Stalling Abuse in Terraforming Mars

[FrankJones]

OP is a new BGA player and didn't know you can kick the other player when they are in the red?

If you are in a game you are not enjoying, and the other player is in negative time, you can kick them out and (thereby) ending the game. The player in negative time will get a karma hit.
This is a more immediate action than reporting the other player (no need for moderators to get involved).
Additionally, you can give the other player a red thumb, which will ensure you will not have to play with that player again.

Also, if you want the game to end, but do not want to give the other player a penalty, you can "collectively abandon the game". The other player will automatically "agree" if that player's clock is in the red.

This is the "good sportsmanship" option if the game is very early and the outcome could go either way. If the game is near the end and you are clearly going to win, it is reasonable and understandable to expel the player and take the win you earned.

(You are always within your rights to expel an out-of-time player, even if it is turn 1 or if it is end-game and you are clearly going to lose; though one or both of these might be viewed as unsportsmanlike.)

[Ceaseless]

OP is a new BGA player and didn't know you can kick the other player when they are in the red?

If you are in a game you are not enjoying, and the other player is in negative time, you can kick them out and (thereby) ending the game. The player in negative time will get a karma hit.
This is a more immediate action than reporting the other player (no need for moderators to get involved).
Additionally, you can give the other player a red thumb, which will ensure you will not have to play with that player again.

Also, if you want the game to end, but do not want to give the other player a penalty, you can "collectively abandon the game". The other player will automatically "agree" if that player's clock is in the red.

This is the "good sportsmanship" option if the game is very early and the outcome could go either way. If the game is near the end and you are clearly going to win, it is reasonable and understandable to expel the player and take the win you earned.

(You are always within your rights to expel an out-of-time player, even if it is turn 1 or if it is end-game and you are clearly going to lose; though one or both of these might be viewed as unsportsmanlike.)

Kicking someone is the other "good sportsmanship" option, as it adds information to help other players see if this player is regularly going over time in a problematic way in their tables. Giving your opponent the penalty can help keep them honest so they do it less often vs other players in the future as well.

You are always within your rights to let a game go on, though letting the opponent drag out an unpleasant timed-out game on your table might be seen as unsportsmanlike, as you are hiding this information from everyone else and rewarding stalling.

[FrankJones]

True, especially if the player is making little effort to fix the problem and get back in the black and stay there with the clock. If someone goes over, once, by one minute, and then never does it again, that's a lot easier to shrug off than someone who does it several times or goes way past the allowed time.

[tbhp]

OP is a new BGA player and didn't know you can kick the other player when they are in the red?

If you are in a game you are not enjoying, and the other player is in negative time, you can kick them out and (thereby) ending the game. The player in negative time will get a karma hit.
This is a more immediate action than reporting the other player (no need for moderators to get involved).
Additionally, you can give the other player a red thumb, which will ensure you will not have to play with that player again.

Also, if you want the game to end, but do not want to give the other player a penalty, you can "collectively abandon the game". The other player will automatically "agree" if that player's clock is in the red.

This is the "good sportsmanship" option if the game is very early and the outcome could go either way. If the game is near the end and you are clearly going to win, it is reasonable and understandable to expel the player and take the win you earned.

(You are always within your rights to expel an out-of-time player, even if it is turn 1 or if it is end-game and you are clearly going to lose; though one or both of these might be viewed as unsportsmanlike.)

Kicking someone is the other "good sportsmanship" option, as it adds information to help other players see if this player is regularly going over time in a problematic way in their tables. Giving your opponent the penalty can help keep them honest so they do it less often vs other players in the future as well.

You are always within your rights to let a game go on, though letting the opponent drag out an unpleasant timed-out game on your table might be seen as unsportsmanlike, as you are hiding this information from everyone else and rewarding stalling.

Telling other people who to avoid because they are time wasters is not more important than ensuring the most fair result of the game is achieved.

The ideal would be to let the game end normally, but still report the player in some way. In other words, result fairness and bad behavior are two distinct issues that should be handled separately (which is the flaw of the kick out function, as it seems to conflate the two).

[Ceaseless]

Also, if you want the game to end, but do not want to give the other player a penalty, you can "collectively abandon the game". The other player will automatically "agree" if that player's clock is in the red.

This is the "good sportsmanship" option if the game is very early and the outcome could go either way. If the game is near the end and you are clearly going to win, it is reasonable and understandable to expel the player and take the win you earned.

(You are always within your rights to expel an out-of-time player, even if it is turn 1 or if it is end-game and you are clearly going to lose; though one or both of these might be viewed as unsportsmanlike.)

Kicking someone is the other "good sportsmanship" option, as it adds information to help other players see if this player is regularly going over time in a problematic way in their tables. Giving your opponent the penalty can help keep them honest so they do it less often vs other players in the future as well.

You are always within your rights to let a game go on, though letting the opponent drag out an unpleasant timed-out game on your table might be seen as unsportsmanlike, as you are hiding this information from everyone else and rewarding stalling.

Telling other people who to avoid because they are time wasters is not more important than ensuring the most fair result of the game is achieved.

The ideal would be to let the game end normally, but still report the player in some way. In other words, result fairness and bad behavior are two distinct issues that should be handled separately (which is the flaw of the kick out function, as it seems to conflate the two).

Loss by timeout is a normal way for a game to end. BGA is a bit abnormal is not automatically lossing the player for timeout, but since the option is offered, it's for their opponent to determine the appropriate action and take it. Though BGA not having a timeout loss without a reputation penalty is interesting.

[tbhp]

Loss by timeout is a normal way for a game to end. BGA is a bit abnormal is not automatically lossing the player for timeout, but since the option is offered, it's for their opponent to determine the appropriate action and take it. Though BGA not having a timeout loss without a reputation penalty is interesting.

I think all timeouts should come with penalties, but not all penalties should be losses. We should be able to want to play a game to completion with someone without the system conveniently omitting that they went out of time and therefore should be penalized.

I think they did something wrong, but that doesn't mean I think I should be handed a win that I don't think I deserve. It's weird that the system seems to conflate the two.

[FrankJones]

I agree with ... everyone.

I think running out of time should be penalized, but in a way that doesn't adversely affect other things. An additional Elo penalty, to me, makes no sense. That compromises the integrity of the Elo system.

I also agree that players should make every effort to NOT run out of time, and should not complain if they do and something bad happens. 99% of the time, it can be avoided. Probably.

I go to great effort to make sure I do not get clock violations. I already used all 4 vacation jokers this year. I don't get any more until 2027. Other people just don't care as much about it. Well, that frustrates me.

Additionally, I dislike getting a "win" I didn't earn, and I dislike someone taking a "loss" that was undeserved.

Example: A real time game is literally over on the next move. Player A cannot possibly lose, no matter what happens. it is 100% a win for player B. All player A needs to do is click the mouse one more time. And, player A has an emergency or internet failure or whatever.

Player B, recognizing the game has been decided and has lost, could graciously just click the "concede" button. That is what I would do. Golden Rule. Easy choice for me. Or, I could apply the rule of, "What would I do if I knew this person, or if this person were here in the room with me?" 99% of internet arguments could probably be avoided if people applied these "rules".

Ultimately, it is up to each person to decide what is fair, right, honest, or proper, and that will differ from person to person.

It's very easy to avoid clock violations. Play turn-based. Play friendly mode. Play with the slowest clock settings (real time or turn-based).

Players who do NOT utilize those methods probably understand inherently that they must accept that clock violations might occur, and that they must accept the consequences.

[CoseDaMatti98]

If you are in a game you are not enjoying, and the other player is in negative time, you can kick them out and (thereby) ending the game. The player in negative time will get a karma hit.

Not really, when you do an action and then you undo an action it will reset the 20seconds timer that you have to wait in order to kick the person out

[Meeplelowda]

If you are in a game you are not enjoying, and the other player is in negative time, you can kick them out and (thereby) ending the game. The player in negative time will get a karma hit.

Not really, when you do an action and then you undo an action it will reset the 20seconds timer that you have to wait in order to kick the person out

Doesn't this release note take care of this issue?

Release 1st September 2022 220901-1000
delay to expel player now decreases from 20s to 0s, if this is still the turn of the overtime player (see viewtopic.php?t=26701 )

The thread it links to talks about abuse of the undo move feature in some games which was addressed by adding a sliding adjustment that decreases the time it takes to expel you.

Here's a more detailed description of the fix from that thread:

Fix we found:

First expel warning is 20 seconds. Second is 10s. Then 5s, 2s, 1s, and finally no warning at all (immediate expulsion).

Each time the turn of the player is really finished (= another player must play), this goes back to 20s.

Thus, any player who tries to build a "loop" will finally be expelled.

[FYI, sourisdudesert is a co-founder of BGA, although he has since left the company.]

So if the cooldown time isn't getting smaller with each undo, that's a bug that should be raised.