Players out of time - code of conduct

[Jellby]

You think people who join such a tournament would think it's a good idea to be eliminated the moment someone else goes out of time?

Yes. Or at least they'd agree to play with that option.
Just like there's a tournament setting that forbids expelling players out of time, and people play (or not) with it.
And there are tournaments for 4 players, even though some people would prefer to play with 2 players.
And there are tournaments with X expansion, even though some people prefer to play without it, or with Y expansion instead.

Moreover, the fact that tournaments are broken, defective, or not compatible with option Z doesn't mean option Z should not exist. If anything, it means tournaments should be fixed (or removed), or that option Z should not be available for tournaments.

[tbhp]

You think people who join such a tournament would think it's a good idea to be eliminated the moment someone else goes out of time?

Yes. Or at least they'd agree to play with that option.
Just like there's a tournament setting that forbids expelling players out of time, and people play (or not) with it.

Yeah, it's common for people to not necessarily agree with all the settings of a tournament, but this is something else entirely, as ending a game the moment a player goes out of time (and the subsequent unfair results) would be so at diametrically at odds with any conception of competitive fairness, and there is no reason a tournament organizer would pick that option unless they take some sick pleasure in seeing people get eliminated for no reason.

Also, your general argument is a bit of a cop out and is basically capitalist logic. "People buy it, so it means they support it, so we have no responsibility to try to make it better or more ethical". That's not how anything works, and buying a product is obviously no indicator that the buyer is okay with everything behind it.

[Cile]

Tournaments have their own broken issues with timers that need to be fixed separately. This thread was just about normal 1-off games. If an option is not compatible with tournaments then don't make it an option for tournaments.

[FSKFSK]

My solution is to play multiplayer elimination tournaments. If there's a slow player, they usually time out and get kicked in the first round or two. After that, you have a reasonable expectation that most games will finish. Sometimes you are unlucky eliminated in the first round due to timeout, and then you just wait for the next tournament.

[KenFin1]

How hard is it to just manually kick someone who's being a pain? Why does it need to be automated? I can't understand why that would be a good idea. Plenty of times I've seen people go over for a legitimate reason, sometimes even just a second or two and then the game finishes just fine. It would be completely disproportionate to auto punish people as someone was proposing above. The current option to manually expel is quite sufficient and allows people to prompt/ask in chat what's happening before expelling them.

[Jellby]

How hard is it to just manually kick someone who's being a pain? Why does it need to be automated? I can't understand why that would be a good idea.

Because people are being blamed/harassed for expelling players out of time.
Because people are willing to wait when they're winning but not when they're losing.
Because people are being given extra time, and then they don't give that extra time to others.
Because people are people, and therefore arbitrary.

It should at least be an option when you start a game. You wouldn't have to play with that option if you don't want to.

[tbhp]

How hard is it to just manually kick someone who's being a pain? Why does it need to be automated? I can't understand why that would be a good idea. Plenty of times I've seen people go over for a legitimate reason, sometimes even just a second or two and then the game finishes just fine. It would be completely disproportionate to auto punish people as someone was proposing above. The current option to manually expel is quite sufficient and allows people to prompt/ask in chat what's happening before expelling them.

Yeah, personally, I've never encountered the time out issue myself (although I've seen it happen in other games of tournaments I've been in). However, the number of times someone has run out of time in my games must be in the dozens. If the option suggested above would have been applied to those games, that would have been a ton of games with unfair results. It's just not realistic to want games to end the moment someone runs out of time. There is already a way to make sure all games end at some point, and that's maximum game duration. It does the job well enough.

[FrankJones]

Another aspect of this topic to keep in mind: Adding another settings option ("automatically expel players out of time") will further divide the player pool for all existing games and game-specific settings, increasing the delays in finding games (either turn-based or real time).

I would not see this as an improvement over the current system.

[Cile]

I would not be suggesting it if it wasn't for the fact that every time the topic comes up someone posts a comment like

In a >2 player game, do NOT boot them and ruin everyone's game, coz that makes you the impolite one, to put it very mildly.

For some reason people blame the person who doesn't want to be stuck at a table being played at a slower speed than what they thought they joined, instead of the person running out of time (including time bank) which is why the booting is happening in the first place.

[Godsmurf]

In a >2 player game, do NOT boot them and ruin everyone's game, coz that makes you the impolite one, to put it very mildly.

The time bank is 3 times longer than the turn time. If the table says "2 moves per day" and they haven't taken a turn for 2 days (or more often: taken 20+ hours to make their move for the past several days) I am not the rude one by enforcing the rules of the table.

Yes you very much are, because you are ruining the game of the other players who WERE taking their turns on time. By all means, ask them if they agree to abort the game, but don't just do it without consulting them. That's equivalent to suddenly wiping away all the pieces on a table game because 1 other player annoys you.