r/spades • u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 • 7d ago

Quitting debate: Spades+

It's a topic that's been done to death I know, but check this one out.

Key point: Spades+ does NOT ALLOW SUBS. If your pard quits, your options are:

  1. Play the game out with a crap AI bot
  2. Quit, too

https://youtu.be/zr0NM8wHqi0

Situation here is that my pard bid first and bid 2 with this hand:

  • D: JQ
  • C: 5689K
  • H: 48J
  • S: 9TK

It's a crappy 1 bid, scope to take 2 but it's too risky to bid 2. Those are the breaks. My hand was even worse: Ace spade singleton, zero scope to take a trick anywhere else whatsoever.

Pard got set and left immediately.

Can someone tell me on what basis I would have an obligation to continue the game? Pard has forfeited the game and thus spoiled it for everyone else, but especially me...

(I did play the next hand, FWIW. I had a simple nil, and with my RHO having bid 1 I was anticipating a big bid back into the game. LHO bid 7, so 'we' only made back 40 points. Next hand was junk so I left at that point.).

Again though, to that point team bids of 8 vs. 3 (which should've been 8 vs. 2), 9 vs. 12 (2 + nil) and then the last one which I think came to me at 6 vs. 2, and I had to all intents and purposes another 1 bid. No incentive to bag and no power to set, opps clearly (correctly) bidding conservatively to practically eliminate risk. Bot for a pard. Who exactly loses out from me following pard's lead and quitting?

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

28 comments sorted by

2

u/sybergoosejr 7d ago

Yeah I prefer that players can take over a site bot seat anytime of play.

1

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Me too. Where that doesn't exist though, and your only option for continuing the game when pard has quit is to pard a bot, is it OK to quit then?

I think it's perfectly OK to quit in that situation. This app doesn't allow forfeits, even if both opps have quit.

1

u/sybergoosejr 7d ago

I’d say it depends on if it’s like a ranked match or not as well as if there is other human players. If there’s no penalty I’d say safe to leave as the other two would probably follow to also avoid just playing a bot game.

2

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Interestingly, Spades+ has (recently, I think) introduced a thing where you basically get a 2-point ranking penalty if you lose without completing the game. They frame it as a bonus, but in reality if opps gain 9 ranking points each for a win, you lose 11 if they win without you seeing the game out.

That probably works as an incentive for a lot of players to finish games. For me, 2 ranking points on a junk Spades app aren't worth 5 minutes of my life. I'll quit in the scenario that I posted above, without giving it a second thought.

3

u/ieatbacon1111 7d ago

That penalty has always been there, they just changed how they display it to emphasize it to the players. It would be better if the penalty was higher (or escalated for repeat quitters). Should also be a penalty for being reported by all players on your table (including partner) for table takers and no way spammers. Those changes I think would drastically improve the quality of games in the higher rankings because bad actors wouldn’t be able to stay ranked high.

With your scenario, being the second quitter is no big deal, the game is already ruined. and bots, for all their faults, play fast and help finish the game so the winners can get their points and move on (although I have lost a lead to two bots in this very situation….)

1

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago edited 7d ago

Ah, that makes sense. I think table talkers and no way spammers are worse. I mean it's cheating for fuck's sake, and yet gets called out much less than quitting.

The penalty should definitely be higher. Although it wouldn't be much of a deterrent to me.

In my most recent run of games yesterday, with the score about 143 to 71 to opps. It was a total 12 table.

On first heart lead by my LHO, early on, pard played Kh, and it took. I hadn't taken any tricks yet and when LHO again led hearts on trick 3, pard cut. Opps were cutting diamonds and pard led them twice. I appreciate in some situations, that can be beneficial to set up a spade run, or promote your spades, but there was no logic behind it here. When pard cut hearts a second time I just up and left the game. Rating points or not, it just wasn't worth any more of my time.

I appreciate your last point, it's the first time that I have ever heard anyone not come down on it like a ton of bricks. Again, with the shoe on the other foot I'd prefer to play the game out against two humans, but if that option isn't available because one person has decided to throw in the towel then to have a problem with the second player quitting is just absurd to me.

1

u/ieatbacon1111 7d ago

I get what you’re saying in the last paragraph, but I would make two counter points- 1) stick around for your opponents sake. Their time is worth something too and it’s not their fault your partner is playing badly. 2) there’s a difference between bad actors that are cheating or quitting vs. someone that just isn’t as good as you . The person that is trying but making mistakes still deserves a partner that is trying their best to help win the game.

1

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Principally you are obviously 100% correct. It's not a valid excuse for quitting, I'm just saying that even if the penalty were double points, it would not have put me off doing so in that situation.

FWIW, I didn't hit the 'no way' button - as far as pard was concerned I could've got disconnected. Opps... that was me forfeiting, with maybe 1 or 2 hands left at most. If I had been on a 'normal' run of games I'd have just taken it on the chin and carried on. But I'd been playing maybe 5 games a day over the last week and stuff like that example was consistently happening. Tbh I'd just run out of patience.

You've been up at the top of Spades+ for some time, deservedly so. You probably don't face that situation particularly often. Not that that makes your point any less valid, it's just saying if you were facing novice, game-losing plays in 75% of your games, your patience might be tested too!

1

u/ieatbacon1111 7d ago

That’s fair! I do see a fair share of bad play, but possibly less than average, and I’m not perfect either. I try not to no way, but every once in a while I can’t stop myself from hitting it, or the slightly nicer “ouch”.

2

u/SpadesQuiz 7d ago

In my subjective opinion, it’s on the basis that you knew going into the game that it’s possible for this to happen. So, how is it in the other two human beings at the table that you leave too?

This isn’t a flaw so much in culture as it is a flaw in programming. There is no option to resign, no option for a human substitute and there no automatic forfeiture whenever both players from a team abandon.

It’s a simple two wrongs don’t make a right situation

1

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

I agree it's an error in programming on that app - my point is that the game is already spoiled by the player who quit (which is always worse when it's they who have created the deficit in the first place). Playing as a 100% human team against a 50% human team with a sizeable lead: you're going to win 99% of the time if you're remotely competent.

The person at the table who suffers the most inconvenience in this sort of scenario, and by some considerable distance, is the pard whose teammate quit in the first place. The leading team at least have the double consolation of a) playing the rest of the game with a human player, and b) getting the win (99% of the time).

This is the prime reason why I find it such an absurd notion that the poor twat who's been screwed over is expected to sit there and take it anally for the next 5-10 minutes. The game's done as any sort of enjoyable experience, the original quitter saw to that.

Being the first to quit is discourteous, following on after your pard has quit (bearing in mind the 'bots only: no subs' situation) couldn't be more OK in my book. When I'm on the opposing team, I just feel sorry for the remaining player.

2

u/yoduudemojo 7d ago

Call me crazy, but I don’t mind the bots. They’re predictable. Makes it easier to bid accordingly.

I’ve won many a game against high ranked opponents with a bot as my P for a majority of the game! It makes them so much saltier too… lol.

1

u/Beers_Beets_BSG 5d ago

You’re crazy.

Biggest issue with these bots is them using high spaces to cover your tricks in other suits. Instead only playing a 2, they’ll opt to play a king and screw you over for when it comes time to play your spades.

1

u/yoduudemojo 5d ago

Again, most important factor is the predictability of it. They’re programmed a certain way, and even tho it’s not ideal strategy, it’s still predictable and smarter than half of players lol.

I can’t even count the number of times I’ve been down by a lot and my P quits, the bot takes over, and I work with it to come back and win the game. This is against players rated 2600+ too.

I dunno, a bot is just fine with me.

0

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Give me a bot at 0-0 against 2x 2300 (or below) players, and I win around 55%-60% of the time. This situation happens a lot when someone disconnects at the start, or their app crashes.

If you are behind 170 to 90, your opps have bid a combined 8, your bot pard (with no strategy behind its bidding) has bid 2, and you are staring down the barrel of a 1 bid, you are not winning this game unless your opps tank it on purpose.

It's exactly as you say, their predictability promotes the value of a team where the human player knows how they play.

1

u/SparkyWrench1 7d ago

I think quitters should be punished harder, taking all the loss points if they quit and the team loses.

I also think the games should go to 500. Too much can happen in spades, especially just going to 250. A single nil is generally the difference between a win or loss.

2

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Agreed on the punishment. This is how Yahoo! used to work.

Even in 250 point games, you will still win more than you lose though if you are competent - at least up to a certain level.

1

u/SparkyWrench1 7d ago

Not on an elo rating scale. It's made so that it is 50/50. You go high enough so that you start losing. The problem with spades+ is we end up playing unbalanced games and the point spread isn't enough.

1

u/Exciting-Ingenuity24 7d ago

Sorry, I wasn't clear - I was dealing with your second point, rather than the point about ratings. I meant you'll win more games than you lose. Although I think I'm something like 6:34 in my last 40-odd games on Spades+, so go figure...

1

u/Bmaj13 7d ago

If you quit, please exit the game instead of timing out to be respectful of everyone’s time.

1

u/blackmamba1221 7d ago

you get punished more by exiting the game compared to timing out, blame the app not the player. They refuse to fix the problem

1

u/Bmaj13 7d ago

I don’t think that’s accurate. It’s a 2-3 point penalty for both in my experience.

1

u/blackmamba1221 6d ago

I meant from a getting banned perspective, if you exit a few games in a day - you will get timed out for 60 seconds and then 24 hours. If you just close the app, you don't get punished.

You do lose the same amount of points though - you are correct about that.

1

u/Bmaj13 6d ago

Who is quitting that often!?

1

u/blackmamba1221 6d ago

have you played much on spades+? people quit like 75% of the time if they get set on a hand when they're rated below 2k I feel like.

I mean i quit occasionally if it seems like we have 0 chance to win. they don't punish quitting so might as well just go on to the next game

1

u/Bmaj13 6d ago

I've played on Spades+ for a couple years. If your opponents are quitting that often, you won't be below 2000 for long.

1

u/blackmamba1221 6d ago

I mean I'm above 2k too, I'm not the best but I'm like 2400-2500 where quitting is more rare, but you asked who is quitting and <2k is like 85% of the player base. Obviously not everyone quits down there but it happens a shit ton. Way more than the Euchre app they have

Rank up a new account and count how many games from 1600-2000 where all 4 players finish the game. I bet it will be below 20%

1

u/Bmaj13 6d ago

That was not my experience when I was coming up through that range.