Automated tournament - running out of time issue

[IainMcNeil]

Hi Mark62,

it looks like the time ran out in one of our tournamanet games. I assume the other will run out soon too. It's really unfortunate because you seemed to be online only in the evening when I was not around so we couldn't get many turns back and forth.

I find it pretty unsatifying for the game nto to complete but for us to have time remaining before the next round starts.

I'm wondering if we could check who ran out of time fuirst, but not end the game until we are really out of time. So if you run out of time first we can continue to play, but if the game does not complete before the next round is due to start, then it awards the wi. This way we could continue and maybe complete the game in time.

I'm not sure if we can do this technically but does it soudn like a more satisfactory solution for people?

Cheers

Iain

[batesmotel]

Iain,

That certainly sounds like a better way to handle it to me, e.g. the time limit is used as a tie breaker if the game hasn't completed in time for the next round of the tournament.

Chris

[IainMcNeil]

It is open to exploitation as if you start to lose you could not play your turn, but it relies on your knowing the opponent is already out of time which you're never sure about. Using the current system they'd have lost anyway so it doesnt get any worse.

[deeter]

This would certainly be an improvement over the current system.

Deeter

[Mark62]

Hi Iain,
sorry but only now I read your post. You are right, I can play only in the evening. Further more last weekend I could play only a pair of turn. So ... I'm very sorry that in this first game I can't play many turns and probably you don't enjoy so much the current system. Anyway It was nice to have some witty remarks with you during the game

[IainMcNeil]

No problem - it is a beta test and designed to find these type of issues!

[shugyosha]

It is open to exploitation as if you start to lose you could not play your turn, but it relies on your knowing the opponent is already out of time which you're never sure about. Using the current system they'd have lost anyway so it doesnt get any worse.

Instead of limited time for a player there could be limited time for a round with the amount of time needed between turns as tie breaker.

Current system: Both players have 3 days worth of time so the maximum amount of time for round 1 of the tournament is 6 days.

A possible new system: There are 6 days of time for round 1. Players play as normal without personal limited time. After 6 days if a game hasn't been finished the time both players needed is checked.
If it is within reasonable value +/- X hours the game is a draw or both lost and if one player needed much more time he/she automatically loses.

This way a player can be "out of town" for 2 days and still be able to end the game during the other 4 days. People at different time zones might still have a problem but less so than with the current system.

Both systems can be exploited. With the current one a player can time his turns in a way so the other one needs the maximum amount of time and therefore runs out of time. With the proposed new system a player can stop playing if he thinks he used up considerably less time. Still the player needs to keep book of times and due to the "+/-X both draw/lose" clause it can be pulled of only near the 6 day mark.

[stonebraveheart]

Have to add to this, had an excellent tournament up to game 4 were my opponent had buisness abroad and the games turns slowed to near impossible to play I will say from the start i think the player is above board and this was by no means a delaying tactic but because of the pointlessness of playing only a couple of turns I more or less gave up on the game and the tournament at that point after doing reasonably well.

There must be some sort of mecanism that can be put in place to fix this or benifit or penalise players who can and can't make turns a sort of chess timer would be my suggestion with points being lost after the timer moves into a specified point not enough to lose the game on but enough to effectively penalise players who delay their turns.

I would further add I probably won't take part in any more tournaments purely based on the disapointment of the last game of this tournament, but will watch closely and be happy to rejoin if some sort of mecanism is put in place

Chris

[claymore58]

While not an active participant in this tournament I have been following it's progress with some interest. One of the reasons that i didn't sign-up was that i knew that I at no free time and did not wish to annoy my opponents. A little planning and respect of other players goes a long way in reducing time related impacts. This is important for a player based in the "land of Flood & Cyclones" due to time zones. However, despite what my WOW addicted son says, we have real lives that impact on our virtual ones. My view is to assume that everyone wants to do the right thing, but stuff happens. Should they be penalized for this? Perhaps some, as we need to time-box these tournies. So I would say that stonebraveheart's suggestion has some merit.

My 2 bob's worth

Claymore

[pantherboy]

But the system already runs with a timer. Each player has 36 hours to complete their game. So if your opponent is tardy in doing their turns they will lose due to time. I don't see this as an issue as compared to the scoring system and structure of rounds.

[stonebraveheart]

Pantherboy, Hi, I understand that the whole game has a time limit, but as in my last game i got to turn 2 and didn't get another chance to move for nearly 24hrs another set of turns took place and then because of the time difference approx 6 more hours passed at this point in the game i knew no more active turns were going to take place, and basically gave up on the game. I was avalible to play my turns for the first 12 hours of the tournament and then daily and evenings till the end. my opponent played the first turn then was un avalible till he had reached his buisness destination that he was flying to (Again see previous post on real Life).

The 36hrs is fine what i am suggesting is a turn based timer why not use the chess example it has worked for them for enough years

Chris

[IainMcNeil]

We do use the same system as chess. Each player has a time limit. If you run out of time you lose, if you don't you win. This only applies if the game has not concluded in the overall timelimit.

E.g. I use up my half of the time limit - 18 hours and time out. If the game is not completed it assumes my army was routed at the end and gives me 100% losses. I still get the kills I had gained to that point but 100% losses.

If I ran out of time but the game completed before the total time was up then we both get scored normally.

If you have ideas how to make it fairer without allowing end times to slip let us know but this seems to work pretty well in my opinion.

[stonebraveheart]

Sorry i be be being thick here but am only going on what appears to have happended in my game 4 were as described very few turns took place through no fault of mine and i seem to lose a fairly decent position on the tournament board

I appreciate the reply and do not mean to offend but from my point of view this didnt work for me

But again thanks for taking time to reply i think i will stick to the non tournament games on line

Cheers

chris

[IainMcNeil]

Hi Chris

you can only have lost the game if you ran out of time, which means the game spent more time waiting for you to move than your opponent to move. In chess you would have lost too.

I don't really understand what you're suggesting instead?

Cheers

Iain