why on line gamers are so impatient?

[Trouncing]

Bonjour,
Je réponds en français....
Je pense qu'il faut envisager de retirer des points de réputation au joueurs ou joueuses qui utilisent trop souvent l'éjection pour dépassement de temps.
A BGA de voir comment le gérer, mais pour certain c'est leur moyen de ne pas perdre leur partie. On a toutes et tous eu des impératifs nous empêchant d'accéder à BGA et c'est très frustrant d'être éjecté alors que la partie est avancée et que l'on dépassé les 70% de la partie.
En conclusion, laissez jouer et n'éjecter qu'en cas d'abus. A BGA de réfléchir à modifier les règles

Clumsy Google Translate of my post, English to follow:

Je suis fortement en désaccord. Il est impossible d'"abuser" du bouton "éjecter le joueur", car ce bouton n'est disponible que si un joueur a abusé de son temps de tour. Si un tour dure X minutes, vous disposez d'une banque de temps de 3x pour effectuer votre déplacement. Si quelqu'un vous éjecte à -00:01, vous n'avez pas dépassé d'une seconde votre temps de tour, vous avez utilisé 3 fois votre temps de tour au cours des deux derniers tours. Vous ne jouez pas à la vitesse de la table que vous aviez convenue lors de votre inscription. Il est raisonnable pour un joueur de vouloir terminer la partie plus tôt alors qu’il s’attendait à jouer dans les délais prévus, mais cela ne se produit pas. Il est impossible de savoir s’ils vous ont retiré pour éviter une défaite ou parce que le jeu prenait trop de temps.

Si vous ne voulez pas que les joueurs puissent vous expulser du jeu, la solution est simple : jouez votre tour dans le temps imparti. Si vous voulez que votre adversaire doive attendre encore une minute avant d'être autorisé à vous éjecter, jouez en "Vitesse normale" au lieu de "Vitesse rapide" (une minute supplémentaire de banque de temps) ou en "Vitesse lente" au lieu de "Vitesse normale" ( 1 minute 40 secondes supplémentaires de banque de temps). Les outils existent déjà pour ce qui est demandé, il n'est pas nécessaire d'introduire des « correctifs » maladroits pour qu'un joueur puisse rejoindre une table « rapide » et prendre des tours « normaux ».

Oui, il y a parfois des bugs dans le système ou des problèmes réels apparaissent. C'est là qu'intervient l'option « Proposer d'abandonner collectivement le jeu ». Si cela ne fonctionne pas, alors rien d'autre proposé n'empêchera un joueur de vous éjecter du jeu, il attend juste plus longtemps pour le faire.

English:

I strongly disagree. It is impossible to "abuse" the 'eject player' button, because that button is only available if a player has been abusing their turn time. If a turn is X minutes long, you have a time bank of 3x to make your move. If someone ejects you at -00:01 you are not 1 second over your turn time, you have used up 3 times your turn time over the past couple turns. You are not playing at the speed of the table you agreed to when you joined. It is reasonable for a player to want to end the game early when they were expecting to play in a timely fashion and that is not happening. It is impossible to tell if they removed you to avoid a loss, or because the game was taking too long.

If you don't want players to be able to eject you from the game the solution is simple: Take your turns withing the allotted time. If you want your opponent to have to wait another minute before they are allowed to eject you play on "Normal speed" instead of "fast speed" (an extra minute of Time Bank) or "Slow Speed" instead of "Normal Speed" (an extra 1 minute 40 seconds of Time Bank). The tools already exist for what is being asked for, there is no need to introduce clumsy 'fixes' so that a player can join a "Fast" table and take "Normal" turn lengths.

Yes, sometimes there are bugs in the system or real life issues pop up. That is where the option to "Propose to collectively abandon the game" comes in. If that doesn't work then nothing else proposed is going to stop a player from ejecting you from the game, they are just waiting longer to do so.

Using a feature in a way it has been intended is not abuse. It sure might be unpleasant for a kicked out party, but if I'll come to our brick-and-mortar game club 20 minutes after working hours and find the door locked, is this abuse? I obviously come to play, so why there is no one here?

Waiting for a person who is over time is a good will, not a must or sportsmanship. Show me any single competition where you can show 10 minutes after the official start and still be allowed to participate.

The problem with your suggestion is that it ignores the fact that you share ownership of the premises and one or two of the others want to wait. In this situation the others should be able to hold the door open just as much as you can lock them, no?

Your agruement is solid but commonplace and I disagree with you. Here is why. Other players are at the table and you own neither the website nor the table. The other players deserve just as much of a chance to decide whether their investment into a good game is wasted at the whim of a single impatient participant. It is very possible to determine that a player is skipping to save ELO reputation. There is proof in this very forum topic of players who have seen it. Furthermore, in real time games a player can be actively completing their turn and get impeded or even prevented from continuing the game for all players by an opportunist with a quick connection and a quicker clicker finger. Spamming a button and stopping another player the definition of abuse.

Your concept of the button works for central park 1 minute chess. I suppose the best way to make everyone happy in your opinion would be a vote?

3.) Make "Skip players out of time" a vote.
https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=97445

[ShassDow]

Bonjour,
Je réponds en français....
Je pense qu'il faut envisager de retirer des points de réputation au joueurs ou joueuses qui utilisent trop souvent l'éjection pour dépassement de temps.
A BGA de voir comment le gérer, mais pour certain c'est leur moyen de ne pas perdre leur partie. On a toutes et tous eu des impératifs nous empêchant d'accéder à BGA et c'est très frustrant d'être éjecté alors que la partie est avancée et que l'on dépassé les 70% de la partie.
En conclusion, laissez jouer et n'éjecter qu'en cas d'abus. A BGA de réfléchir à modifier les règles

If you're so often ejected from games then maybe you should consider playing either turn-based games OR only friendly mode ones.

[Cile]

Spamming a button and stopping another player the definition of abuse.

There is already a built in solution to this: If you want players to have to wait an additional minute before they can click the button, then play on Normal speed tables instead of Fast. Problem solved, they have to wait another minute. You're most likely to find the impatient online gamers at the fast tables anyway, so win win.

Most other places for playing games online the system itself will automatically boot you if you exceed your time limit. BGA gives your opponents the option to not have the game immediately end when you have already broken the rules by exceeding your time limit, they are doing you a courtesy by not clicking the button.

The problem with your suggestion is that it ignores the fact that you share ownership of the premises and one or two of the others want to wait. In this situation the others should be able to hold the door open just as much as you can lock them, no?

And if someone else is holding the door open I should be allowed to leave, no? That is my main issue every time I have ejected someone from a table: I don't want to play with this person anymore. They should not be allowed to hold me hostage to their slow play because one other person at the table doesn't care. I am done and actively want to leave the game, and should not be punished for doing so when I am playing within the time limit.

So fine, if you want to propose we "have a vote" and everyone who votes to expel the player gets to leave the table regardless of the outcome of the vote I'm fine with that. I just don't see the need to implement the new code for it to accommodate players who are breaking the rules of the table when a simpler solution already exists: Play at tables you can meet the time requirements for.

[Fuchur]

Hi everybody,

it seems to me that the discussion is an mix-up between the real-time and the turn-wise games. For me the situation is entirely different between these settings and an argument that applies to one of them doesn't necessarily apply to the other.

So please, if you could always say if your argument holds for both or only for RT respectively TW games, the discussion might be much easier.

RT games : (I don't like them and have played, in several years on BGA, only a handful of them.)

TW games : The only valid reason FOR ME to kick someone out of a turn-wise game is that this game blocks one of your game slots and you can't join other interesting games because of this. As long as you can still join other games, one shouldn't (in MY OPINION) bother if someone else is late.

Still in TW games i think that certain fast modi are ridiculous : For instance if you join a 4 moves/day or faster game, you've got to be lucky about the distribution of your time zone relative to the off-times of the other players : For instance, if the player before you makes his move always a few minutes after you have left the site for several hours (going to sleep/work), you will run out of time rather quickly and depend entirely on the good-will of all the others. And there is no way of anticipating this while you join a random table.

Two propositions for TW games which might reduce this risk :
First : Every player should indicate his individuel playing times -- for every TW game he joins his clock is only ticking during this paying time : So you don't wake up only to find out that you had run out of time during your sleep and being kicked.
Naturally this should give a classification of your player-type and an game creation option to exclude players who are too rarely on the site to make their move.
Second : Classify players relative to their kick-behaviour IN TW games : 100 % Hawk -- kicks every player who had run out of time
100 % dove : never kicks a player run out of time
and give an search option for open tables : Only join tables where all the other players have your hawk-status or less.

[Jellby]

For instance if you join a 4 moves/day or faster game, you've got to be lucky about the distribution of your time zone relative to the off-times of the other players

That only apples to 4 moves per day. Faster settings have playing hours that you can set, so you only have 12 hours per day to play and 12 hours when your clock doesn't run.

First : Every player should indicate his individuel playing times -- for every TW game he joins his clock is only ticking during this paying time : So you don't wake up only to find out that you had run out of time during your sleep and being kicked.

As it is now, the playing times (for fast turn-based games) are per table. You can set what you want per table, and you can join the tables you want, whether its playing times match yours or not (up to you if you join a table that expects you to play while you're asleep).

[Cile]

TW games : The only valid reason FOR ME to kick someone out of a turn-wise game is that this game blocks one of your game slots and you can't join other interesting games because of this. As long as you can still join other games, one shouldn't (in MY OPINION) bother if someone else is late.

Then there is no reason for you to play anything other than 'Friendly' (no turn limit) or '1 turn every 2 days' if you want ranking.

For me, I do not like having more than 1 table of the same game going. It's easy to lose track of which table it is, and start going for end game objectives the other table has, or expecting abilities to trigger that I don't have at this table.

I have joined a table for a game I want to play at the speed I want to play at. If an opponent can't play at that speed I will eject them so I can join a table that plays at the speed I am looking for.

Still in TW games i think that certain fast modi are ridiculous : For instance if you join a 4 moves/day or faster game, you've got to be lucky about the distribution of your time zone relative to the off-times of the other players : For instance, if the player before you makes his move always a few minutes after you have left the site for several hours (going to sleep/work), you will run out of time rather quickly and depend entirely on the good-will of all the others. And there is no way of anticipating this while you join a random table.

Don't join a table with a speed you consider ridiculous. If you can reasonably expect to check the table every 4-6 hours during the day it doesn't matter if it becomes your turn just after you log off, your time bank will be fine. If you can't, then those tables are not for you, join one with longer turn times.

[Trouncing]

Spamming a button and stopping another player the definition of abuse.

There is already a built in solution to this: If you want players to have to wait an additional minute before they can click the button, then play on Normal speed tables instead of Fast. Problem solved, they have to wait another minute. You're most likely to find the impatient online gamers at the fast tables anyway, so win win.

Most other places for playing games online the system itself will automatically boot you if you exceed your time limit. BGA gives your opponents the option to not have the game immediately end when you have already broken the rules by exceeding your time limit, they are doing you a courtesy by not clicking the button.

The problem with your suggestion is that it ignores the fact that you share ownership of the premises and one or two of the others want to wait. In this situation the others should be able to hold the door open just as much as you can lock them, no?

And if someone else is holding the door open I should be allowed to leave, no? That is my main issue every time I have ejected someone from a table: I don't want to play with this person anymore. They should not be allowed to hold me hostage to their slow play because one other person at the table doesn't care. I am done and actively want to leave the game, and should not be punished for doing so when I am playing within the time limit.

So fine, if you want to propose we "have a vote" and everyone who votes to expel the player gets to leave the table regardless of the outcome of the vote I'm fine with that. I just don't see the need to implement the new code for it to accommodate players who are breaking the rules of the table when a simpler solution already exists: Play at tables you can meet the time requirements for.

If someone who was about to win the game is holding the door open and the other player is walking in you should definitely be able to walk out. Should the remaining players be forced to play with you again if they disagree with your decision?

4.) Add a category to red thumb called "out of time abuse".
https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=97446

[Cile]

Should the remaining players be forced to play with you again if they disagree with your decision?

Nope, and currently they aren't. If Player 1 ejects Player 2 from the table for running out of time, then players 3 and 4 are free to finish the game without player 2, or leave the game without penalty and red thumb player 1 as "personal opinion" so they don't have to play with them again.

Any of the proposals I've seen to prevent Player 2 from being removed from the game for exceeding their time limit is forcing Player 1 to keep playing with someone they don't want to play with.

[Fuchur]

TW games : The only valid reason FOR ME to kick someone out of a turn-wise game is that this game blocks one of your game slots and you can't join other interesting games because of this. As long as you can still join other games, one shouldn't (in MY OPINION) bother if someone else is late.

Then there is no reason for you to play anything other than 'Friendly' (no turn limit) or '1 turn every 2 days' if you want ranking.

The only reason for joining "fast" games is that no others are proposed and that these tables fill up to quickly to look at specifiques like time-zones.

I don't understand the "Then" ? As I join BGA each day, 1 turn/day games shouldn't be a problem ?

For me, I do not like having more than 1 table of the same game going. It's easy to lose track of which table it is, and start going for end game objectives the other table has, or expecting abilities to trigger that I don't have at this table.

I understand this remark (and i do the same for "complicated" games where i am still in the learning phase).

I have joined a table for a game I want to play at the speed I want to play at. If an opponent can't play at that speed I will eject them so I can join a table that plays at the speed I am looking for.

Still in TW games i think that certain fast modi are ridiculous : For instance if you join a 4 moves/day or faster game, you've got to be lucky about the distribution of your time zone relative to the off-times of the other players : For instance, if the player before you makes his move always a few minutes after you have left the site for several hours (going to sleep/work), you will run out of time rather quickly and depend entirely on the good-will of all the others. And there is no way of anticipating this while you join a random table.

Don't join a table with a speed you consider ridiculous. If you can reasonably expect to check the table every 4-6 hours during the day it doesn't matter if it becomes your turn just after you log off, your time bank will be fine. If you can't, then those tables are not for you, join one with longer turn times.

What do you mean by "during the day" ? Do I have the right to stay in bed for more than 4 hours ? Should I bring my laptop (+ personal internet connection) to work to be able to make some moves during lunch break ?

[Cile]

Do I have the right to stay in bed for more than 4 hours ? Should I bring my laptop (+ personal internet connection) to work to be able to make some moves during lunch break ?

You should not play at those tables if it's a concern for you.

I don't understand what you're arguing for here. Are you saying those tables shouldn't exist? I'm sure plenty of users are able to play at those tables and not exceed their turn time. Not every game setting needs to be for you, and that's okay.