Jensen
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
|
 Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 14:58 |
 
|
I propose that each coach gets listed with their average game time. That way people can tell before playing how long the coach is thinking (on average) and maybe avoid dissapointment with long turn or that the slow coach gets stressed.
I´m sure this must have come up before - anyway here it is again. What do you think?
Jensen |
|
|
Enkeli
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:07 |
|
And how long is too long by your "standarts"? |
_________________
The End Always Justifies The Means
Grotty Little Newspaper |
|
Ispep
Joined: Apr 08, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:09 |
|
Average game time is not a good idea since you might have been unfortunate enough to play several slow players one after the other.
A good idea would be something like average turn time for each player instead..
Cheers! |
|
|
Jensen
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:13 |
|
I don´t mind long turns - but I do mind getting bugged for using on average 4 minutes pr. turn. BB for me is a thinking game - not just a luck/rolling dice game. So I find it annoying when my opponent starts insulting me for spending too long time....
When we play the board game I sometimes spend maybe 10-15 minutes pr. turn (which is against the rules I know). I try to be quick about it hee, though.
But if you could tell before agreeing to play that the other coach is slow then he could always say that that information were available beforehand. On the other hand the slow coach could warn very fast players that he like to think things over.
.... That got a little messy  but I hope you got my drift. |
|
|
Mentok
Joined: Nov 19, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:14 |
|
I fully support that proposal. I have been involved in games with slow players where I really got annoyed. |
_________________
I am Jack's colon. I get cancer, I kill Jack. |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:23 |
|
More than this: if I play a poor coach maybe I can get a 3-0 win easily and withouth thinking too much.
But when I meet good coaches I need some more time to plan offensive and defensive tactics. So, average time per turn or per game would be quite useless and pointless, IMHO... |
_________________
 |
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:30 |
|
You miss the point of 4 min turn rules...
I really like this rule. Bloodbowl is a thinking game that s true but not a stastistic calculator game .
4 min rules is here to avoid wonderful perfect turn as in bash turn than in pass and run turn...
Nobody force you to play every player! just play as many as you can in 4 min... sometimes it s 11, sometimes it s 5 |
_________________
Ash |
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 15:48 |
|
BB is a thinking game, but one that encourages fast thinking. The best coach is one that can go through all the possibilities inside four minutes, one that an inferior coach would take a lot longer to think through.
Chess has a clock too, and chess certainly is a thinking game. Go over the clock, you lose. |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 16:02 |
|
and BB is a game played by two players. it's annoying to watch your opponent think for 4 minutes on his first turn, when he's attacking... you're supposed to start thinking of your moves during your opponent's turn, and when setting up, etc...
EDIT: btw, the 4 minutes rule is a rule that apply in ftf BB iirc, which means it's calculated for people to roll the dice... you don't need to spend time rolling with JBB, which means 4 minutes is waaaaaaay too much anyway. |
_________________
'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 16:08 |
|
a clock timer like for chess with 24 min for each half should be great ))
In average you don t need your 4 min cause their is always fast turn over |
_________________
Ash |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 16:12 |
|
clock-timing over the internet is impossible, because of the fact you can get a phone call, or lag, or whatever. it's just that coaches should do their best to play fast, that's all. |
_________________
'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
Laviak
Joined: Jul 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 16:27 |
|
It would work fine if there was a 'pause' button ... something where the timer could be paused if both players agree -- then just have it start again as soon as the person with control clicks on something.
If it were implemented though ... one thing that comes to mind is that control changes to the 'other player' -- e.g. for apos & blocks where the other person picks the die.
lag could still be an issue ... but i'm sure there would be ways around it -- maybe just stopping the timer when no data is received for a certain amount of time, until data comes through again. |
|
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 17:40 |
|
lag is insignifiant in that kind of thing... |
_________________
Ash |
|
Fudge
Joined: Sep 29, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 22, 2004 - 18:39 |
|
I think that instead they should make it a rule that you have to tell your opponent if you are already playing a game, because that i think is one of the bigger reasons for the turn lenght average increase.
I have on several occations found that my opponents are playing two games at the same time when they are taking to long time( in my opinion), and i have serched on the games page.
I find it very rude not to tell your opponent that you are already playing a game, and think i should be a rule breach not to tell your opponent.
But i don´agree on teh average game lenght, way to many different divisons and tourneys for that.
for instance stunty will lower time lengh tand 4 vs 4 games will do the same by alot, and the player can still be slow in ranked. |
|
|
|
|
Blackbox Teams
Search
