I have noticed something odd about turn-based play.
On another site I use, there is little or no clock pressure, yet games often move faster. On Board Game Arena, players sometimes seem to use as much of the clock as they can.
My own way of thinking about async games is different. When I join one, I am taking on something I mean to tend each day. I will keep every game moving at least once a day, and often two or more times when work and sleep allow it.
That is also why I am careful when choosing a pace on BGA. I choose one I know I can meet. A faster clock may fit my normal play, but I could easily end up matched with players in another time zone and so have to contend with my clock counting down during sleep and work.
I learned that the hard way in an Arena tournament, when I had to get up in the middle of the night to avoid running out of time and being expelled. I am ordinarily a prompt player, yet the clock penalized me.
I do not want real-time play. I like turn-based games. What I want is a better signal for the people who mean to keep their sessions moving each day without clocking their sleep and work.
One thought is keeping a cadence rating based on how people actually play.
A player would set one start time each day marking the start of a fixed eight-hour block, and the cadence-rating clock only ticks down inside that window.
Over time, their usual pace could fall into bands such as Rapid, Prompt, Steady, Leisurely, or Unhurried.* Those would not be marks of merit. Some people may quite happily be Unhurried because that is an honest picture of how they like to play.
Hosts who care about pace could then choose the minimum cadence for tables they open.
This would be almost the reverse of the current setup. BGA now asks you to commit to a pace before you have played, then punishes you if life gets in the way. A cadence rating simply describes the pace you have shown over time.
If you get sick, have a bad weekend, or miss a turn, you are not slapped on the wrist or expelled from a game. That turn is simply folded into your history, and its effect fades as normal play resumes.
I am mostly trying to get at the idea rather than claim this exact setup is the answer. Does this seem like a useful way to match people who want brisk async games without turning them into real-time games?
* As a rough starting point: Rapid, under 1 measured hour; Prompt, under 2; Steady, under 4; Leisurely, under 8; and Unhurried, 8 hours or more. The measure would use a player’s rolling median, not an average, so the odd bad day would have little effect.
On another site I use, there is little or no clock pressure, yet games often move faster. On Board Game Arena, players sometimes seem to use as much of the clock as they can.
My own way of thinking about async games is different. When I join one, I am taking on something I mean to tend each day. I will keep every game moving at least once a day, and often two or more times when work and sleep allow it.
That is also why I am careful when choosing a pace on BGA. I choose one I know I can meet. A faster clock may fit my normal play, but I could easily end up matched with players in another time zone and so have to contend with my clock counting down during sleep and work.
I learned that the hard way in an Arena tournament, when I had to get up in the middle of the night to avoid running out of time and being expelled. I am ordinarily a prompt player, yet the clock penalized me.
I do not want real-time play. I like turn-based games. What I want is a better signal for the people who mean to keep their sessions moving each day without clocking their sleep and work.
One thought is keeping a cadence rating based on how people actually play.
A player would set one start time each day marking the start of a fixed eight-hour block, and the cadence-rating clock only ticks down inside that window.
Over time, their usual pace could fall into bands such as Rapid, Prompt, Steady, Leisurely, or Unhurried.* Those would not be marks of merit. Some people may quite happily be Unhurried because that is an honest picture of how they like to play.
Hosts who care about pace could then choose the minimum cadence for tables they open.
This would be almost the reverse of the current setup. BGA now asks you to commit to a pace before you have played, then punishes you if life gets in the way. A cadence rating simply describes the pace you have shown over time.
If you get sick, have a bad weekend, or miss a turn, you are not slapped on the wrist or expelled from a game. That turn is simply folded into your history, and its effect fades as normal play resumes.
I am mostly trying to get at the idea rather than claim this exact setup is the answer. Does this seem like a useful way to match people who want brisk async games without turning them into real-time games?
* As a rough starting point: Rapid, under 1 measured hour; Prompt, under 2; Steady, under 4; Leisurely, under 8; and Unhurried, 8 hours or more. The measure would use a player’s rolling median, not an average, so the odd bad day would have little effect.
