| Poll |
| Which turn limit fix would you prefer? |
| 1. Timeout! button |
|
23% |
[ 72 ] |
| 2. Pause button + start of turn blanking |
|
27% |
[ 86 ] |
| 3. Global emergency timer |
|
41% |
[ 129 ] |
| 4. Something else (explained below) |
|
8% |
[ 26 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 313 |
|
phubar
Joined: Jan 17, 2007
|
 Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:06 |
 
|
I voted #3, emergency timer.
I'd actually like to see something along the lines of 15 minutes at the start of the game, you get an extra 5 minutes added at half time (to a max of 15 minutes), but the "emergency timer" kicks in after 3 minutes instead of 4.
Reducing base turn length to 3 minutes would work to speed up the game and keep the turn timer relevant. Players would have to be concerned with how much of the emergency timer they are burning up. I think this would address the issue of the emergency timer making turn limits irrelevant.
Over the course of the whole game, the E-timer would add up to 20 minutes to each team, or 40 minutes at an absolute max. Reducing the base turn limit to 3 minutes gets 32 of those back. And this way coaches would have to keep their average turn length close to 4 minutes.
However, this still raises a serious concern with reloading games - how do you ensure that the remaining minutes on the timer are accurately reloaded? And what about all the time the 2 coaches spend trying to ascertain if the reload is accurate? |
_________________
NBLite - for all those people I've fouled out of the NBL...
oops... just fouled a coach all the way out of FUMBBL... (gosh)-(darn) it! |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:09 |
|
| pac wrote: | | Mob democracy is not a good way to make rules of any sort. |
The worst thing is trying to make a dictatorship seem a democracy (which is the mistake Christer did with his poll, and he's doing again stating he'll implement the rule anyway... and incidentally, I was caught up with it and was wrong when I voiced out my malcontent).
This is no democracy. It's just a firm dictatorship ruled by a very caring dictator, the kind of dictator you don't want to get rid of.
But giving ppl the "feeling" of democracy is just illusion.
So yes, the turn limit WILL be implemented because it's LRB and this is the site policy. And site policy won't change for you, me, whoever. Things that don't work will be fixed over time, and some solutions for those who really hate the competitive setting will be arranged. But time limit will stay.
What for the poll? Nothing 
Is it so bad? No. |
_________________
Last edited by JanMattys on %b %27, %2007 - %18:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:10 |
|
I think the best solution is what is currently in place. Play unranked division if you are vulnerable to distractions.
However, #2 seems good too. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
Astarael
Joined: Aug 14, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:14 |
|
#3 seems the best option. It's what is used in online poker tournaments to allow for things coming up (disconnections, real life emergencies) and works perfectly well. |
_________________
Oh my. |
|
Sziro
Joined: May 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:25 |
|
I see that the rule will stay.. oh duh. From the options present I would take #3 because 1 makes more tension, and 2 is silly.
I gave much thought to this lately, maybe because I don t play till it is resolved somehow, and got an idea. I read about the so called 'Illegal procedure', like not tossing the turn counter. It states, that the opp. will get a reroll. Why not use this? It can be coded in 10 seconds.
Every time someone takes more than 4 min the opp. will get a reroll. He can complete the turn, but his opp. will have higher chance of winning. If it is reasonable, like real life issues and the opp is a good sportsman, then they can forego this by not useing the reroll. It will not give away the match, but punishes the slow player. Fitts perfectly to any tourney.
And even I, hwo think time limit is a horrible thing would welcome this kind of change. Any thought?
Kk |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:25 |
|
#1 is perfect. This is because if someone wants more time, they simply ask.
Meanwhile the truly slow player that this rule is SUPPOSED to effect is effected. Rest assured.... if i am in a game where my opponent legitimately takes more than 4 mins... i am calling him on it. Blacklisting me is the last of my concerns since i don't plan on playing the criminally slow a second time anyway.
It also mimicks face to face BB action in that while the rule is stated in the LRB... there is always a subjective element to its usage. A coach who has to use the bathroom in TT is obviously going to get a break from his opponent. A coach who really takes more the 4 mins has the rule written to back them up.
The emergency timer, as i understand it, seems a little too similar to what we have. Mabey i am not understanding it.... but now a turn has to go 19 mins before the turn ends? At 15 i minutes i am calling the game.
__Synn |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
A few comments:
1. Lag
Network lag is not an issue. It will be handled gracefully. If your computer is slow enough to make the system "lag", then you have worse problems than competetive JBB being disrupted by it.
2. Turn limit or not
Yes, I do want the turn limit. However, I will not force it in if I feel it's counter-productive and flawed. I've stated that the current implementation is less than perfect, but it's still enabled for testing purposes. So far, I haven't been made aware of any bugs in the actual implementation which is a good thing.
3. Option.. um.. #3.
This option would give a flexibility that I like. It would make it possible for me to allow tournaments with different timer rules:
* Normal (4 minutes per turn + 15 minutes extra)
* Chess style (1h per match)
* Speed tourneys (1 minute per turn + 10 minutes extra)
* Hardcore (1 minute per turn, no more!)
This is in addition to the fact that people normally has plenty of time to chat and deal with RL emergencies. I mean, let's face it: If you spend that much time with emergencies in RL, you might be better off walking away from the computer entirely... For competetive play, something on the order of 15 minutes extra should be enough. Mind you, this is 15 minutes _in addition_ to your normal 4 minutes per turn.
Yes, I'm in favour of option #3 because I truly feel it's the most elegant solution to the problem. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Synn, if your opponent's turn 2 is 19 minutes long, he'll only have those 4 minutes per turn for the rest of the match... that's the difference. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:36 |
|
Ahhhhhh..... thanks Big C.
__Synn
**Still like option 1 |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:36 |
|
| Synn wrote: | #1 is perfect. This is because if someone wants more time, they simply ask.
Meanwhile the truly slow player that this rule is SUPPOSED to effect is effected. |
I agree completely! (hmm it's a scary feeling agreeing with Synn)
Not to mention #1 almost HAS to be the easiest to code for Ski... |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:41 |
|
| Christer wrote: | 1. Timeout! button
Has been referred to as Illegal procedure in previous threads. Using another term to not mix it with the real BBowl term of the same name. |
Might I suggest the term "Delay of Game!" as "Timeout" seems to be causing some confusion.. (due to the Timeouts used in American Football, Basketball etc...) |
|
|
Reventlov
Joined: Aug 14, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:44 |
|
Christer - Good work. Your rescent posting is a great step to "solve" this problem.
After some thinking the +15 min pot to be used anywhere is the best option.
If that solution is possible - I would salute you!! |
|
|
phubar
Joined: Jan 17, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:46 |
|
| Christer wrote: | 3. Option.. um.. #3.
This option would give a flexibility that I like. It would make it possible for me to allow tournaments with different timer rules:
* Normal (4 minutes per turn + 15 minutes extra)
* Chess style (1h per match)
* Speed tourneys (1 minute per turn + 10 minutes extra)
* Hardcore (1 minute per turn, no more!) |
Interesting. Could the turn limit structure be enforced for Tournaments that run a specific format? So someone could set up a Hardcore tournament where all games must be played in Hardcore mode? |
_________________
NBLite - for all those people I've fouled out of the NBL...
oops... just fouled a coach all the way out of FUMBBL... (gosh)-(darn) it! |
|
Unstoffe
Joined: Aug 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:52 |
|
| Christer wrote: |
* Chess style (1h per match)
* Speed tourneys (1 minute per turn + 10 minutes extra)
* Hardcore (1 minute per turn, no more!)
|
That does sound very cool
I still wonder about the value of the 'normal' setting. But then the slowest players I've met have been around 3 minutes per turn, pushing 5 on occasion - and they are rare. While I kind of would like to see one of these guys' turn end while they're debating whether to make that last block, I don't really care.
So thinking about it, this actually means, back to the way things were for pretty much every game. OK, I'm sold... |
Last edited by Unstoffe on %b %27, %2007 - %18:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 18:53 |
|
Option 3 is fair in my opinion. Minor things like phone calls and stuff shouldn't exhaust the 15 min counter, and in case people need a 30 min break for something big I honestly think it reaches the point where perhaps a concede or breaking the match to continue it another time becomes the most fair solution.
Depending on the situation I will still consider it a bad attitude if the opponent forces a concede, but this should happen so rarely that I can just take the loss and blacklist (or whatever method chosen to remind yourself to avoid some people) the opponent so that I don't have to deal with him again.
I would still prefer if there would be an option where both coaches can agree to not have any form of time limit though. I don't really see any valid argument against it except that people who specc might get bored, but I don't understand why their will should ever be premiered over the playing coaches. |
|
|
|
|
| |
All Star Bowl!
Search
