why on line gamers are so impatient?

[Cile]

This isn't true. You can meet the winning condtions w/ game being at 99.999% completion. Someone can quit before you finish your turn and you can receive no elo (by no I mean under 0.something)

https://boardgamearena.com/faq?anchor=f ... notplaying :

If the player seems to be away, we advise you to wait a few minutes: this player may be experiencing some network problems or have left temporarily. If the player does not come back, and their clock has become negative, then you may kick this player out of the game. The effects of kicking a player out are the following:

This player will get a 'leave' reputation penalty (see 'Reputation/Karma' for more details).
This player will lose the same ELO points as if they were the loser (last place) of this game, minus an additional -10 ELO.
Whatever happens in the game afterwards, all the other players will be considered tied in first place for ELO, and will receive a % of the ELO corresponding to the % of progression of the game at the moment the player was kicked out. Example: if 80% of the game has been played, the remaining players will receive 80% of the ELO they would have won.
All following turns from this player will be skipped.

If the game is 99% complete and a player receives almost no ELO then the ELO scores between the players was so large they would have received almost no ELO if the game went to completion.

If the system has to be changed in some way (it doesn't) I would propose harsher penalties for players running out of time, such as higher karma loss, and restrictions in creating/joining tables for a period of time regardless of if a player kicks them. If players were less indifferent about "dipping into the red" Player 2 would not have the opportunity to boot them and "rob" Player 1 of the victory.

I care more about me being credited for my win than punishing someone. Maybe overall the topic at hand wouldn't occur as much but it still doesn't fix the problem of player 1 not getting a victory. Would bga be willing to make the penalty severe enough to see a change? It is now 10% first offense and 20% after. Would making it 50% for first time help? I could also see people coming here to complain explaining how they had a busy day yesterday and now their karma is at 0%.

My issue here is twofold:
1) Player 3 is the one creating the situation that allows Player 2 to end the game early to avoid the loss.
2) BGA is putting it on the players to "punish" the players going over time by kicking them, forcing them to preemptively end the game to do so. This causes users to blame the player for enforcing the rules instead of the player breaking the rules. A player running out of time is inconvenient to the other players at the table, but might not be inconvenient enough for them to end a game they are invested in.

I would propose players should be given a 5-10% karma penalty every time they "dip into the red" on their turn, regardless of if another player ejects them. Make it clear that running out of time is causing the penalty, not running out of enough time that one of the other players get fed up.

[ChiefPointThief]

This isn't true. You can meet the winning condtions w/ game being at 99.999% completion. Someone can quit before you finish your turn and you can receive no elo (by no I mean under 0.something)

https://boardgamearena.com/faq?anchor=f ... notplaying :

If the player seems to be away, we advise you to wait a few minutes: this player may be experiencing some network problems or have left temporarily. If the player does not come back, and their clock has become negative, then you may kick this player out of the game. The effects of kicking a player out are the following:

This player will get a 'leave' reputation penalty (see 'Reputation/Karma' for more details).
This player will lose the same ELO points as if they were the loser (last place) of this game, minus an additional -10 ELO.
Whatever happens in the game afterwards, all the other players will be considered tied in first place for ELO, and will receive a % of the ELO corresponding to the % of progression of the game at the moment the player was kicked out. Example: if 80% of the game has been played, the remaining players will receive 80% of the ELO they would have won.
All following turns from this player will be skipped.

If the game is 99% complete and a player receives almost no ELO then the ELO scores between the players was so large they would have received almost no ELO if the game went to completion.

I looked at my game history. I have 4p games that I played 80% of and only received 1 elo. We were all fairly close in elo in the 100s. Normally I would get a min 20pts for winning games like this. This doesn't appear to be the issue here but some games don't properly reflect game progression anyway. For instance, I am in a terra mystica game now that is at the end of round 5/6 but it shows 50%. There are also pregame moves.

[Joëlle_]

Yeah, impatient when they loose.

[BattleBott]

Let me explain better if an action makes me perform a second one, time should be added.

Game ended, and the Scoring board popped up. Ran out of time while having to scroll up in order to hit X (exit scoring board) to get the score board off the screen, then having to hit another button to officially end my turn (game). I never look at the timer. only time I get freaked out about time is when the warning sound comes on. I wish (do to lag) I could set the warning timer, giving myself more notice/time.

Yeah, impatient when they lose.

or losing. far too many players just up and quit the game when they think they are losing.

[ChiefPointThief]

How do you propose to solve the problem that is Player 2 cheating Player 1 out of a win? Let them get away with it?

I don't propose anything different from the system already in place. Player 1 still gets credited with a win and gains ELO. If the game is 95% completed they only lose out of 5% of ELO, and frankly I don't care about ELO.

This is a game that I just played. It says in final notes that game ended at 88%. I received 0.87 elo. I would’ve got about 9 elo for a victory. Final turn. I met the winning conditions and there was nothing that could be done. Player 2 who was losing and booted player 3 to prevent a loss got 35 elo. This is just wrong. Also I guess I jinxed myself because this has happened to me twice at 4 moves per day since I made my last comment

* Moderator edit: the Forums should not be used to call out specific players or tables but for a general discussion.

[buu441]

Reading throw the comments, it is honestly amazing and mind boggling how the blame somehow falls on the person who kicks a slow player and not the one playing slowly.

[fiscused]

It depends on the situation. If you like games you should hate having to quit a game in progress. No matter if you think you will win or lose. In some instances a player is playing slowly the entire game. In other instances a player might be playing fine then suddenly have a delay, such as getting disconnected. In a long game, taking over 60 min, it does annoy me when someone is booted without being given at least 5 min to make their turn. Things out of control of the player do happen. In a short game some people are playing with a time limit, so they can't wait.

I always try to turn the game to turn-based, because I want to finish all games I start.

[Fuchur]

Reading throw the comments, it is honestly amazing and mind boggling how the blame somehow falls on the person who kicks a slow player and not the one playing slowly.

It depends on the situation.

I've just encountered this in a tournament (AZUL) : One player (who had probably a bad time zone) was slightly in the red (about 4 hours) and that since 2 weeks maybe -- so everybody had a lot of time to decide whether to kick him or to let the game go to a naturel end.

Entering the last round the player who was going to eat a lot of tokens, causing him to lose more than 10 points, decided to kick the late player.

So yes, in this situation i entirely blame the "kicker" for destroying the game, just to avoid him losing the game.

[buu441]

Okay buddy.

[Aviela]

Reading throw the comments, it is honestly amazing and mind boggling how the blame somehow falls on the person who kicks a slow player and not the one playing slowly.

It depends on the situation.

I've just encountered this in a tournament (AZUL) : One player (who had probably a bad time zone) was slightly in the red (about 4 hours) and that since 2 weeks maybe -- so everybody had a lot of time to decide whether to kick him or to let the game go to a naturel end.

Entering the last round the player who was going to eat a lot of tokens, causing him to lose more than 10 points, decided to kick the late player.

So yes, in this situation i entirely blame the "kicker" for destroying the game, just to avoid him losing the game.

Based on what you said, I have to agree. The person who decided to kick them was in the wrong. Again, this is only based on what you said.

I have not had an issue with live games; however, I have chosen to skip a players turn and basically end the game. 4 + Days in the red was getting frustrating and I'd rather just end it than sit and hope for their return. I do a lot of turn-based games because I have a hectic schedule, but 99.9% of the time I am making a move before my time is up. I had a small issue with internet connectivity while on vacation, but didn't go beyond 4 hours in the red.