's 100% inevitable that one of us will win. For example, it's turn 5 or 6 in a Killpoints mission, I've got 12 and he's got 3 with one unit left on the board. Best case scenario, he can't do enough damage to win. Otherwise, I only surrender on a time crunch.

I don't have an issue with people conceding, whatever their reasons. I will certainly take note of the manner in which they do, however, and it might influence whether I choose to play with them again the future.

for me, if I'm convinced that I don't have the forces to change the outcome of the game, I will concede the win to my opponent. I don't do that lightly, though, because I'm there to play. I have to believe that I can't kill enough models, break enough units, claim enough objectives, etc. to possibly win given the forces and time I have left. these are all friendly matches, though. in a tournament setting I might be more inclined to follow jimsolo's stance on it.

in my group, it's common to have to call a game around turn 4 due to time constraints. we'll add up victory points and sometimes throw in a few extras for event outcomes that are highly probable, such as a very lopsided assault that would have been resolved in the following turn, and decide the winner based on that. I wouldn't technically consider that conceding, but we rarely have enough time to play to the bitter end.

I never concede games, even if they are going horrible but I have no problem if other people do it (well, maybe a little).
Even if I'm losing horribly, it is better to make a heroic last stand and try to take as much enemy models with me as possible. This applies to both friendly games and tournaments. Giving up just isn't in my nature I suppose.

If its done with good sportsmanship I don't mind. If its an nerd rage outburst, good luck trying to get a game with me again.

I'll concede, only if my opponent and I agree on the scoring outcome. If theres a dispute I'll play until the cows come home. Its just a game.

I have no problems with conceding. Sometimes, you just know how it will end, so why waste time playing to that end, when you can just start a new game and try again?
If there isn't time to play a new game, I'll go for a moral victory. I remember a game once where I played pure Grey Knights (old DH codex) against an Alaitoc Ranger army (back in the Craftworld Eldar days). I got trounced early and hard, with no chance for even a draw. But I did decide that, dammit, I was going to KILL THAT WRAITHLORD. And I did.

I do feel bad when my opponent is doing badly. Especially when they're doing badly because of the dice. It really does suck to watch someone lose a game through bad dice, even when they're making all the right tactical decisions with a good army. It's one thing if it is a single dice roll that decides things, but when you're blowing more saves than you should, hitting less than you shield, getting run moves of 1" more often than not, that just sucks.

Tournaments, well, I would play to the end.

let me add some context. I usually play with a friend of mine and we usually only play one game. If he feels that he is going to lose he concedes, I can only remember a handful of games where i have won not by concession. it gets annoying sometimes when I want to finish or try a new unit or character that hasn't engaged yet. If were pressed for time, then I don't mind and will even do so myself. But if its the last turn, whats the harm in playing it out?

I've only conceded twice in 6th edition.

First, I had a perhaps too friendly game with a guy I'd never met before, but who recognized me from my DJing days. The result was an exchange of jokes and anecdotes with a game of 40k for a background that dragged on well past closing time, so we had to call it quits by turn 4. For fairness, I just had some lootas, a dakkajet and my warboss on the table, while his Eldar were virtually untouched, so I conceded.

Second, I got completely stomped by an expertly played (and beautifully painted) Saim-Hann list I brought all the wrong tools to deal with. By the time my planes arrived, my ground forces had been all but wiped out, my squads dead or broken, my vehicles burning. Closing time was drawing near, though, so by mutual agreement we decided to put an end to my suffering with a cataclysmic 6-1.

Ironically, the entire game hinged on my planes - Had I had better luck with my reserve rolls, the game could have been very different, as he had nothing in the way of anti-air.

I'll concede under various conditions:
-If there is no mechanical way to win (i.e. no scoring units left, and the opponent has at least one unit/model that I no longer have the capacity to harm).
-If the majority of the remainder of the game will not involve any contribution on my part (i.e. my entire turn is just fighting an irrelevant assault); at that point I'm not playing the game anyway.
-If I feel that my opponent is deliberately and maliciously prolonging a game they have already won.
-If time runs out.

That said however, if I feel compelled to concede, it means I have either messed up incredibly badly or had abnormally bad luck. Neither of those things should happen all that often unless the skill gap between players is enormous. In my opinion, against equally skilled players, concession shouldn't happen often enough for either player to get contentious about it.

If it is 100% unavoidable that one person is just going to be totally annihilated then I am glad to amicably accept or concede defeat

I only concede if i am either pressed for time and 80% sure I have no chance, or 100% assured to lose and have time for another game but only if i end that game soon. otherwise i just let the other player enjoy trying to wipe out my army and doing what I can to hold what I can, gotta make em work for it.

I rarely concede, mostly doing so if the battle is truly hopeless (as JimSolo pointed out) or (more likely), time is short and the odds of winning are a long shot.

That said, my last game, I ran 1750 points of nids with 0 Synapse. By start of Turn 2, I had no Troops left (I went first, and 1 30-gant blob ran away without a second thought, the other took massive casualties and ran away). Despite the loss, I was surprised I made it to the end of Turn 5.

If I can't win, can't even draw, have an opponent that is only interested in stomping me and is getting a 20-0 anyway, and I am not having ANY fun, then I see no problem with conceding.
(If only because it will allow me to go off and get a beer to get away from the game). If he lets me, then he gets a decent sports score (as a decent person will not prevent me getting a beer.)

If he won't let me concede, insisting that I stick around for the 2+hours and 6-odd turns until he has taken me apart piece by piece, then I will simply fling my units into the proverbial meatgrinder (throw shooty units at assault units - or allow them to be assaulted by moving closer and NOT shooting at them) until he does wipe me out.

These days, If challenged to a game of 40k, I simply concede outright - I have no desire to even get my armies out of the shed to play the game that hasn't been any fun for me for 3 years.

I've done the other two with the other games I've played since, though.
Happy to say that none of my opponents outside of the 40k tourney scene have fallen into category #2 though.

If it's blatantly obvious you can't win, sure, I don't mind conceding. However, you'll sometimes be surprised what you can come back from, especially in Fantasy.

In my early days gaming I had a friend I'd play against, he was Bret I was Lizardmen. He'd almost always lose and would usually concede around turn 4. We swapped armies one day and he was stomping me (so going as per usual) and I just kept playing instead of conceding and due to the speed of the Knights I managed to actually come back and win by turn 6.

I agree that it's context dependent. If there's time constraints then you've just got to make the best of things you can and resolve it as fairly as possible.

As for how a game is going...I haven't played in forever, but I'm inclined to keep going until the bitter end if possible, taking as much of the enemy down with me (and seeing & understanding better what things he's got in store for the next game).

As for accepting concessions...can't really envisage that happening with my sub-optimal Orks, but if somehow I was presented with that situation it'd depend on the attitude of the player, I agree there. A well-reasoned argument to say 'Dude, you've definitely got this one in the bag and here's why....Well played man' would go over well and would take the handshake. Someone just wanting to take their ball and go home because it was getting a bit difficult...nah wouldn't like that.