No Time Limit shouldn't mean Training Mode

[Meeplelowda]

Playing in no time limit mode allows us to socialize and enjoy each other's company without the stress of a time clock.

If you are socializing and enjoying each other's company, then it sounds like you are playing real time and likely finish your games on the day you start them. In this case using turn-based mode set to 1 move every 2 days will still let you do that. If someone is stressed by a clock that will not run out until two days after the game is over, then I'll recommend they explore meditation techniques.

I know there are others who say they *need* a time period longer than one move every two days. This is not addressed to you. Keep fighting the good fight.

Then there are those who would not be satisfied if the turn-based time period were one move every year. For them, I have no words.

[Windrisen]

This decision is very disappointing to me, personally. For many of my friends, not having to worry about being gone for more than two days is a nice luxury.

I understand the decision to change this, but I do see a lot of protests, and in the end, games that have no turns for X weeks get terminated anyway.

I suspect that game time out happens automatically, with no intervention necessary, so that doesn't seem like it would add load to the developers.

Pages of users (some probably premium users) have expressed their dissatisfaction with this decision, and while there are a few customers who have defended the decision, the reality is that those of us who chose to "only play with friends", and who chose "no time limit", are being impacted by this decision.

For myself, I worry about things like what if something happened where a friend of mine (or me) and simply couldn't make it back in by the two day deadline, for any number of reasons. We lost power here during a hurricane for 4 days. We might have lost cell phone coverage, too, but we didn't so it was possible to play, if we *had* to. But I didn't worry too much about it because I knew my games were set up as "no time limit".

Yes, I see the site managers saying "that's our decision, and it is final, and you all need to just get used to it". Which isn't exactly appealing to a service based customer experience.

If there is no negative consequence for "only playing with friends" and "with no time limit", and games get terminated at 5 weeks or so anyway, why not leave it in place? I'm on the 8th page of these comments, and just went to set up some new games with friends, saw I couldn't set "no time limit", and canceled the games instead.

Now I have to think about if I want to play any more games, when a hurricane/blizzard/snowstorm might hit, and I might be offline for more than two days, and this system is in place.

The answer appears to be - your friends won't kick you out - but honestly, why should that be the answer?

I don't really understand why the decision was made, and I'm unhappy about it.

[znajder]

• ... a very good alternative is to play with the slowest speed (1 move every 2 days), and even with that, if some player is over allotted time, you can ignore this and do not expel him/her.

As outlined by several people in this thread already, this ISN"T a "very good" alternative.

Even with all the UI aspects set aside (that is, "I'm stressed by the timer", "I don't like having the expell button showing"), there is a very real side effect of a player running over time. They get a time penalty marker showing in the stats of their profile.

This can negatively impact their ability to get people to join their public table they set up at a later time. I (and others with me) check player profiles before joining long games (especially when low or no Karma restriction set), and avoid joining games with players who have a lot of time penalties, as it can be _very_ frustrating to play a game with someone who constantly runs over time. Because even with the option to expel a player, the game is ruined.

If people who normally _always_ make their moves on time when playing timed games, are now forced to accumulate time penalties to play a slow paced game with friends, there will be no reliable way to differentiate between a player who will be a total pain to play with and a player who will be making all their moves on time.

[Philoupino]

So again:

• I, like many others here, really like all your efforts to make this site as good as possible

• I, like many others here, really get the point of the changes by now. No need to reiterate them all the time

• I, like many others here, just don't agree that it's fair to say 'just use the slowest setting and it's no problem if you go over time, you are playing with people on your friends list, so they won't kick you'. Time systems are there for a reason, people shouldn't be forced to go over time if they want to play slow but still with something competitive like ELO. Moreover, if you state that people actually got trapped in no time limit games, even with friends, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't also happen that those 'friends' actually do kick you out for going over time

That's brilliant!

Of course we value and appreciate the awesome and impressive job made by the developers and admins!
But erasing a feature that many people use peacefully just because some people use it badly is the same thing as banning highways because some people drive crazily
Besides that, I don't understand the concept of 'being trapped in a game', because every game where nothing happened for ≈30 days is automatically cancelled, so you can't be trapped in a game forever... am I wrong?
And as mentioned above by T72on1, I don't see any reason why a bad "friend" wouldn't kick you out of a game the same way he would wait forever not to lose the game... So this change doesn't really solve the problem of 'bad behaviors' IMHO, but it removes something that is used by honest players...

So... is there any chance it could be reimplemented?
OR... could a new option like "1 move every 10 days" be available?

[znajder]

The No time limit with friends is the perfect way to play with friends you rely on, with an ELO scoring to keep some challenge, and with several games at the same time of the same game, which is not possible in Training mode.

There is no difference between what you are describing and playing with 1 move per 2 days and simply refusing to kick anyone who is out of time.

Of course there's a difference! If a player runs out of time, they get a Time Penalty marker showing in their profile, and if you end up with too many of those, people may be less likely to join public tables you set up, because many players prefer to not play with people who are known to not make their moves on time. And this would happen despite them always making their moves on time in regular games.

The No time limit with friends is the perfect way to play with friends you rely on, with an ELO scoring to keep some challenge, and with several games at the same time of the same game, which is not possible in Training mode.

The only possible use of no time limit games with Elo is for a player to abuse it by refusing to finish games they are losing. This is a substantial improvement to the service by gradually eliminating an option which exists to be abused.

"The only possible use"... Wow... are you serious? How about the exact thing it was designed for, to be able to play turn based games without a time constraint, where you wont end up with a penalty in any form, if you end up not making a move for a week or so. That's a pretty valid usage.

And if you seriously think the main usage of this mode is to "abuse it by refusing to finish games they are losing", could you explain who would go into games with that type of player again and again to make this possible? This is/was a game mode that was limited to your friends. I would imagine most people would stop playing with a "friend" who is systematically discontinuing games when losing. So I strongly doubt that this was systematically abused the way you claim.

Just because this change of game configuration didn't affect YOUR preferred ways of playing on BGA, doesn't mean this isn't a real issue.

[6element]

As a side note, I understand people's desire to play with friends with a specific time limit or no limit at all, and a desire to have some kind of ranking. What is important to keep in mind - this ranking is private-group-of-friends-ELO, it only shows who is stronger in this particular group and has nothing to do with "general" ELO. Treating it under any circumstances the same way as general ELO is totally unfair.

[nik592]

As a side note, I understand people's desire to play with friends with a specific time limit or no limit at all, and a desire to have some kind of ranking. What is important to keep in mind - this ranking is private-group-of-friends-ELO, it only shows who is stronger in this particular group and has nothing to do with "general" ELO. Treating it under any circumstances the same way as general ELO is totally unfair.

I disagree with this - when I play with friends, I was playing no time limit with ELO. But I play a lot of non-friend games with regular time limits, probably more than I play with my friends.

If I only play with my friends, and never with anyone outside, my ELO shouldn't matter to anyone else anyway (cause I'm not playing with them). If I'm playing outside of my friend group, then my ELO is just as valid as anyone else's.

[GeraldineMerida]

If you run out of time but no one expels you, it will appear as an "event" in your reputation tab, but with no penalty whatsoever. If you get a karma hit it's because someone has expelled you.

While the clock can be hidden, avoiding the sense of pressure of going over time, and there is no direct penalty for going over time with friends, one thing that has not been considered in the 'you can just play turn-based and ignore the clock' arguments is that there IS a knock-on effect for racking up a number of run-over games.

In play with non-friends and especially tournament play when someone goes over time, a lot of players (as they have stated in multiple forum threads) will look at someone's history to decide whether to kick a timed-out player or be patient. If they have a history of timing out in other games, far less allowance is made.

And the kind of player who cares about ELO in friendly games seems to me to be quite likely to want to play competitively in tournaments sometimes too.

[kunde]

I also don't like the change. Mainly playing with friends and I don't want them pressured by the time limit. Yet, we ELO to compare ourselves.

[cigma]

When you play 1 move per 2 days, then your maximum of time on the clock is 6 days.

I would like to understand better how this works.

Is this applied automatically when you have exceeded the time? I have read somewhere else that you can specify 4 days as vacation, so I wonder if you have to announce it in advance.

And does this mean you have these +4 days starting new in every game? Or is it - like a vacation - 4 days in a year in total?