Is it a reasonable expectation

[Deltron]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

[FabledIntegral]

Then give them a 3 for attendence. They have 24 hours to take their turn - if you want to play faster games pay up.

[wacicha]

it is a 24 hour time period to take your turn. It is a pain as a freemium member I know. But that is how the powers get us. I was freemium for about a day back in 2006. It is not something I want to be again.

[jiminski]

I was freemium for about a day back in 2006. It is not something I want to be again.

ahhh we were all so young then!

[detlef]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

In short, no is not. It is a reasonable expectation that they will make their turn in the required 24 hours or have their deployment deferred to the end of their next turn. Nothing more, nothing less.

For a mere $2 per month, you can join speed games and avoid this.

[Deltron]

You haven't convinced me it isn't a reasonable expectation. I played nearly 15 1v1 freestyle games where I played frequently and my opponent did. This is what I expected out of freestyle when I started and was happily rewarded. I'm not sure why anyone else would expect different. Now, games have ground to a halt. If I wanted 24 hrs between turns, I would have picked sequential games. Please don't try to sell me on the rules and the fact that it is a 24 hour limit, expectations != letter of law. I might get around to premium, but I'm not exactly interested in 5 minute games.

[FabledIntegral]

You haven't convinced me it isn't a reasonable expectation. I played nearly 15 1v1 freestyle games where I played frequently and my opponent did. This is what I expected out of freestyle when I started and was happily rewarded. I'm not sure why anyone else would expect different. Now, games have ground to a halt. If I wanted 24 hrs between turns, I would have picked sequential games. Please don't try to sell me on the rules and the fact that it is a 24 hour limit, expectations != letter of law. I might get around to premium, but I'm not exactly interested in 5 minute games.

People who set up casual games set them up for a reason - they are not prepared to play a speed game. Therefore, if you are not going to play a speed game, shut up, stop complaining, and play casual.

[lord voldemort]

you dont need my input heaps but ot say being premium is best hting you could do...and players can take there turn whenever they feel like within the 24 hours

[detlef]

You haven't convinced me it isn't a reasonable expectation. I played nearly 15 1v1 freestyle games where I played frequently and my opponent did. This is what I expected out of freestyle when I started and was happily rewarded. I'm not sure why anyone else would expect different. Now, games have ground to a halt. If I wanted 24 hrs between turns, I would have picked sequential games. Please don't try to sell me on the rules and the fact that it is a 24 hour limit, expectations != letter of law. I might get around to premium, but I'm not exactly interested in 5 minute games.

OK then, please don't expect me to agree with you if you're wrong. The rules are, quite simply that in casual games, you get 24 hours to play. Perhaps this person has a specific time each day that he sets aside for CC. Maybe it's as described on the home page, when he enjoys his morning coffee. See, if he didn't have 24 hours to take his turn, he wouldn't have joined.

Now, if he takes his turn at 8am and you log in at 9 to take yours. Guess what? It's going to be 23 hours before his next turn. What about this don't you get? He didn't break the freaking rules.

Why the hell do people phrase things like this as questions when it's bloody freaking clear that they're not asking a question. Your mind seems quite made up and you were hoping to have that validated by everyone. Guess what, most of us don't agree. Tough chit.

[zimmah]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

give them a 2 star rating for attendance.

even though it's perfectly fine to take your turns once every day (like stated above, during your morning coffee whatsoever) it's still below average, since most persons are faster then that, and since 2 stars = below average, means it's perfectly fine to rate them a 2 star, even if they didn't actually miss a single turn.

[max is gr8]

No they are within 24 hours they have done nothing wrong you can't mark them down for having no computer access during the day and infact anyone that does give people a low rating because of that I would add to my foes.

[Optimus Prime]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

give them a 2 star rating for attendance.

even though it's perfectly fine to take your turns once every day (like stated above, during your morning coffee whatsoever) it's still below average, since most persons are faster then that, and since 2 stars = below average, means it's perfectly fine to rate them a 2 star, even if they didn't actually miss a single turn.

Given the standard set forth by the site, this is wrong. If you don't miss any turns and you play once every 24 hours you are completely within the rules and should get a 3. Simple as that. If you are playing a real time game, and play every 20 minutes when it's your turn, then yes, possibly a 2, if you miss some turns, a 2, not if you take your turns each time and use the time given to you within the rules.

[detlef]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

give them a 2 star rating for attendance.

even though it's perfectly fine to take your turns once every day (like stated above, during your morning coffee whatsoever) it's still below average, since most persons are faster then that, and since 2 stars = below average, means it's perfectly fine to rate them a 2 star, even if they didn't actually miss a single turn.

Given the standard set forth by the site, this is wrong. If you don't miss any turns and you play once every 24 hours you are completely within the rules and should get a 3. Simple as that. If you are playing a real time game, and play every 20 minutes when it's your turn, then yes, possibly a 2, if you miss some turns, a 2, not if you take your turns each time and use the time given to you within the rules.

Damn it, you screwed up my trap. Based on her own definition of what earns you a 4 or 5 for attendance I asked her what she defined as a 3. Given that taking "most of your turns" within 12 hours earned you a 4, it seemed logical that by her same criteria, basically not missing turns would earn a 3. Which, of course, is not what she said here.

So, if we can't expect consistent ratings from somebody who's bothered to start a thread about this and has contributed to all of the others on the subject...

[brandoncfi]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

Get Premium and spend a day playing more then four games at a time and you will no longer have a problem

or

Help improve CC by
1. Running a Tournament
2. Creating a Map

Both of which are fun and will take up your free time

[jako]

you could always go to the callouts on live chat and seek opponents there. that can usually get u a fast game.

but yeah, as people stated already, taking ur turns just once/24 hours is not against the rule is should be given a low rating because of it.

[owenshooter]

give them a 2 star rating for attendance.

even though it's perfectly fine to take your turns once every day (like stated above, during your morning coffee whatsoever) it's still below average, since most persons are faster then that, and since 2 stars = below average, means it's perfectly fine to rate them a 2 star, even if they didn't actually miss a single turn.

this is absolutely nuts. how have you decided, in thread after thread, what each situation merits for star distribution? in this situation, you have a freemium, complaining that someone is taking their turns within the time given, and not missing turns, and you somehow think this is poor attendance? wow, that just makes absolutely no sense. you seem like a smart enough person from all your posts and the few pm's we have shared, but i must part ways with you on this post. you are given 24 hours for a turn. if you take your turn with 10 minutes remaining, you have not broken a rule and your attendance is not "poor" and surely not a "2". wow...-0

[zimmah]

No they are within 24 hours they have done nothing wrong you can't mark them down for having no computer access during the day and infact anyone that does give people a low rating because of that I would add to my foes.

i'm not maring them down, i'm giving them a normal rating for a normal achievement. they did not do anything out of the ordinairy, so they don't deserve to get an out of the ordinary rating. how many times i need to tell you that?

[Deltron]

Is the feedback based on how well someone followed site rules? If someone plays 1v1 freestyle with a frequency slower than the average for the site, are they not below average in attendance? Why have a 1-5 rating at all if your standard for average is yes/no. What would get them a 2, missing 1 turn out of 5...10...20? What would get them a 1, total dead beat?

I for one hope that folks like zimmah are going to rate slow players below average. If someone knows they are only taking 1 turn a day, they can start a sequential game, that way I won't bother playing them.

[detlef]

No they are within 24 hours they have done nothing wrong you can't mark them down for having no computer access during the day and infact anyone that does give people a low rating because of that I would add to my foes.

i'm not maring them down, i'm giving them a normal rating for a normal achievement. they did not do anything out of the ordinairy, so they don't deserve to get an out of the ordinary rating. how many times i need to tell you that?

But you're not giving them a "normal" rating. You're giving them an unsatisfactory rating. If you think this is a 3, that's fine. If you want to save 4s and 5s for people who are johnny on the spot and always take their turns quickly, that's fine. But to advocate giving someone less than a 3 who's done nothing wrong seems silly.

[detlef]

Is the feedback based on how well someone followed site rules? If someone plays 1v1 freestyle with a frequency slower than the average for the site, are they not below average in attendance? Why have a 1-5 rating at all if your standard for average is yes/no. What would get them a 2, missing 1 turn out of 5...10...20? What would get them a 1, total dead beat?

I for one hope that folks like zimmah are going to rate slow players below average. If someone knows they are only taking 1 turn a day, they can start a sequential game, that way I won't bother playing them.

It bloody well should be. Are we talking pieces of flair here? Great, give the dude with 35 buttons a 5, but don't demote the hot chick who put on exactly as many as you asked her.

See, the deal is, that guy can join whatever the hell game he wants as long as he follows the rules. The problem here is your misconception that freestyle means real time. It simply means that players can play at the same time. Don't blame the system or this player for the fact that you want it to be something it isn't.

Besides, Freestyle sucks anyway.

[zimmah]

When I join a 1v1 freestyle game, that the player will take their turn more frequently than every 22 hrs or so? I had a lot of luck with folks playing frequently in my first 10-15 games or so. But recently, I've joined a few, and these guys are barely making their turns in time. I'm not really upset about or anything, it's just mildly annoying.

give them a 2 star rating for attendance.

even though it's perfectly fine to take your turns once every day (like stated above, during your morning coffee whatsoever) it's still below average, since most persons are faster then that, and since 2 stars = below average, means it's perfectly fine to rate them a 2 star, even if they didn't actually miss a single turn.

Given the standard set forth by the site, this is wrong. If you don't miss any turns and you play once every 24 hours you are completely within the rules and should get a 3. Simple as that. If you are playing a real time game, and play every 20 minutes when it's your turn, then yes, possibly a 2, if you miss some turns, a 2, not if you take your turns each time and use the time given to you within the rules.

no, if you take exceptionaly long for taking turns even if you don't miss any turns, you are below average so i would also rate is below average that's just fair. fast players should get a good attendance ratings, slow players should get a below average one, and only the deadbeaters and such deserve to have the worst.

otherwise you should have called it 'missing turns'

Attendance: covers deadbeating, missing turns, deliberately prolonging rounds, finding a babysitter to keep things moving, etc...
and The number of stars given should be based on this scale: 1 = Bad, 2 = Below Average, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = Excellent.

thus, you could translate that into:

* misses a lot more turns then what's considered normal, typicly doesn't have any good reason for it as well, or just a deadbeater.
** takes most of his turns, but takes pretty much longer then everyone else (hence: below average!) either that, or misses slightly more turns then what's considered 'normal'. (and with taking your turns slowly, i mean like 18 hours or more most of the time, like 2 out of 3 turns or so)
*** takes most turns within 12~18 hours like most of us do (= average) and doesn't really misses a lot of turns either (might miss a turn or 2 in longer games, or might have a good reason to miss one or more turns, like not allowed to play on saturdays)
**** takes all/most of his turns and does this within 6~12 hours most of the time (about 2 to 4 logins a day) this is what i don't see every gamer doing, so it's considered to be above average
***** this rating is reserved for players who really hardly ever miss a turn and take most of them within 6 hours or so (4 logins a day, still doable)
and if you don't agree, then you see why your beloved system is flawed. everyone has a different points of view on this system, and therefore the ratings are plain inaccurate and therefore useless!

better yet, just let the rating for attendence go automaticly let the system calculate for every person how many turns he has lost based on the turns he has had (in all of his games) and compare it to the other gamers, also compare the speed (except for speed games) of all the games of a specific player, and also compare that with the rest of the players, and then let the system calculate what his attendance rating is compared to the rest. it's the fairest and most accurate way of calculating how fast a player is. this way you can see who you can play if you want to play fast games but don't like to play speed games. (or if you want to play an 8 player game, without having to wait a week before it's your turn again) you can just look up 8 players with above average attendance (takes turns fast) and therefore have a pretty fast game.

at least i know for sure that if this rating isn't going to be fixed, i won't pay one single penny to this website again, no matter how much i like to play.

not if you take your turns each time and use the time given to you within the rules.

rules or no rules, slow players are still below average whether they use the time they have by the rules or not. i think there should be a seperation between slow and fast players. either way it's considered below average no matter what the rules say. it's a fact, you can't deny that. unless of course 60% of the community takes 20 hours to take turns, which is not the case!

[detlef]

Why did you highlight prolonging rounds but not "deliberately"? That's the deal here isn't. Say you're the guy who has carved out 8-9 am to take your turns each day. If your opponent doesn't take his until that afternoon, then you're going to be inside the magical 18 hour mark. It just so happens, in this case, you're opponent takes his right after you (but not so quickly after you that you are able to take another turn right away because it would still be during your hour for play.

How is this "deliberately prolonging the round"? You're not letting the game drag on as a plan, you simply take your turn at the same time every day.

Now, before you find a bigger and bolder font and continue to act like nobody understands what you're saying, realize that we do understand what you're saying and simply think that you're wrong.

Out of curiosity, why do you think it is more important to have a good rating system than a fun game. You seem to imply as much by saying you wont spend another penny here if they don't fix this despite how much you enjoy the game. Do you come here to engage in game or get worked up about ratings? Shouldn't the ratings be a means to an end? That is a way to avoid bad players? Well, I agree that this rating system seems absolutely useless but, until because of it I'm subjected to tons of bad players it's failures won't matter at all.

Give those windmills a break.

[owenshooter]

Now, before you find a bigger and bolder font and continue to act like nobody understands what you're saying, realize that we do understand what you're saying and simply think that you're wrong.

possibly a 5 on the wrongness scale...-0

[Deltron]

rules or no rules, slow players are still below average whether they use the time they have by the rules or not. i think there should be a seperation between slow and fast players. either way it's considered below average no matter what the rules say. it's a fact, you can't deny that. unless of course 60% of the community takes 20 hours to take turns, which is not the case!

QFT


Thats really all there is to it. I'm not sure why anyone else is in here arguing.

[detlef]

rules or no rules, slow players are still below average whether they use the time they have by the rules or not. i think there should be a seperation between slow and fast players. either way it's considered below average no matter what the rules say. it's a fact, you can't deny that. unless of course 60% of the community takes 20 hours to take turns, which is not the case!

QFT


Thats really all there is to it. I'm not sure why anyone else is in here arguing.

You mean besides the fact that we're right and you're wrong?