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.

As long as sunlight burns in my soul, I'll fight on.

If you have nothing but three disarmed drop pods, that's not conceding. You've flat-out lost. :p

Conceding implies that you have actions you could take, and are instead electing to not make any of them.

I wouldn't quit earlier than turn 4. Sometimes things miraculously turn around in your favour, but mainly I just don't want to be a rage quitter. I play for the sake of playing and not to grind my opponent into the ground.

ductvader wrote:This is why I never just pull a unit from an assault or shooting he should obviously die to.

And it's furthermore bad form for the game itself. After all, if you're a tau player, you WANT the squad to die horribly so that you can shoot at whatever assaulted them the next turn. In this case, it's borderline cheating.

Breng77 wrote:I'm not sure conceding has anything to do with being emotionally able to deal with defeat (by conceding you admit defeat), it has more to do with having other things to do with your time.

But still, you're saying you only have time to win. Once you can't win, you don't play. That's only focusing on winning. That's WAAC behavior, pretty much by definition.

Breng77 wrote:I could turn it around to say if you feel everyone needs to keep playing so you can kill every last model...that is very WAAC.

If you keep on playing after you've won, then it's not, strictly, WAAC. You've already won the game. Now you're playing it for some other reason.

That other reason might not be a good one (like, you're being vindictive, or like to watch other suffer, or want to rub it in your opponent's face, or whatever), but they're still outside of the scope of winning.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:A buddy of mine plays Dark Eldar. Our armies are horrible matchups for one another. On one occasion, due to some incredibly poor luck for my friend, I've nearly tabled him in a single turn due to seizing the initiative, Manticores and other IG firepower vs. AV10 paper airplanes. I wouldn't expect him to play out another 4+ turns with ~400 pts of DE on the table vs. 1,500 points of IG. That wouldn't be fun for either of us...we'd rather pack up and go get a beer.

Actually, this is a great example of what I'm talking about.

You're bringing a list that you know is going to give you an easy win. You're expecting your opponent to give up when they don't think they can win. Because not being able to win isn't fun. It's still all about the win.

If winning wasn't what it was all about, then you could always play your army NOT in such a way where winning is so easy (like not bringing manticores or hydras against DE, but instead playing foot guard, or whatever). If winning wasn't what it was all about, you wouldn't expect your opponent to give up when they couldn't pull it off anymore. If losing is boring, and you're just making your opponent lose, you're consciously providing a boring experience to your opponent.

It would be better to just skip the game of 40k in the first place and just head straight to the beer, unless you need that gratification of winning first...

I have never asked an opponent to concede and I have no problem at all finishing a game no matter what's going on. BUT, frankly, I think it is far more polite to call a game if, come turn 3 or 4, it is 100% clear who is going to win. This will be different for everybody, but the time I spend gaming is both precious and scarce. Rather than spend another 45 minutes rolling dice for a game who's outcome is determined, I'd prefer to start a new game, play some Magic, paint a mini, or just relax with friends. If I was still in my 20s, maybe I'd feel differently, but at this point in my life, I prefer the politeness of just graciously ending it and moving towards the next entertainment.

Edit: I'll add that in Magic, a game that I have far more experience with in both tournament and casual settings, a clearly losing player conceding is not only customary, but the concession is called a "courtesy scoop," which of goes along with my idea of conceding being the more polite action.

This reminds me of my last game vs RavenWing. Turn 4 my lone Guardian (my last 9 points out of 1600) charges Chapter Master (allied from SM) equipped with everything you could imagine.
He has 2 wounds left. While charging I say with a Poker face "There is still chance to kill that ".

“Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
― Winston Churchill

I will play until I have no models left on the table, or the game ends. Every time. Quitting just feels wrong to me.

I've only conceded once. I had a single warlock facing his entire army (the dice were not on my side that day). I asked him if there was any point continuing.

I chose "other". Against one of my friends, I'm pretty much always tactically fethed, so when I get to the point where most of my army is gone, and the only thing left to do is die in a depressing manner, I'll just concede.

But, one other friend, who pretty much never wins against me, is the guy I'll play until turn 1 billion regardless of the gameplay. It always goes on until one guy gets tabled, and even then we may just have that guy "respawn" most of his army, just to see how long the other can continue.

When it makes no sense to play it is just one manupship . 3 helldrakes come in turn 2 . blown up 2 chimeras I lose 59 out of 60 troop models and his biker unit with 3 lords is on the relic and out of LoS. He just got firstblood and slayer the warlord . What for am I suppse to play for now . To move my stuff around and that he tables me in 2-3 turns anyway . Waste of time . Better for him and me to find a different opponent and have another game then me stand around and look how he is rolling dice.

“Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
― Winston Churchill

Big words from a dude who pulled had beaten by Turks.

 Ailaros wrote:

ductvader wrote:This is why I never just pull a unit from an assault or shooting he should obviously die to.

And it's furthermore bad form for the game itself. After all, if you're a tau player, you WANT the squad to die horribly so that you can shoot at whatever assaulted them the next turn. In this case, it's borderline cheating.

Breng77 wrote:I'm not sure conceding has anything to do with being emotionally able to deal with defeat (by conceding you admit defeat), it has more to do with having other things to do with your time.

But still, you're saying you only have time to win. Once you can't win, you don't play. That's only focusing on winning. That's WAAC behavior, pretty much by definition.

Breng77 wrote:I could turn it around to say if you feel everyone needs to keep playing so you can kill every last model...that is very WAAC.

If you keep on playing after you've won, then it's not, strictly, WAAC. You've already won the game. Now you're playing it for some other reason.

That other reason might not be a good one (like, you're being vindictive, or like to watch other suffer, or want to rub it in your opponent's face, or whatever), but they're still outside of the scope of winning.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:A buddy of mine plays Dark Eldar. Our armies are horrible matchups for one another. On one occasion, due to some incredibly poor luck for my friend, I've nearly tabled him in a single turn due to seizing the initiative, Manticores and other IG firepower vs. AV10 paper airplanes. I wouldn't expect him to play out another 4+ turns with ~400 pts of DE on the table vs. 1,500 points of IG. That wouldn't be fun for either of us...we'd rather pack up and go get a beer.

Actually, this is a great example of what I'm talking about.

You're bringing a list that you know is going to give you an easy win. You're expecting your opponent to give up when they don't think they can win. Because not being able to win isn't fun. It's still all about the win.

If winning wasn't what it was all about, then you could always play your army NOT in such a way where winning is so easy (like not bringing manticores or hydras against DE, but instead playing foot guard, or whatever). If winning wasn't what it was all about, you wouldn't expect your opponent to give up when they couldn't pull it off anymore. If losing is boring, and you're just making your opponent lose, you're consciously providing a boring experience to your opponent.

It would be better to just skip the game of 40k in the first place and just head straight to the beer, unless you need that gratification of winning first...

I'm saying that I only want to take time to continue games where both players are having a good time/want to continue. Again if on turn 2 I have nothing but re put drop pods left should I keep playing even though you have obviously already won? I would not expect my opponent to do so (not that I'd be pissed if he wanted to, but if he wanted to stop I'd be fine with it.)

I'm saying that once a player has no ability to realistically win then forcing them to play on is Waac because the only motive is to want to table them.

Essentially to say there is never a good time to resign is plain false. I'm not saying it should be done quickly or frequently but there are plenty of good reasons to do it.

I'll concede when the game stops being fun. I don't see the point in letting your army get blasted off the table, just so your opponent can say they tabled you.
That being said, I'll always wait until the bottom of my turn 3 before deciding, and if it's a game with friends we'll often play out a few of the units actions anyway for fun (eg. seeing how many boyz that immolater is about to kill)

People admitting to loosing on the internet? I have to get a screencap of this.

I rarely rarely have every conceded. Only once in tournament play and that was the last game this past Sunday. My fiance who was amazing and chose to go with me for three days was exhausted and ready for the four hour drive home. I offered to take they bye they were offering, but due to my record and it increasing my payout was not allowed to. Dice really turned his way especially with an insane courage on a critical broken scoring unit while the dice had turned against me. After Turn 3, I shook his hand, apologized for conceding, and packed my minis to hit the road as early as possible.

I still had reasonable chance of pulling the game out, but was mentally drained, exhausted, and had to be up at 6am.

 Ailaros wrote:

NuggzTheNinja wrote:A buddy of mine plays Dark Eldar. Our armies are horrible matchups for one another. On one occasion, due to some incredibly poor luck for my friend, I've nearly tabled him in a single turn due to seizing the initiative, Manticores and other IG firepower vs. AV10 paper airplanes. I wouldn't expect him to play out another 4+ turns with ~400 pts of DE on the table vs. 1,500 points of IG. That wouldn't be fun for either of us...we'd rather pack up and go get a beer.

Actually, this is a great example of what I'm talking about.

You're bringing a list that you know is going to give you an easy win. You're expecting your opponent to give up when they don't think they can win. Because not being able to win isn't fun. It's still all about the win.

If winning wasn't what it was all about, then you could always play your army NOT in such a way where winning is so easy (like not bringing manticores or hydras against DE, but instead playing foot guard, or whatever). If winning wasn't what it was all about, you wouldn't expect your opponent to give up when they couldn't pull it off anymore. If losing is boring, and you're just making your opponent lose, you're consciously providing a boring experience to your opponent.

It would be better to just skip the game of 40k in the first place and just head straight to the beer, unless you need that gratification of winning first...

Actually, I'm bringing a list that is Take-All-Comers because I despise list tailoring. I never tailor to my opponent.

If you read my post carefully, I specifically outline certain situations in which it's impossible for my opponent to win. If we always knew the outcome of the game at the beginning, the entire venture would be mental masturbation. As it is, sometimes tactics and dice actually do play a role in the game.

Finally, my gaming group and I generally fall on the competitive end of the spectrum in terms of list building. That's part of the fun for some people. Why would I waste time building a foot guard army to intentionally handicap myself? It would require a better reason than that people on the internet can't tell the difference between competitive play and WAAC attitudes.

Play until the game is finished, I've seen too many players want to give up half way through a game only to reluctanly keep playing and end up winning. I once saw a Grey knight player against a Tau player call a game lost but wanted to play until the end. In the last three turns he managed claw back 7 kill points using his last unit winning the game.

I feel that the vast majority of players I've seen don't have the knowledge or experience to accurately judge when a game is unwinable.

I'll concede when the game is not going to be any fun at all for me.
For example, under the previous codex, when my GK opponent managed to Dick Quake the entire table, I simply just snapped my case closed against and told them "you win" because there's no way I could even realistically deploy more than a single unit of my Daemons at that point. What's point in wasting my time with such non-sense?

Granted I don't think it's fair to concede a game, especially early on just because you had a bad turn/your opponent's dice were on fire for a shooting phase... but when the result is 100% never in doubt about what the outcome is going to be, AND, one or both parties aren't having much fun, why continue? (outside of a tournament)

While it's true that some of my best gaming experiences have been where I've gotten absolutely thrashed senseless, such as those games were I tabled myself by rolling 1's with plasma weapons, or my quite literally trolled me the entire game, I was also playing against a fun opponent who was laughing along with me about how abysmally awful my luck was.
One the other hand, I'd rather be hanging upside down by my toenails, while having my eyeballs stapled to my arse than spend another minute playing a pointless game vs. an opponent who's being a complete donkeycave while ruthlessly crushing my army within 2-3 turns just to stroke their ego at exploiting a game of toy soldiers.

Breng77 wrote:
It really depends on a lot of things.

1.) Am I playing a buddy for fun and we can get in another game if we wrap it up? If so concede.

2.) Is there anything meaningful I can still do? Can I still fight it out claim some objectives or contest (this matters in a tournament certainly) if so I soldier on. If I have say 3 weapon destroyed drop pods left and nothing else....concede. It is an extreme example but if my opponent has most of his army and I have basically nothing left, why go through the motions of rolling saves and dying, or hiding. More true in KP missions when you are also hoplessly down on the mission objective.

3.)Is my opponent a Jerk? If so conceed, even if I am losing if I am having a good time hanging out and joking with my opponent...no problem...if I am getting blasted and every other minute there is a rules argument....concede.

4.) Play to a random roll wher eif the game goes on it is obvious who has won (i.e. the next turn will be rolling dice and last few models dying) So we play to the end of 5 and I have 2 models left that will die on top of 6...We roll game goes on and we just call it a win for you.

I think people need to realize the difference between conceding when you are throughly beaten and conceding when your opponent is winning. In the first your opponent has beaten you already and the rest of the game is a formality (you have a miniscule amount of models facing a full army), in the second your opponent is likely going to win the mission and you just want to call it.

this

I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

That sucks dude.

 BrotherOfBone wrote:

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

That sucks dude.

It was especially annoying since it was first turn and I just got 1500 pts out and set up terrain etc
yeah wraithknight is now painted and if he came back we throw him over the fence

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

He wasn't a true Tyranid player then. A true Tyranid player goes till the last model dies. Other than that, how old was the person? They should know better than to rage with a synaptic army centered on one model if they are an adult.

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

He wasn't a true Tyranid player then. A true Tyranid player goes till the last model dies. Other than that, how old was the person? They should know better than to rage with a synaptic army centered on one model if they are an adult.

That's like building an Imperial Guard army with Conscripts in it...

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

He wasn't a true Tyranid player then. A true Tyranid player goes till the last model dies. Other than that, how old was the person? They should know better than to rage with a synaptic army centered on one model if they are an adult.

Sadly some 15 year olds are more immature then others like my friends are all mature and responsible compared to him having a tantrum at the age of 15. And I played tyranids once oh how much I loved that never ending tervigon

 hiveof_chimera wrote:

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:

 hiveof_chimera wrote:
I've been against a tyranid player who conceded because I killed his only synapse creature with a wraith cannon (hive tyrant) and he then threw my wraithknight into a bush lucky he wasn't painted. The player wasn't invited back to the club

He wasn't a true Tyranid player then. A true Tyranid player goes till the last model dies. Other than that, how old was the person? They should know better than to rage with a synaptic army centered on one model if they are an adult.

Sadly some 15 year olds are more immature then others like my friends are all mature and responsible compared to him having a tantrum at the age of 15. And I played tyranids once oh how much I loved that never ending tervigon

My friend usually plays a list with 2 Tervigon troops, a Flying HT, 3 Zoans, about 40 Terms, 40 Horms and the Swarmy with a Venomthrope backing him up..
I play gunline guard with as many plasma guns as I can fit behind my little ADL ;n;

I was considering conceding once when I played a 1250 points game against an Ork friend of mine, and his Lootas (They sure are dangerous, them Lootas...) proceeded to blow up a lot of my precious stuff. (RIP Clawy the Defiler)

And then my semi-cheap 10-man MoK CSM CC squad led by my counts-as-Khârn proceeded to hack their way through the majority of his army, including almost 60 boyz and Grotsnik. The charging Khorne Marines hit so hard against the poor Orks so it almost made me giggle. Ever since, the idea of conceding just does not sit right with me. The best part of that battle, though, was when my Aspiring Champion chopped down a Nob in a challenge, rolling Dark Apotheosis and promptly killing himself as I had no DP model! They really should change that to 're-roll this result if you have no DP model available' or something, but I digress.

No surrender!

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
I was considering conceding once when I played a 1250 points game against an Ork friend of mine, and his Lootas (They sure are dangerous, them Lootas...) proceeded to blow up a lot of my precious stuff. (RIP Clawy the Defiler)

And then my semi-cheap 10-man MoK CSM CC squad led by my counts-as-Khârn proceeded to hack their way through the majority of his army, including almost 60 boyz and Grotsnik. The charging Khorne Marines hit so hard against the poor Orks so it almost made me giggle. Ever since, the idea of conceding just does not sit right with me. The best part of that battle, though, was when my Aspiring Champion chopped down a Nob in a challenge, rolling Dark Apotheosis and promptly killing himself as I had no DP model! They really should change that to 're-roll this result if you have no DP model available' or something, but I digress.

No surrender!

My friend conceded when I blew up his Soul Grinder with 1 lascannon shot from a dread in turn 1, then proceeded mow down his entire squad of Seekers with boltgun fire ;P

I don't enjoy playing when it's painfully obvious I can't possibly win.
I don't enjoy playing when it's painfully obvious my opponent can't possibly win.
It's just wasting time (and at the expense of someone's enjoyment!) and anyone who's such a WAAC that they can not accept someone's surrender is not worth playing. Ever.

I don't expect you to play when you are not having fun, so you shouldn't expect me to play when I'm not having fun. That's the contract between gamers and anyone who adhere to that contract can not be a WAAC, by definition.

The only time I ever to choose to concede is where time has become a factor.

 Ephemeral Moment wrote:
I really should have said other, usually discuss it with opponent, and if it is clear I'm stuffed and they want to get another game in on the night, I'll concede

This is a fair point. If the game is *truly* a forgone conclusion, and throwing in the towel will let us get another game in the same night, okay, i'm cool with that.

Good caveat to bring up.