Hi all,

I propose some changes for surrender as it has been perverted by some players.

In team game, a guy can surrender to appear less dangerous :
and team mates don't accept it, so they continue to play.
that's what I call perverting surrender.

or other teams refuse it, especially if they don't have contact with the surrendering guy,
probably for a strategic aspect: ennemies of my ennemies are my friends...
again, I think that's perverting surrender.


To me, surrender means surrender, that's why I propose 3 changes :

1) if someone surrender, it is automatically accepted after 2 turns:
in team game, you can try to change your mate's mind,
but one turn of discussion is enough

2) if someone surrender, he can un-surrender for 2 turns.
And this, only once in a game.

3) if someone surrender, he cannot deploy armies nor attack.


if you agree with me,
I hope fizzer will make those modifications.

We all have 1001 ideas we would like to see here. Fizzer has said it so many times over and over again. USERVOICE IT!

Perverted by some players, it just your view of it. If rules allow it, there is nothing wrong with it. Neither is there nothing wrong if you attack your team-mates out of fun, revenge or what-ever reason. Make lottery or rigged games. Open-games will be of poor quality always. If you want to play by your rules - find friends, trusted players etc. Changing the surrender rule will not change the players quality, attitude or behavior in game.

So playing strategically in team-game is perverting, what else is new here? Or read rules before you join and please don´t whine after if you did not like them in first place, but still joined.

Or maybe this is exactly what Fizzer had in mind, this will be the new Warlight-changing update we all been waiting for: https://www.warlight.net/Forum/220634-update-318-coming-soon

Surrender is the same tactic as if you say GG in real time games and continue. If a player in team surrenders, you can always force other player(s) to make push over that player or just neglect that he is surrendering and continue.

In some games people surrender because the situation becomes really bad, with only few opportunities to continue, but the development of the game can go to different direction, so they can be back in next several turns. In one of FFA games I played, I had opponent that surrendered in turn 4, so I didn't accept his surrender as I thought he is ordinary quitter (and rather wanted him booted), but when he shown his armies on my back with the income that was almost as mine, I didn't hesitate for a single moment and I kicked only real threat, in that very moment, out of game. When he regained losses, and was undisturbed for several turns, he managed to be equal to the rest of us who were fighting between ourselves.

So, surrender can only be option given by game creator (immediate surrender or all players must accept it, or to AI takes that position) regardless of player's wishes. If you don't like the solution where surrender must be accepted by all players, then just don't play such game.