Moderator: Community Team
I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.Woodruff wrote:While I'm sympathetic to this, it would be, in my view, much worse to watch someone miss their turn, have the next player be 20 hours into HIS turn when the first player shows up to take his turn. Then the clock starts over for the second guy. Sounds like a nightmare scenario to me, particularly if folks are routinely slow back-to-back in the same game.patrickaa317 wrote:Not sure if this has ever been mentioned but if I miss a turn, I think as long as the person after me hasn't started yet, I should still get a chance to redeem my miss. This is probably only easily possible on sequential games. It sucks when you see a teammate miss by 5 minutes and the person after him takes another 20 hours to go.

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
Because it's giving them an advantage for no reason other than their own lack of attention to the game. And especially in team games, where I very much believe this will be abused every single time.squishyg wrote:I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.Woodruff wrote:While I'm sympathetic to this, it would be, in my view, much worse to watch someone miss their turn, have the next player be 20 hours into HIS turn when the first player shows up to take his turn. Then the clock starts over for the second guy. Sounds like a nightmare scenario to me, particularly if folks are routinely slow back-to-back in the same game.patrickaa317 wrote:Not sure if this has ever been mentioned but if I miss a turn, I think as long as the person after me hasn't started yet, I should still get a chance to redeem my miss. This is probably only easily possible on sequential games. It sucks when you see a teammate miss by 5 minutes and the person after him takes another 20 hours to go.![]()
But really, what's the harm in letting someone take their turn at 27 hours or 36 if the next player hasn't appeared yet?
Can you give me an example or two?Woodruff wrote:Because it's giving them an advantage for no reason other than their own lack of attention to the game. And especially in team games, where I very much believe this will be abused every single time.squishyg wrote:I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.Woodruff wrote:While I'm sympathetic to this, it would be, in my view, much worse to watch someone miss their turn, have the next player be 20 hours into HIS turn when the first player shows up to take his turn. Then the clock starts over for the second guy. Sounds like a nightmare scenario to me, particularly if folks are routinely slow back-to-back in the same game.patrickaa317 wrote:Not sure if this has ever been mentioned but if I miss a turn, I think as long as the person after me hasn't started yet, I should still get a chance to redeem my miss. This is probably only easily possible on sequential games. It sucks when you see a teammate miss by 5 minutes and the person after him takes another 20 hours to go.![]()
But really, what's the harm in letting someone take their turn at 27 hours or 36 if the next player hasn't appeared yet?

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
What's stopping you?The Voice wrote:Patrick, I want to kiss you.
2dimes wrote:What about if it did not start the next guys clock over? Instead it just paused it while the missed turn was taken.

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
I find that more agreeable, certainly, and I believe it would correct my complaint regarding non-team games. However, I still see serious problems in team games due to this that it does not correct for.squishyg wrote:2dimes wrote:What about if it did not start the next guys clock over? Instead it just paused it while the missed turn was taken.
Ooh, that makes sense.

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
There is no real difference between gaining an advantage and avoiding a disadvantage. In fact, the ability to avoid a disadvantage that others cannot is to gain an advantage.squishyg wrote:I see your point, but even if a teammate intentionally stalls, I don't think preventing someone from missing a turn is gaining an advantage. At most it's avoiding a disadvantage.
Woodruff wrote:There is no real difference between gaining an advantage and avoiding a disadvantage. In fact, the ability to avoid a disadvantage that others cannot is to gain an advantage.squishyg wrote:I see your point, but even if a teammate intentionally stalls, I don't think preventing someone from missing a turn is gaining an advantage. At most it's avoiding a disadvantage.
I believe this would become rampant protocol, effectively slowing down team games to a near stall.

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
This exchange scares me. I am completely opposed to this idea in any fashion for one reason: Team games among good teams that communicate. If you miss a turn and my team starts talking about what the next turn will be, sometimes that takes 20 hours by the time everyone has had a chance to talk and I get back to actually play my turn. Under your suggestion, now all that thought that we just put into the game is pointless, and we're now starting another 20 hour round of discussions.Woodruff wrote:I find that more agreeable, certainly, ...squishyg wrote:2dimes wrote:What about if it did not start the next guys clock over? Instead it just paused it while the missed turn was taken.
Ooh, that makes sense.
You may have misunderstood. Squishyg and I were responding to a fix to the situation wherein two players from the same team were going back-to-back with the suggestion implemented, and 2dimes provided that fix. I agree with you in general regarding the suggestion, as I said, but 2dimes fix here is a very limited one not affecting the overall suggestion itself much at all. He was just addressing one minor concern of mine.agentcom wrote:This exchange scares me. I am completely opposed to this idea in any fashion for one reason: Team games among good teams that communicate. If you miss a turn and my team starts talking about what the next turn will be, sometimes that takes 20 hours by the time everyone has had a chance to talk and I get back to actually play my turn. Under your suggestion, now all that thought that we just put into the game is pointless, and we're now starting another 20 hour round of discussions.Woodruff wrote:I find that more agreeable, certainly, ...squishyg wrote:2dimes wrote:What about if it did not start the next guys clock over? Instead it just paused it while the missed turn was taken.
Ooh, that makes sense.
This could even happen in non-team games. On occasion, I will write a couple notes to myself and then come back later to give the map a fresh look, if I'm really not sure of what to do.
The only way to make the original suggestion worse would be to not restart the clock. Then the team's strategy that just got shot to hell only has four hours to come up with a new one.
If anyone's response to the above is "Well, how often will that really happen?" I don't care. If it happens ONCE it's too many times. There is absolutely no reason to punish a team or player who was NOT the one missing turns. Even if that punishment is just the extra time formulating a new plan or modifying an old one.
This is the main reason I oppose this suggestion 100%.agentcom wrote:If you miss a turn and my team starts talking about what the next turn will be, sometimes that takes 20 hours by the time everyone has had a chance to talk and I get back to actually play my turn. Under your suggestion, now all that thought that we just put into the game is pointless, and we're now starting another 20 hour round of discussions.

What if your 24 hours starts over if the other player comes in and takes their turn?Catarah wrote:the idea sounded good to me, until agentcom pointed out the bad side.
this setting means that in a bad situation, you can suddenly have only 4 hours to discuss the result of the latest move. and say your teams expert on the map/team captain/whjatever only comes on twice a day, that'll be a real problem.
so, no, i am against this. if you're afraid you'll miss a turn, contact a sitter. simple as that.
It's still really annoying for that team that just spent 10 or more hours to plan out their next move. And the alternative for those teams would be to act quickly lest the other person comes back and gets their turn in and they have to start planning again.Mr_Adams wrote:What if your 24 hours starts over if the other player comes in and takes their turn?Catarah wrote:the idea sounded good to me, until agentcom pointed out the bad side.
this setting means that in a bad situation, you can suddenly have only 4 hours to discuss the result of the latest move. and say your teams expert on the map/team captain/whjatever only comes on twice a day, that'll be a real problem.
so, no, i am against this. if you're afraid you'll miss a turn, contact a sitter. simple as that.