Turn-based → Real-time switching when players are online

[Thomas Yverdon]

Let’s make it possible to switch from turn-based to real-time during a game when all players are online and agree. This would let players focus on a single table and speed up gameplay when everyone is available.

If you like this idea, please vote

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=217776

[BarnardsStar]

Let’s make it possible to switch from turn-based to real-time during a game when all players are online and agree. This would let players focus on a single table and speed up gameplay when everyone is available.

If you like this idea, please vote

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=217776⁠

But there’s nothing stopping you from effectively playing real time today. If all the players are agreeing to do it, just … take your turn.

I’m also not clear on the “focusing on a single table” bit… you can still take turns on turn-based tables while in a real-time table.

I guess maybe I just don’t understand what problem you are trying to solve.

[Meeplelowda]

Let’s make it possible to switch from turn-based to real-time during a game when all players are online and agree. This would let players focus on a single table and speed up gameplay when everyone is available.

If you like this idea, please vote

https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=217776⁠

But there’s nothing stopping you from effectively playing real time today. If all the players are agreeing to do it, just … take your turn.

I’m also not clear on the “focusing on a single table” bit… you can still take turns on turn-based tables while in a real-time table.

I guess maybe I just don’t understand what problem you are trying to solve.

I understand your point that turn-based games don't enforce a minimum amount of time you must use to take a turn so everyone could just take their turns like they are playing real time. But that's different from everyone knowing that everyone else is going to stick around until the game is over instead of going a couple rounds at real time speed, then someone stepping away unannounced. The OP's suggestion would be a way for everyone to say, "hey, we agreed to a turn-based game, but let's all renegotiate that arrangement and agree to finish this in real time right now." It also would eliminate language barrier issues.

I personally set up all my games with IRL friends on BGA as turn-based games but we agree to meet at a certain time and play them all out in real time, except you have the ability to step away to use the restroom or put something in the microwave, etc., without the clock being an issue the same as if you'd gone over to someone's house. But the difference is I know all these people and know they aren't just going to wander off for the day, so we can keep it turn-based without that risk.

[Thomas Yverdon]

That’s exactly my point. BGA already supports switching from real-time back to turn-based if a game gets interrupted — so why not allow the opposite too?
If all players are online and agree, being able to temporarily switch a turn-based table into real-time would make games smoother and faster, especially when players want to focus on a single table instead of multitasking.
Of course, players can already simply ask each other to stay active at the table — but having an actual built-in mode would be much clearer, more efficient, and would create a proper shared framework and expectation for everyone.
And to avoid any pressure or abuse, the game could simply switch back to turn-based automatically as soon as someone leaves, becomes unavailable, or no longer wants to continue in real-time. No penalties, no forced expulsions, no wasted game.
It feels like a natural extension of an existing feature, with real practical value for players.

[Jellby]

There might be some practical issues. Like how long do you wait for others to agree or not? Imagine this.
1. You propose to turn to real-time
2. 5 minutes pass
3. You get distracted or go to the bathroom or get a phone call...
4. The other player(s) agree(s) and the game switches to real-time
5. You're still gone/busy/distracted
6. Your time runs out and you're expelled

Considering how often real-time tables get aborted before starting because someone who joined is not responding, I'd say this wouldn't be unusual.

[Meeplelowda]

There might be some practical issues. Like how long do you wait for others to agree or not? Imagine this.
1. You propose to turn to real-time
2. 5 minutes pass
3. You get distracted or go to the bathroom or get a phone call...
4. The other player(s) agree(s) and the game switches to real-time
5. You're still gone/busy/distracted
6. Your time runs out and you're expelled

Considering how often real-time tables get aborted before starting because someone who joined is not responding, I'd say this wouldn't be unusual.

And to avoid any pressure or abuse, the game could simply switch back to turn-based automatically as soon as someone leaves, becomes unavailable, or no longer wants to continue in real-time.

[Jellby]

As if the online/offline status had any reliability..

[Thomas Yverdon]

It's not the status, but being here playing.

[Jellby]

How do you know if someone is "here playing", or "here thinking" or "out of the building"?

[Meeplelowda]

How do you know if someone is "here playing", or "here thinking" or "out of the building"?

They are here playing if they are.....PLAYING, i.e., making moves almost immediately after you move. You won't know much longer they will be around, but you can see what they are doing at the time.

Here's a question: for everyone trashing this idea, is it so bad that you would want it REMOVED from BGA if it had already been implemented? If you like things the way they are, then the only thing that would change for you is occasionally having to click "decline" if someone proposed to convert the game to real-time.

I understand if the objection is that you'd rather BGA spend its development resources elsewhere. If so, I agree. But I don't think it's a bad idea. It would just be waaaaay down on my list of priorities.