HasniM
Joined: Dec 30, 2006
|
 Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 04:38 |
 
|
I never doubted that Christer was trying to work out something reasonable. I really haven't been here long, but it's clear that he cares deeply about this being fun for as many people as possible. Of course not everybody is going to be happy with every decision, but really, it's his league, and he's going to do what he thinks is best.
Hopefully, his relationship with SkiJunkie will help him mold the technology so that he gets a nice happy answer for the vast majority of the people. Anyhow, nobody can say that he didn't solicit feedback or listen to our concerns. |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 04:48 |
|
Is there any problem with keeping the limit enforced in ranked and unenforced in unranked? Seems to me there's two parties here, some who like it and some who don't. Keeping it as it is should make everyone happy.
1) If you like it, you can play in ranked, if you don't you can play in unranked.
2) If you dont always have the conditions for a serious timed game, or if you want a sociable game now and then, keep teams in R and U. Play whichever suits the moment.
3) If you sit down with the intention of being able to play a serious timed game, I think emergencies and the problems mentioned above would be rare enough to not cause any great issues.
I think there's enough people in each camp (or both) to make this work. I also think this would reflect better what ranked and unranked should be. Many of the problems in ranked come up because some people are powergamers/competitive/serious about their bbowl and others are just using it as a sociable way to relax. At the moment, you cant pick what you're opponent is likely to be like and the conflict in personalities often blows up. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 06:35 |
|
seems to me, instead of having ski waste time coding some sort of "fix"....it would be easier to just make the time limit enforced in tournies only, and not in casual ranked play...
seeing as how the poll which you posted, christer, shows 48% of the community wanting that in the first place...
just a thought...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
Shinan
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 07:27 |
|
| Gebannus wrote: | ... or we could have the timer do nothing when you hit 4 minutes unless your opponent repeatedly hits a "Call illegal procedure" button while dancing around his desk.  |
Isn't it also in the rulebook that you can try to argue the call on Illegal Procedures? 8^) |
_________________
"Älä löi, en ole hurrit." |
|
tautology
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 08:09 |
|
While it has been quite rare that I have had turns exceeding 4 minutes, I do think that a few of my most memorable moments in this game would be less so if I had the 4 minute timer there to artificially move past the moment.
I am thinking of a turn or two in the Fumbbl cup quarterfinals or the Dark Elf XFL quarter finals where the board was a mess and the game was hanging in the balance and I enjoyed taking a few moments to chat with my opponents while the 50+ specs booed or cheered or generally cuased a ruckus over the tension of the moment.
I also think of games that I spec'd, where the crowd sent a chorus of cheers that must have been two minutes long after a particular play (thinking of Malthor's game in the last FC).
These are some of the great moments of FUMBBL.
Let's not destroy our ability to sit back and reflect for a moment, and share a thought or two with the crowd or our opponent over the dramatic moments of a big game.
-taut |
|
|
Arcon
Joined: Mar 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 08:10 |
|
| pac wrote: | | Christer wrote: | | It appears that some of you have misinterpreted that as me not caring, which is far from the truth... |
Perhaps I think too kindly of people, but I don't think that it's true that many people hold a poor opinion of you, Christer. I think that this change might have been resolved in a better way, but I don't think many coaches truly doubt your positive goals for this site. |
To this I can only agree.
| Gebannus wrote: | | ... or we could have the timer do nothing when you hit 4 minutes unless your opponent repeatedly hits a "Call illegal procedure" button while dancing around his desk. |
Would be a good idea, but the 4 min rule has nothing to do with illegal procedure, so it wouldn´t be LRB.
| Snorri wrote: | Is there any problem with keeping the limit enforced in ranked and unenforced in unranked? Seems to me there's two parties here, some who like it and some who don't. Keeping it as it is should make everyone happy.
1) If you like it, you can play in ranked, if you don't you can play in unranked.
2) If you dont always have the conditions for a serious timed game, or if you want a sociable game now and then, keep teams in R and U. Play whichever suits the moment.
3) If you sit down with the intention of being able to play a serious timed game, I think emergencies and the problems mentioned above would be rare enough to not cause any great issues.
I think there's enough people in each camp (or both) to make this work. I also think this would reflect better what ranked and unranked should be. Many of the problems in ranked come up because some people are powergamers/competitive/serious about their bbowl and others are just using it as a sociable way to relax. At the moment, you cant pick what you're opponent is likely to be like and the conflict in personalities often blows up. |
There are major differences betwenn R and U. CR, awards, more coache, official tournaments been some. I want to play in R.
What most critics of the implementation do not like is not the 4 min itself, but the fact that the client does not allow to take a pause when out-of-game things happen*. These things are not always timely at the end of my turn. At table-top (for which LRB was written) you will allow your opponent to leave the table any time he wishes and stop playing yourself or stop the clock for his 4 min. So, the clients interpretation of the 4 min rule is that you might lose players actions due to out-of-game occurences, which you really can´t tell me is LRB-wise. So, client as now is not a good LRB enforcing one and thus should not be used in my eyes. Also, as others pointed out, it does reduce in game chat and make it less a nice experience, but more an impersonal power gaming thing.
Ok, you can do reloads etc etc but why going through this when the vast majority of all turns with the client was less then 4 mins? 99% of the games with the client were LRB complient even without this enforcement.
I am not against 4 min turn. Not even against the enforcement. But I just would not like to get into trouble due to RL issues. And, of course, parents are more likely to get interrupted while playing. I will just not start an R game as long as the chance remains that it might leave me frustrated due to this strange 4 min turn enforcement.
* as Christer has summarized in his post. It is not against the 4 min. |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 08:32 |
|
As I said before in the other thread, I love the 4 min rule. Of course it might create some problems when playing from work, but I'll just have to deal with that. I'd say 4 mins is quite enough for a social chatting game. Most people seem to finnish their turns in less than 2 mins, so that would leave 2 mins for chatting per turn too, while you're playing. I suppose the people who mostly would have problems with the 4 min rule, are the kind of players who first think their options through, taking 2-4 mins before even standing up players. I remeber once playing a 3h game, when oppo kept playing 10 to 15 min turns. I mentioned the 4 min rule to him, and he tried to play faster... rolled snake eyes on the first roll, so after that it was back to 10 to 15 min turns... That if anything was annoying.
Besides, 4 mins should be easy on JBB, you're not actually rolling any dice yourself so that does speed the game up quite a lot. And if real life issues sometimes make you miss some of your movements on a particular turn, just think of it as a pitch invasion or a fan throwing a rock  |
|
|
Frankie
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 08:56 |
|
Did everybody forgot about saving the game? If you have some issues then tell it your opponent and continue later. And I don't want to play a game that is interrupted in every fifth minute. Settle to play one when you have time and consider the wishes of your opponent too!
I can't believe there are so many 4+ guys around! It is possible to make the turns in four minutes. And if anybody isn't able to manage it then he's a gamespoiler for me.  |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:06 |
|
| Frankie wrote: | Did everybody forgot about saving the game? If you have some issues then tell it your opponent and continue later. And I don't want to play a game that is interrupted in every fifth minute. Settle to play one when you have time and consider the wishes of your opponent too!
I can't believe there are so many 4+ guys around! It is possible to make the turns in four minutes. And if anybody isn't able to manage it then he's a gamespoiler for me. |
I can take 2 mins turns, and still need one 5 mins turn due to RL issues.
In tabletop you would not call the illegal procedure against me if I'm at the phone, I suppose. Why should you think this is any different? |
_________________
 |
|
Frankie
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:13 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | Frankie wrote: | Did everybody forgot about saving the game? If you have some issues then tell it your opponent and continue later. And I don't want to play a game that is interrupted in every fifth minute. Settle to play one when you have time and consider the wishes of your opponent too!
I can't believe there are so many 4+ guys around! It is possible to make the turns in four minutes. And if anybody isn't able to manage it then he's a gamespoiler for me. |
I can take 2 mins turns, and still need one 5 mins turn due to RL issues.
In tabletop you would not call the illegal procedure against me if I'm at the phone, I suppose. Why should you think this is any different? |
That's what the save is for. You try make sure the game won't be bugged -- save and the beggining of the turn -- and continue efter five minutes. I think it is polite to do it up to three occasions a game, with greater regrets added each time.  But if you (and everybody else in the same shoes) can make turn below 2 minutes then you shouldn't worry about this. |
|
|
Markus
Joined: Aug 26, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:26 |
|
The only player i ran into (apart from new players) that took frequently more than 4 min per turn was dalibor. I liked our games nevertheless as they were thrilling and very well played, at least form him. Otherwise only reallife issues made the games/turns longer.
From my experience there was no need to implement a strict 4 min turn limit in ranked. I think this would make the games longer, as i used to do the short reallife issuse (toilett/coffe/beer...) during my opponents turn. Now i'll do those in my turn after all actions before ending my turn.
LRB 4 compliance is not the best argument for implementing. There would be more pressing issues to be fixed in the client than the turn limit. (pass/handoff actions, sidestep on secondary pushes, apo on stun, ko, optional use of skills (standfirm, dodge)...) The client game is close to bb but not identical.
Saving and reloading is bad in my view. One thing is, its a voluntary disconnect and against the site rules. Reloading frequently results in the multiple ball bug. It makes the game even longer.
Anyway i'll have to give it a try. |
_________________
"When the gods wish to punish us they answer our prayers."- Oscar Wilde
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."- Niels Bohr |
|
Kelharis
Joined: Apr 02, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:39 |
|
I think the people who are adamantly in favor of the 4 min rule are perhaps missing the main point. We all play as quickly as is prudent for us, 99.9% of us complete our turns in less than 2 minutes 99.9% of the time, but there is that .1% of the time where something might come up. In a TT situation, you, as my opponent for example, would see that I always finish my turns quickly, and would allow me that 5-7 minutes on the phone, in the loo, or to have a smoke, becuase every other turn has gone so quickly, it does not noticeably increase the game to have one longer turn.
Perhaps the way to fix this is for each player to have a clock similar to the ones used in speed chess. Each player is allowed 64 minutes on his turn each game. This way, if you have taken 2 minutes per turn for the first 8 turns, then you could easily take a 5-10 minute break in an emergency, and still be under the 4 minute per turn limit.
I know some might be thinking that 128 minutes for a game is WAAAAY too long, and I agree, but honestly, how many players do you play that take 4 minutes EVERY turn?
Also, how fair is it if I finish each of my first 15 turns in less than one minute, only to have an emergency on turn 16 that makes my turn last 5 minutes, and it costs me the game, even though I am less than 1/3 of the total time I could have taken for the entire game?
All we are asking for is the ability to have a "common sense" way to avoid the arbitrary 4 minute rule in case it might be needed. |
|
|
Doowa
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:46 |
|
Sweet Christer,
thx for the summaries. As you know you will always be this cummunity greatest "Hall of Fame" dude, standing high with honor next to SkiJunkie
Hope ya come up with a nice and simple idea for all us whiners, hehe (ps. another vote for the "Call Illegal Procedure" button here )
| Frankie wrote: | | That's what the save is for. You try make sure the game won't be bugged -- save and the beggining of the turn -- and continue efter five minutes. I think it is polite to do it up to three occasions a game, with greater regrets added each time. But if you (and everybody else in the same shoes) can make turn below 2 minutes then you shouldn't worry about this. |
I've thought about it to, but still it's prolly the worst idea. Reloading games is so annoying and sometimes the save file f*ckes up and you have to do it multiple times, so it ends up take much more time then a single 5 mins time out. |
_________________
I play the game of life and have never once lost... |
|
Frankie
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:47 |
|
Well, I did had the misfortune to play against coaches with 4+ turns and those games weren't exactly what I'd call entertaining... The new setting is great to filter these chaps, whom against your only weapon would be to have a shower in your turn, but that's illegal.
There are two groups of coaches who has problems with the new rule I think: those who babysit while playing and those who are really deliberate. The first should reconsider that has he really have the time to play -- some breaks are okay of course -- the second should try to speed up and implement the use of "routine manoeuvres" in game, or move to a non-competitive group i.e. [A] [U].
Also, saving and reloading is not against the rules. And if the game has to be interrupted in every turn, then it's preferable to finish it when the problematic coach really has freetime.
@Doowa, in my experience I have to interrupt about every 8th-10th game for more than five minutes. It is possible to makes those saves safe indeed -- beginning of the turn as I said and you can use the .dat file. But if the illegal procedure option would force the particular treeman for a turnover it is just as good for me. |
Last edited by Frankie on %b %27, %2007 - %09:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 09:48 |
|
Great to hear that, Christer.
cheers!
ps: Is second debate really needed?
I guess everything must have been voiced out already, no? |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
