Got kicked from a tournament because another player skipped someone?

[JohnnyCyclops]

The issue would just be eliminated if skipping wasn't allowable in tournament-games. The maximum length a tournament game can ever be is 15 or 30 days, as they're the longest 2 options available when setting it up - just take away the ability to skip players out of time, and let all tournament games run to the maximum length if necessary.

They may run the full duration but would you have a result?

[Meeplelowda]

The issue would just be eliminated if skipping wasn't allowable in tournament-games. The maximum length a tournament game can ever be is 15 or 30 days, as they're the longest 2 options available when setting it up - just take away the ability to skip players out of time, and let all tournament games run to the maximum length if necessary.

They may run the full duration but would you have a result?

Yes. Those with the most time left on their clocks advance.

[mrdoctor]

The issue would just be eliminated if skipping wasn't allowable in tournament-games. The maximum length a tournament game can ever be is 15 or 30 days, as they're the longest 2 options available when setting it up - just take away the ability to skip players out of time, and let all tournament games run to the maximum length if necessary.

They may run the full duration but would you have a result?

Yes. Those with the most time left on their clocks advance.

Sorting winners by time-remaining is still fairer than the current system where a player who is 3-days into negative-time and clearly going to lose if the game plays out to the end (where there are still 10 days remaining to finish and it can easily be finished still) is able to skip the player who is best-placed to win the game for going 5-minutes into negative-time themselves.

[Meeplelowda]

Sorting winners by time-remaining is still fairer than the current system where a player who is 3-days into negative-time and clearly going to lose if the game plays out to the end (where there are still 10 days remaining to finish and it can easily be finished still) is able to skip the player who is best-placed to win the game for going 5-minutes into negative-time themselves.

It has been proposed that if they don't eliminate expelling altogether in tournaments, at least a person in the negative should lose the ability to expel someone.

[JohnnyCyclops]

Sorting winners by time-remaining is still fairer than the current system where a player who is 3-days into negative-time and clearly going to lose if the game plays out to the end (where there are still 10 days remaining to finish and it can easily be finished still) is able to skip the player who is best-placed to win the game for going 5-minutes into negative-time themselves.

It has been proposed that if they don't eliminate expelling altogether in tournaments, at least a person in the negative should lose the ability to expel someone.

That feels a good suggestion.

[Meeplelowda]

That feels a good suggestion.

It should be called the "glass houses" rule.

[Phoxtrot]

Somewhat Related suggestions (upvote what you want and comment where close enough to the subject to warrant a mention):

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=43968
#43968: "Tournament admins should be allowed to remove players before the tournament starts"
(Removing inactive players at the starts can reduce the risk of players going out of time)

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=35289
#35289: "Stop skipping in multiplayer tournaments"

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=121841
#121841: "Make the framework more flexible as to what happens when someone leaves/quits a game"

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=126622
#126622: "Framework should allow games to define their own tournament scoring (and more)"

[admscotty]

If a tournament game ends due to time... then the game should be replayed by the 3 players which were not out of time. Then the winner advances.

[nik592]

This would slow tournaments down - and what happens if one of those three also times out? Replay with two? I believe the point of fixed time in tournaments is to ensure there's a maximum known length of time between rounds. This kind of idea would play havoc with that.

[RazorOz]

Yes, that suggestion wouldn't work, as then you could see Round 1's last forever in some tournaments, as they'd effectively become 2 rounds. The simplest fix of all is for them to implement longer round clocks, 45, 60 days, some games would appreciate it this a lot. When a round actually goes to time I'm not sure there really is a better solution than it going on time, I'd like to see changes around if it ends early, of play to the finish etc., but if the round actually goes to time you can't really do anything but have the result go on time, as it's very hard to define who is winning before the end at many games.

I generally would avoid tournaments with obvious overly ambitious clocks like the plague, they always end in tears, but I also don't play games that play super fast, so you have to judge it to the game you're playing, how many players per table (as the more players the amount of time goes up, and it's not linear either, as more chance of bad time zone mixes etc.).