Karma is a major problem and too easy to fix.

[Remkar]

We need bigger karma hits and/or it needs to be WAY harder to gain back.

The easiest simple fix would be to cap how much karma can be gained back in a 24 hours period. Maybe cap at +5 or less karma in a 24 hour period as a start?

Right now, people not taking their turns in a timely manner or quitting is not discouraged by the karma system as they barely get a slap on the wrist, which just encourages the behavior and majorly brings down the quality of the whole site.

I'm tired of playing with people with 100 karma that can't keep up, then get booted and ruin the game, only to check and see that they have lots of missed turns and boots in the past month, but they easily keep working back to 100 with a bunch of quick real time games that mask how poor they actually are at keeping up.

[MrBeardy]

Are you setting your game option to fast? Which game are you having trouble with? Some games need thinking time. If people are taking too long is this because you're playing in a slow game with people of less experience etc? There's a lot more to this than your suggestion implies. Try playing a game with a screaming baby in the room and you'll see a marked drop in your play rate. The time allowances are generally there for a reason. I've had frustrating games but equally have had games where I've needed time to think. The balance is about right I think provided you select fast games with good players or higher for games you know well.

[Remkar]

I'm talking almost exclusively about turn based games, but I don't necessarily feel like it should be significantly different for real time.

When my life situation doesn't allow for 99% certainty of handling a real time game in the allotted time, I won't play. And if I do, and that 1% bad occurrence comes up, I'll take a harsh penalty and deal with it.

[Tisaac]

Are you setting your game option to fast? Which game are you having trouble with? Some games need thinking time. If people are taking too long is this because you're playing in a slow game with people of less experience etc? There's a lot more to this than your suggestion implies. Try playing a game with a screaming baby in the room and you'll see a marked drop in your play rate. The time allowances are generally there for a reason. I've had frustrating games but equally have had games where I've needed time to think. The balance is about right I think provided you select fast games with good players or higher for games you know well.

That's not the really the topic of OP. Players might have good reason or not to go overtime, but OP think it's too easy to gain back Karma after a loss, which makes it easier for players to abuse the system and not commit to the time setting they agree to play on since you can easily recover by playing couple of "Can't stop" games in a few minutes.
I tend to agree with OP on that topic, but I would propose a different perspective : have some "stricter" setting for a table as an option, which would imply a bigger loss of Karma if someone would go overtime. People joining such tables would be aware of that and hence more prone to commit to the table.

[MrBeardy]

If someone goes overtime on a turnbased game you can kick them. Turnbased by their nature are disjointed in play so it bothers me far less how long someone takes in them. It depends on what your expectations are I guess.

Karma can be quickly regained on a first offence but multiple offences in a short space of time multiply the Karma loss so this bigger hit people are suggesting already happens. More karma is quickly lost so repeat quitters rapidly plummet below 50%. At that point a lot of people block them from joining games and they start to lose chat privileges too.

I've seen someone drop to 15% in a week when they went on holiday to find the promised WiFi didn't exist. Their turnbased games kicked them and they are still not even back to 50% after two weeks and are still unable to chat in games. We're having great fun teasing them in the chat at the moment.

[Remkar]

re: just being able to kick someone...
Sure. But that ruins the game. What I think we really need is a way for people that play consistently quickly to find games with each other. I don't play a lot of games in a week (usually keep about 5-6 multi-day games going at a time, and play some solo Pandemic), and I always set my games at 85+ karma, and I still had around a half dozen games where people ran out their timer. I never WANT to boot someone, and I always give the benefit of the doubt, but I don't want to play games that take multiple weeks to get there. That's not fun for me, which is why I set game speed to fast (usually 12, sometimes 24 turns per day). If a person consistently can't keep up in the first 2 days, I'll boot. And I've done that at least 3 times this week, I believe. But that means that my attempt to play a single, full game of Wingspan, has failed. I was hoping to be on my 2nd or 3rd game by now, but I have yet to complete one. And in my current game, someone already hit their timer limit around the end of round 1, and has been behind since then. I'm trudging through, but it's less fun.

I think the overarching problem is that we have a ceiling effect with karma. Meaning that karma DOES mean something at very low levels, but because it is easy to gain back (if you want to), people in the 85-100 range (and even people being at or right near 100) doesn't really tell me anything. Pretty much every person that consistently hits their timer with me IS at 100 already. And when I check their history (I use that to determine how quickly I boot or how much extra time I give before booting), they usually have double digit missed timer hits and at least a couple boots in their recent history. Those people shouldn't be at 100.

I can see multiple ways to deal with it.
-Harsher penalties (or game setups with harsher penalties, like Tisaac wrote).
-More difficulty in gaining back karma (i.e., capping gain per day).
-Having part of a karma hit be longer lasting. For instance, if you take a karma hit, only half of that can be gained back in a week.
-Having a "super karma" rating. 100+/100*, for people with 1 or less time violations in the last month, and being able to set up games with that as a criteria.

I used to play a lot more on here with random people, but in recent months, I mostly play with people I've already met. BUT, I run into the same old experience when I try new games. Seems to take me 5+ tries and a couple of weeks to find 2-3 other random people that will actually play at the speed I pick and finish a game in a reasonable amount of time.

I also see others complaining (in game and on the forums), so I'm just trying to figure out a possible solution to present for a vote. Was hoping to brainstorm on this thread and get feedback.

[MrBeardy]

why shouldn't those people be at 100%? Some games need thinking time. E.g. PI or Break the Code where it's a case of "get it right or lose the game" when the other player has initiated the final round. Running over timer isn't always a sin. You can't say oh that person went overtime so they're a problem. Maybe that person was playing a game with their friend and the baby started screaming so they agreed to take 15 mins and reconvene. Sure they'd get a timer mark, but it does noone any harm and your mechanic is they should be penalised?

Seems to me like some people want a rigourous fast player only option with no timeouts. Maybe you'll be successful in finding people to use this option. For me the current balance is just fine and far more, what's the word, reasonable? Tolerant? Idk but I read your posts and while I can think of games where I've suffered laggy frustrating players, I don't think your proposal will make BGA a better place overall.

[Remkar]

I think you are REALLY misunderstanding. If you want lots of thinking time, play 1 turn/2 day games. Don't join my 12 turns per day game.

There are LOTS of options for how fast to play. Choose the one that suits you, and then stay in the time limit. Not enough time for you to think? Then choose a slower time limit. Real time games too fast? Play turn based.

Why should people who play at the speed that is clearly defined at the start of the game be forced to accommodate slower players. Slower players CAN PLAY IN SLOWER GAMES. If a slower player joins a faster game and can't keep up, they should be "punished" to help them learn that they are in the wrong speed and/or get "marked" (which is what karma is for, right?) so players who play the correct pace can easily avoid them.

I honestly don't really understand your arguments. If your problem is people needing more time to think in real-time games, then maybe make a separate suggestion to have an "extra slow" mode for real time.

BUT, I (and I think many others) still want a way to figure out who can't keep up with the set speeds.

[MrBeardy]

so you say

"Real time games too fast? Play turn based."

but you're complaining about turn based?

I could say the same back that I really don't get your complaint either. If you want real time speed play real time. You're complaining about people taking their time in turn based games? That's what turn based is for.

The suggestion was made to penalise people who go over timer but there is a big difference between going over once at a critical move and going over repeatedly. Whoever made the suggestion is being far too blanket in their approach to not differentiate between the two. As I've said previously I think the current system is the better option than making it too draconian which will put off new joiners overall IMO.

[Remkar]

I'd be completely fine with different karma options for real time vs. turn-based. I just don't know if that's too complicated (both for people to understand and for the site to want to implement).

But, regardless, this site lets you set up for a MAX time per turn. If you have to think (even for one move) longer than that, then you're playing the wrong speed. The system intentionally lets you accrue back up to that max time by playing at a reasonable speed. This is all built in already. I rarely have played Through the Ages in real time, because I know I will want at least a half dozen turns where I want to think for more than the max time. So I don't play it in real time. Because I'd either be booted, or I'd drag down the game for other people. So I play fast turn based.

I only brought up real time because you did. I don't play real time very often (probably well less than 5% of my games on here), so I'd be fine listening to other people's opinions on real time games and karma. My only point was, if you don't have time to think in a real-time game, you can play a slower real-time game, or a turn-based game if even that is too slow (or suggest an even slower pace).

I personally can't usually play real-time games for games that take more than 30 minutes, as I know there is a reasonable chance I get called away. I can play 30 turns in a day, but not all within an hour span. But it shouldn't matter WHY one would choose a certain game speed, just that we should have a way to play with people that want to play at the same speed. Slow people get almost no real penalty that they can't easily overcome, and fast people can't avoid the slow people. I'm open to other thoughts on how to fix this, like I said, I'm just brainstorming here. And I know that simpler solutions are more likely to get implemented, so it seemed like increasing karma hits and/or capping karma gain per day would be reasonably simple to code into the site, and an easy to understand way to accomplish this. You claim there's no problem, but you seem to be a mostly real time player with LOTS of games that you miss your time on, so of course the system is working fine for you.