Did you meet unfair players ? I did 2 times in a row, and it drove me nuts

[buu441]

Gotta love how people think they are the victim after breaking rules that they agreed to play with (:

Vous avez tort, complètement tort. La limite de temps n'est PAS une règle au sens propre du terme.

Si c'était une règle, elle serait AUTOMATIQUEMENT appliquée sans intervention des joueurs, et basta ! (voir les deux ou trois posts précédents)

Au contraire, ceux qui ont conçu ce site ont choisi de laisser aux joueur le choix de la manière d'appliquer cette "règle".

Il y a donc des enragés ou des mauvais perdants qui l'utilisent abusivement. Et d'autres, dont je fais partie mais je suis loin d'être le seul, qui choisissent parfois de laisser le chronomètre filer parce qu'on joue entre gens de bonne compagnie.

Et puis c'est tout, que ça plaise ou non.


You are wrong, completely wrong. The time limit is NOT a rule in the true sense of the word.

If it were a rule, it would be AUTOMATICALLY applied without player intervention, and basta! (see the previous two or three posts).

On the contrary, those who designed this site chose to let the players choose how to apply this "rule".

So there are some madmen and bad losers who abuse it. And others - myself included, but I'm far from the only one - who sometimes choose to let the timer run down because we're playing in good company.

And that's it, like it or no

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

Lol. So confident and yet so wrong <3

[Cile]

The reason the system does not automatically boot players for exceeding time is because some users would rather allow their opponent to exceed the turn limit in order to play the game to completion. When the other players do not boot you from the table for going into the red they are doing you a favour, it is neither expected nor an obligation which is why you don't see people agreeing with you in this thread.

The risk would be for players I dont know to make the game lag without solution to get them speed up. That's why i play Friendly mode with friends only.

So, just to make sure I am understanding what you're arguing here: Nobody should be allowed to speed you along by enforcing the turn clock. Also, you require a way to speed other people along. This is starting to sound a lot like "Rules for thee, not for me."

Can we both agree there is some point where it would be reasonable to eject you from the game? Surely if you are an hour into the red it would have been long past acceptable? What about 5 minutes? You had a total of 10 minutes of thinking time in that game so 5 minutes sounds more than reasonable to me.

If you had played at a medium speed table instead of a fast speed table, the total amount of thinking time allotted to you by the time you were booted would have been about 16 minutes instead of 10. So what is the functional difference between requiring the clock to be 5 minutes in the red before booting, and playing a game speed that gives you 5 minutes more time before it goes red?

Your time per turn was +9 seconds. If you were over by 22-23 seconds that is nearly three times the turn timer. Play at medium speed tables and this can't happen to you.

[RobertBr]

The reason the system does not automatically boot players for exceeding time is because some users would rather allow their opponent to exceed the turn limit in order to play the game to completion.

Also because the result in a multiplayer game does not work well and no solution for that has been found. But yeah, its clear from the last couple of threads that Hagardunor is not engaging with any of the actual genuine issues and instead wants to complain about the rules they agreed to play under.

[Hagardunor]

It is enforced automatically that you can expel.

The rule is not that a player that runs out of time is expelled, the rule is that a player that runs out of time can be expelled.

If you are playing chess, and you can make a move that causes checkmate, you are not forced to make that move.

The problem is different.

At the origin of the thread is an abusive use of the right to boot you out when allowed time is exceeded.

Most of the time players I meet use it very carefully. For the game that triggered the present discussion it was used at the very second the time was over, in order not to loose the game.
Although this is allowed, it is some unwritten rule that fair players dont act this way and again a massive majority of players I have met do.

The issue raised here is when fair players meet unfair one that doesnt care. Both do not play the same rules and this is the source of unenending arguments.

What I am calling for is a way to make sure that at the beginning of a game, all partners play with the same rule, or if you prefer with the same interpretation of the rule

In former exchanges of this thread someone advocated an AUTOMATIC boot once the time is over, and I tink this could be an answer to what I am calling for.

The only addition to an AUTOMATIC boot I would suggest is an optional switch off of the automatic boot for players who ALL agree to play fairly (in the sense that they would use it for good reasons, in any case not for winning the game)

[Jellby]

At the origin of the thread is an abusive use of the right to boot you out when allowed time is exceeded.

There's no such abusive use (except maybe when constant expulsion attempts prevent you from actually finishing your turn).

Although this is allowed, it is some unwritten rule that fair players dont act this way

You choose to make it an unwritten rule. It's not written, it's not a rule. Some player may act like that (not expel when it's their right) due to many different reasons, that doesn't make it a rule.

The issue raised here is when fair players meet unfair one

There's no fair or unfair. Some players choose to make use of an option they have, others expect them not to.

What I am calling for is a way to make sure that at the beginning of a game, all partners play with the same rule, or if you prefer with the same interpretation of the rule

You want to have a timer, but agree on not using it? You could write it in the table description ("old" lobby), but many people don't read or even see it. Or create a group of friends that agree to play like that

(in the sense that they would use it for good reasons, in any case not for winning the game)

I call winning the game a fairly good reason (this is, after all, a gaming site, with no lives or money at stake). When is it fair to expel someone? How far into the negative do they need to be? Who decides when is too soon and when is enough? What if the player keeps saying "sorry, I just need another minute"?

[Hagardunor]

You can switch off the ability for players to boot, that's called Friendly mode.

The risk would be for players I dont know to make the game lag without solution to get them speed up.

I am very confused. You want automatic booting to happen but you want the option to turn it off but still have time limits in games where booting is not automatic? Is that not just non-Friendly mode now? As in, the mode you are currently complaining is unfair and you don't like?

The problem is not the current mode. The problem is that not all players interpret the rule the same way. The biggest problem is that some players use it as a mean not to loose a game, whereas most other dont.

I can understand that when you play arena : when you play a game in the arena you are perfectly aware that it is a competition and time limit is part of it.

But outside arena I do not consider being in a competition whereas some others do (I would like to know what they are competing for)

So I am calling for automatic boot out to make things perfectly clear if needed. And i call for a possibility to switch it off meaning that all players around the table implicitely acknowledge not using it abusively. Because current rule allow to close the game in evident situations where waiting is of no use (connection lost for a long time, no answer to requests for playing one's turn, etc...)

What i call for is not completely crazy : there has been a recent update in CATAN settings to resolve exactly the same kind of rules intepretation differences.

Until recently, there was an unwritten law called "friendly robber" that says not to use the robber to someone until he owns at least 3 houses. Some players followed this unwritten rule whereas other did not. Those who use it where evidently disadvantaged.

Now you can have a setting "friendly robber" which is optional and guarantee that all players use the same rules.

What I ask for about time limit management follows exactly the same philosophy

[Hagardunor]

In fact, I think making booting automatic is a good solution. I would of course not blame the platform to be unfair as the contract would be perfectly clear.

The contract is perfectly clear. If you exceed your time limit, your opponent is entitled to boot you from the game. It's the same as any other "if you do x, your opponent may do y" rule. In some games, if your opponent discards a card, you may pick it up and add it to your hand. You don't have to, but the choice to do so is still part of the rules.

Did you ever play with someone who has connection problems ? It happens very often as far as I am concerned.

Do you take advantage of someone having connection problems, especially when you are not in the arena?

I don't. I let the clock run enough time to make sure that the problem has very little chance to be solved in a reasonable delay (I have waited a few minutes once), and many many players I played with do the same. I have an extraordinary example of it.

What your statement means is that you consider being entitled to.

Do we agree that it is unfair ?

Don't you think that the developers probably gave you the choice not to boot out somebody exceeding time limit to handle such situations ?

If yes, don't you think that players that take advantage of the time limit rule abusively are distracting the option from its true goal ?

That's why I say that the contract is not clear presently. And that's why I think the rule should stayed the same, but just change the implementation to prevent any misunderstanding between players about the way they use it

[Jellby]

I can understand that when you play arena : when you play a game in the arena you are perfectly aware that it is a competition and time limit is part of it.

When you're not playing Arena, it's also competitive and there are time limits. If you want a friendly, non-competitive, no-time-limits... that's the friendly mode.

[Hagardunor]

The reason the system does not automatically boot players for exceeding time is because some users would rather allow their opponent to exceed the turn limit in order to play the game to completion. When the other players do not boot you from the table for going into the red they are doing you a favour, it is neither expected nor an obligation which is why you don't see people agreeing with you in this thread.

The risk would be for players I dont know to make the game lag without solution to get them speed up. That's why i play Friendly mode with friends only.

So, just to make sure I am understanding what you're arguing here: Nobody should be allowed to speed you along by enforcing the turn clock. Also, you require a way to speed other people along. This is starting to sound a lot like "Rules for thee, not for me."

Can we both agree there is some point where it would be reasonable to eject you from the game? Surely if you are an hour into the red it would have been long past acceptable? What about 5 minutes? You had a total of 10 minutes of thinking time in that game so 5 minutes sounds more than reasonable to me.

If you had played at a medium speed table instead of a fast speed table, the total amount of thinking time allotted to you by the time you were booted would have been about 16 minutes instead of 10. So what is the functional difference between requiring the clock to be 5 minutes in the red before booting, and playing a game speed that gives you 5 minutes more time before it goes red?

Your time per turn was +9 seconds. If you were over by 22-23 seconds that is nearly three times the turn timer. Play at medium speed tables and this can't happen to you.

I don't know how to go back to the game to get the information to answer properly to your question.

What I would have appreciated would have been some kind of preliminary warning before using the nuclear bomb

What is sure is that my partner was also surprised by the move, and according to his comments i think it also disapproved it. He did not warn me of excessive time delay as well.

Regarding your comment "Rules for thee, not for me", this is not the case. I still consider being booted for exceding time limit apply for me as for anybody. But what I want to be sure is if it will be applied mercyless (fine for me in competition), or if players agree to play it in a fairly way : that means not as a mean to win the game without noticing it first for example. Again, a large majority of players i have encountered thus far play that way. Unfortunately not that last one who is most probably an exception.

Being expelled at the very last move without notice, I dont call it fair.

[Hagardunor]

At the origin of the thread is an abusive use of the right to boot you out when allowed time is exceeded.

There's no such abusive use (except maybe when constant expulsion attempts prevent you from actually finishing your turn).

Although this is allowed, it is some unwritten rule that fair players dont act this way

You choose to make it an unwritten rule. It's not written, it's not a rule. Some player may act like that (not expel when it's their right) due to many different reasons, that doesn't make it a rule.

The issue raised here is when fair players meet unfair one

There's no fair or unfair. Some players choose to make use of an option they have, others expect them not to.

What I am calling for is a way to make sure that at the beginning of a game, all partners play with the same rule, or if you prefer with the same interpretation of the rule

You want to have a timer, but agree on not using it? You could write it in the table description ("old" lobby), but many people don't read or even see it. Or create a group of friends that agree to play like that

(in the sense that they would use it for good reasons, in any case not for winning the game)

I call winning the game a fairly good reason (this is, after all, a gaming site, with no lives or money at stake). When is it fair to expel someone? How far into the negative do they need to be? Who decides when is too soon and when is enough? What if the player keeps saying "sorry, I just need another minute"?

To make a long story short :

• except in the arena or tournaments, is BGA a competition platform ?

• if not, do we play as in real life or not ?