Skipping players (why is this allowed?)

[Lettuce03]

My opponent in a recent 1v1 Terraforming Mars game skipped me on the last turn. The game was over, I had passed, my opponent had no more moves to make other than pass, and I was ahead by a substantial amount of VP. Instead of passing and ending the game, my opponent skips me. I was at -1 hour at the time. Admittedly, I had been at minus hours since the very beginning because I had not realized the game settings were for an entirely different time zone than mine. But if that was an issue, my opponent could have skipped me on turn 2 instead of waiting for the final round. What a joke. Finished venting.

[Jellby]

So you lost since the very beginning. Your opponent enjoyed playing the game, but they didn't enjoy handing over a victory to you.

[RobertBr]

You lost, the opponent won. It is that simple.

A lot of people have legitimate issues with the way timers work in multi-player games (which are quite hard to resolve) but in a 2 player game clocking your opponent is as legitimate a win as any other winning move. In this case it sounds like your opponent was actually quite generous to you, giving you the opportunity to spot and fix your misplay (which you could have done*) before finally claiming the win they were entitled to.

In terms of why it is allowed. It is because it is an entirely normal practice in competitive games, and was so even before online gaming. If you do not like timers (which is fine as a subjective preference) the site allows you to play without them by changing to 'friendly' mode.

* the correct 'move' in this case was to play a holiday joker, which would have put your time back in the green. If you did not know about this you will find it by clicking on the meeple symbol then going to view current tables, then looking to the top right.

[Lettuce03]

You lost, the opponent won. It is that simple.

A lot of people have legitimate issues with the way timers work in multi-player games (which are quite hard to resolve) but in a 2 player game clocking your opponent is as legitimate a win as any other winning move. In this case it sounds like your opponent was actually quite generous to you, giving you the opportunity to spot and fix your misplay (which you could have done*) before finally claiming the win they were entitled to.

In terms of why it is allowed. It is because it is an entirely normal practice in competitive games, and was so even before online gaming. If you do not like timers (which is fine as a subjective preference) the site allows you to play without them by changing to 'friendly' mode.

* the correct 'move' in this case was to play a holiday joker, which would have put your time back in the green. If you did not know about this you will find it by clicking on the meeple symbol then going to view current tables, then looking to the top right.

Thanks for the advice on the holiday joker, I was not aware of that option. But my concern in this case was my opponent creating an expectation that my tardiness was OK by allowing the game to proceed. To then skip me on the final turn obviously created an inconsistent and frustrating experience for me and it was somewhat a waste of time. Personally, I have only skipped people that were multiple days late. A couple of hours has never been an issue for me, particularly in a game that takes up to 2 weeks to complete anyway. I certainly wouldn't call out the technicality of tardiness on the very last turn.

[Shivaware]

My opponent in a recent 1v1 Terraforming Mars game skipped me on the last turn. The game was over, I had passed, my opponent had no more moves to make other than pass, and I was ahead by a substantial amount of VP. Instead of passing and ending the game, my opponent skips me. I was at -1 hour at the time. Admittedly, I had been at minus hours since the very beginning because I had not realized the game settings were for an entirely different time zone than mine. But if that was an issue, my opponent could have skipped me on turn 2 instead of waiting for the final round. What a joke. Finished venting.

When you look at the replay log of a finished game, there is a graph at the end that shows the remaining time for all players throughout the game. There is also a checkbox that displays these times at various steps in the log.

Looking at this graph for the game in question, the first time you ran out of time was at move 206 (although the graph mistakenly indicates you still had a little time left), and then you were able to get your time positive again for a while. You go negative again at move 357 and again recover for a while. Finally you drop below 0 at move 437 and stay there until your opponent skips you at move 497.

This is, unfortunately, a depressingly common outcome of fast turn-based games where someone will join a game with inappropriate playing hours and eventually run out of time. It sounds like you are aware of the issue and will avoid that mistake in the future. BGA could also help by making it harder for this to happen. For example, if players indicate they are flexible on time using the newer lobby on the game's page, they can be added to games with any playing hours. In the older lobby using the Play Now link at the top of the page, you can configure automatic matchmaking to only accept playing hours that make sense for you.

[FrankJones]

This is a very silly system.

If a player runs out of time in a system that uses only a turn-based timer and not a total-game timer, there's a very logical way to do this:
When a player runs out of time, the opponent(s) should be given the option:

"Your opponent has run out of time. You have three options:
1) Forfeit your opponent, ending the game and awarding / penalizing the appropriate Elo, or
2) Offer to cancel the game with no penalty.
3) Granting the opponent a Mulligan, which restores the player's turn timer to the starting timer amount. It will not be possible to later forfeit that same player unless that player runs out of time again, at which time you will again be presented with the same three options."


Is it within the rules for the player to allow the game to continue, to try to actually win, and then forfeit the opponent not literally the final turn? Yes, it is within the rules. But just because we MAY do something does not mean we SHOULD. That is an unsportsmanlike way to handle the situation.

That being said, I am not sure I understand running out of time on a turn-based game. How short can the turn timer be in turn-based? (I have never played turn-based and have no desire to; but I am curious.)

[Jellby]

Is it within the rules for the player to allow the game to continue, to try to actually win, and then forfeit the opponent not literally the final turn? Yes, it is within the rules. But just because we MAY do something does not mean we SHOULD. That is an unsportsmanlike way to handle the situation.

If you put yourself in a vulnerable position (i.e., run out of time), the opponent may or may not take advantage of it, at any time, as long as you're still in such a vulnerable position. It's no different to any other move in the game.

[Lettuce03]

When you look at the replay log of a finished game, there is a graph at the end that shows the remaining time for all players throughout the game. There is also a checkbox that displays these times at various steps in the log.

Looking at this graph for the game in question, the first time you ran out of time was at move 206 (although the graph mistakenly indicates you still had a little time left), and then you were able to get your time positive again for a while. You go negative again at move 357 and again recover for a while. Finally you drop below 0 at move 437 and stay there until your opponent skips you at move 497.

This is, unfortunately, a depressingly common outcome of fast turn-based games where someone will join a game with inappropriate playing hours and eventually run out of time. It sounds like you are aware of the issue and will avoid that mistake in the future. BGA could also help by making it harder for this to happen. For example, if players indicate they are flexible on time using the newer lobby on the game's page, they can be added to games with any playing hours. In the older lobby using the Play Now link at the top of the page, you can configure automatic matchmaking to only accept playing hours that make sense for you.

You're right - looks like I misremembered when I dropped into minus. It must have been that I was close to dropping into minus the whole game and that gave me the impression that I was, even though it wasn't actually the case until the final third of the game. But I am still unhappy with being skipped on the final turn when ending the turn normally would have concluded the game equally fast anyway. Skipping me on move 437 would have been preferable. Still petty, but preferable.

[Strode]

This is a very silly system.

If a player runs out of time in a system that uses only a turn-based timer and not a total-game timer, there's a very logical way to do this:
When a player runs out of time, the opponent(s) should be given the option:

"Your opponent has run out of time. You have three options:
1) Forfeit your opponent, ending the game and awarding / penalizing the appropriate Elo, or
2) Offer to cancel the game with no penalty.
2) Granting the opponent a Mulligan, which restores the player's turn timer to the starting timer amount. It will not be possible to later forfeit that same player unless that player runs out of time again, at which time you will again be presented with the same three options."

I kind of like this mulligan idea.

[Jellby]

But I am still unhappy with being skipped on the final turn when ending the turn normally would have concluded the game equally fast anyway.

Yes, but then your opponent would have lost You made a "mistake" and are asking your opponent to ignore it? Your opponent was probably considering two factors:
1. Play the game to the end. So they didn't abandon or concede.
2. Win the game. So they didn't let you win when they could do it.

You can imagine all kinds of other dark and obnoxious motives in their actions, and they probably did the same with yours.

PS. I understand you thought your opponent was OK with your being a bit (or a lot) slower, and then felt betrayed. But if that was not explicitly agreed or discussed, it was only your impression. Note that, being turn-based, it may be that they expelled you the first time they noticed you were over time while they were logged in and checking.