Conquer Club

I approve.

Woodruff wrote:

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.

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.

I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.


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? Worst case scenario is:
Player 1 misses turn Day 1
Player 2 misses turn Day 2

Player 1 should have no more than 48 hours to take their turn. Once Player 2 has missed a turn, Player 1 has lost their leniency window.

Patrick, I want to kiss you.

24 hours!!!

I have no leniency. And if a teammate misses a turn, I'll kick them in the head!

squishyg wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

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.

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.

I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.

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?

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.

Woodruff wrote:

squishyg wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

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.

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.

I like Patrick's suggestion. I don't see it as a nightmare scenario Woody, but rather an added incentive to buy premium.

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?

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.

Can you give me an example or two?

The Voice wrote:Patrick, I want to kiss you.

What's stopping you?

What about if it did not start the next guys clock over? Instead it just paused it while the missed turn was taken.

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.

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.

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.

For an example, squishyg, in a quads game, one player on Team A has been eliminated...thus, Team B has two teammates who will play back-to-back. In order to avoid having a missed team turn, the second player in that back-to-back turn order simply sits and waits so that his teammate can make the turn. Thus, Team B gains what is in my mind a significant advantage of not having lost that turn.

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.

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.

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.

I believe this would become rampant protocol, effectively slowing down team games to a near stall.

Woodruff wrote:

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.

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.

I believe this would become rampant protocol, effectively slowing down team games to a near stall.

Not if they fix account sitting!!!

But for reals, most serious teams don't miss turns. ViperOverLord makes me sleep in the rain when I do that (so I don't do it anymore).

Woodruff wrote:

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.

I find that more agreeable, certainly, ...

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.

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.

agentcom wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

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.

I find that more agreeable, certainly, ...

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.

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.

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.

Haha, OK thanks. I'm still opposed to this suggestion in any form (for reasons it sounds like you and me both agree on).

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.

This is the main reason I oppose this suggestion 100%.

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.

MERGED.

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.

What if your 24 hours starts over if the other player comes in and takes their turn?

Mr_Adams wrote:

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.

What if your 24 hours starts over if the other player comes in and takes their turn?

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.