Grambo
Joined: Sep 01, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 13:26 |
|
I actually like the IP button concept myself... though I would never use it, and it certainly couldn't be used on me (as I play quickly). It would allow total flexibility... if both players are slow, they can just mutually agree to ignore time limits... if one player is slow, he can plead for mercy, or take his licks... if someone has an emergency or needs to pee, their opponent is likely to understand and not click the IP button... and worst case, if someone really blows past their time and gets called on it, they lose a RR or opponent gains one.
Thumbs up from me, who was previously on the "time limits are fine" side of the argument. |
|
|
SeraphimRed
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 13:35 |
|
JanMattys wrote: | lol guys
I just thought it could be a good way to prevent ALMOST all problems...
After all, I could play all my games with the Hellfish in chat with PeteW telling me what to do. That would be most unfair but the current system doesn't prevent me from trying (and probably winning) that way.
Of course you can print screen but come on... would you REALLY bother????
sigh... |
Me? No. You, I imagine not, many others again probably not.
But this site has its share of extremists remember. |
_________________
Enhance YOUR FUMBBL
|
|
Krulemuck
Joined: Jan 30, 2007
|
  Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 13:54 |
|
JanMattys wrote: | Trying to be constructive... |
Seriously, best post so far!
Hypotetically speaking, depending on the posibillity of implementation:
Timeout/Resume Button:
- Clock is paused
- All relevant controls freeze
- Players are removed from the field
+ Chat window stays fully functional
Then again, i safely assume this suggestion will be turned down because you can easily:
-> make a screenshot
-> pause game
-> call a Blood Bowl grandmaster to advise you on your move via skype
-> use a giant supercomputer that uses a SLI configuration of trollbrains chilled down to -270°C to figure out the best move
-> resume game
-> roll doubleskulls
Since SkiJunkie actually likes the challenges of programming in Java, i'm pretty confident he will give it a try unless he already did and gave up on the ideaa for coding reasons in which case we are all doomed und must die. |
|
|
Stormbringer
Joined: Aug 19, 2005
|
  Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 13:56 |
|
All that you'll need for that is a BB grandmaster willing to help you cheating. Which won't be easy to find.
Stormbringer |
_________________ Adieu, mein Freund. Ich war tausendmal verderbter als Du.
Last edited by Stormbringer on %b %27, %2007 - %14:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
  Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 14:10 |
|
Just had my first game under the time limit rules - so I thought as a 'con' poster in the original thread (2 ago now?), I'd give a little feedback now I've had a go.
I was helped a little bit by having a cool opponent who on set-up told me that if I needed to, he would not click turn when he'd moved his guys to let me go off and deal with the unexpected. I took a bathroom break at the initial set-up and dealt with turning the washing machine on at half-time with no trouble.
I did feel that the level of chat was cut down a bit - for instance the one turn I had a problem with the limit was because we were having a bit of a chat intermittently, and when I got to 3 minutes, I panicked and screwed my cage up. Although, I used to do that anyway - so nothing new! Luckily – nothing unexpected happened, all cats in the area are not alight as I write, so that was a hurdle I didn’t have to jump.
I'm thinking that Christer has dealt with the volume of posts that this has thrown up pretty damned well. He's read them all, kept us informed, and is striving for a solution. Like many who have posted before, I don't think there is any animosity toward him at all, it's just people get wound up pretty easy.
Again - an example where FUMBBL - a free site - has far superior customer service to any corporation I have to deal with, and they demand my cash. Cheers, and keep up the good work. |
|
|
lauth81
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 08:53 |
|
After my first games with the time limit implemented I noticed the following things:
1) clock stopping while the opponent was selecting things like sidestep worked. I saw use of Apothecary, SideStep, Pass Block, Diving Tackle and possible Intercepters. Clock stopped.
2) During setup and Kickoff Actions. Time wound down, but the turn limit was not enforced in the setup and kick off resolution phase. Seems it works like it shoul
3) I noticed though, that the clock kept running after kickoff during the first turn of the receiving team's coach. Hard to see how many time I have left then. For example, setup and kickoff takes 3.30 mins, 1st turn starts, the clock keeps running. I have until 7.30 to complete my turn. Should be better to reset the clock to 0.00 at the start of the receiving coach's turn.
4) Chat was definitely down in all the games. One of the games was vs. a new player and he had some questions (I know, he should have started in [A]).
5) Same coach was also a bit slow. I didn´t mind then, but he actually violated Turn Limit once and came very close on several occassions. My turns took about 2 mins each, which is normal for me. But I felt hurried and didn´t enjoy it that much.
6) Luckily I had no RL issues to attend to. No phonecalls interupting midturn. So, no feedback about that. |
_________________ no plan survives contact with the enemy |
|
m0nty
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 09:16 |
|
A button to call IP sounds workable on face value, but it does have problems. If SkiJunkie implemented the illegal procedure rule in full, including the bits about choosing to lose a reroll or the other coach gaining a reroll, things could start to get messy (not to mention open to abuse). I don't think that would be a good idea.
I don't have a problem with the four-minute rule. It's in the LRB, deal with it. SkiJunkie didn't implement the LRB rule verbatim, which was that a turnover happens at the four-minute mark even if you're in the middle of a move, so be grateful that he compromised on that at least. |
|
|
smilingtom
Joined: Apr 24, 2005
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 09:55 |
|
Hi,
Why it is not possible to make it optional???
If both coaches agree to use the turn limit than they can switch it on in the options!
For example, we play a customized League and like to have an enforced turn limit with 6 minutes!
So we could change the turn limit to 6 minutes and activate the enforce turn limit option....
Would be perfect for us )
I also like the idea, that each coach has a number of "timeouts" like in real american football!
@Christer: You do a really good job, and I know that it is very difficult to make everybody satisfied! don't give up ;o)
cheers
Tom |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 16:01 |
|
1) Time-out Time Pool:
- Up to 3 time-outs may be taken each game
- Those 3 time-outs may last up to 15 minutes (i.e. overall time-out time pool = 15 minutes)
2) General Time Pool:
- General time pool = 64 minutes (16 turns x 4 minutes)
- Time is counted against the active player (i.e. set-up, active turn, side step, time-out etc.)
- Overtime adds 32 minutes to both players' time pools
Thus, there had be 2 time pools for each player and an additional turn-timer:
- Turn Time: 4 minutes
- General Time Pool: 64 minutes
- Time-out Time Pool: 15 minutes
64 minutes overall should be more than enough for a game, and 15 minutes for up to 3 major interruptions should suffice as well. A general time pool in combination with a time-out time pool and limited access to it (3 times) should prevent possible abuses of a time-out-option.
This would allow to handle RL-issues smoothly. Chatting, on the other hand (at least from my experience which includes tons of specced games), hardly ever interferes with the 4-minute turn-time limit and constitutes a neglectible problem in a competitve environment. I can't remember a single game which lasted more than 2 hours because of excessive chatting.
One problem would remain:
What happens, once a player has exhausted his general time pool? A possible solution: As long as a player's general time pool is so low that he would only have 30 seconds left for each of his remaining turns, his turns automatically end after 30 seconds (or less, if he has used up additional time during his opponent's turn). |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 16:21 |
|
I think a "Delay of Game!" button would work just fine.
If you exceed your 4 min, without giving your opponent a reason, he can call you on it. Or he can simply choose to let you have the time his option.
I think this would cause much less grief than an automatic timer would, and should be extrememly easy to impliment. |
|
|
JockMcRowdy
Joined: Jul 07, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 17:20 |
|
/me ignores everyone and gives his 2 pence
Is I have stated before, it is your place Christer and you can do whatever you want and I will gladly stay. However, I think you need to decide whether its a democracy or a dictatorship. Either give us a poll with a set of options and implement the winner or do what you want to do.
I would imagine constantly debating the issue and seeing many disagree with you can only be depressing |
_________________ The White Isle League is by far the best Blood Bowl league in the world. FACT!
If you are interested in joining please get in touch. |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 17:50 |
|
JockMcRowdy wrote: | /me ignores everyone and gives his 2 pence
Is I have stated before, it is your place Christer and you can do whatever you want and I will gladly stay. However, I think you need to decide whether its a democracy or a dictatorship. Either give us a poll with a set of options and implement the winner or do what you want to do.
I would imagine constantly debating the issue and seeing many disagree with you can only be depressing |
Can't agree more. |
_________________
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 17:50 |
|
Quote: | Is I have stated before, it is your place Christer and you can do whatever you want and I will gladly stay. However, I think you need to decide whether its a democracy or a dictatorship. Either give us a poll with a set of options and implement the winner or do what you want to do.
I would imagine constantly debating the issue and seeing many disagree with you can only be depressing |
Why would it be better to not take the communities opinions into consideration just because he doesn't want the site to be run like a democracy? That a slight or large majority doesn't get their will through doesn't mean that the decision maker doesn't give a shit about them. I'm glad that Christer actively engages in discussions regarding this new feature even if he had made up his mind to implement it anyway. |
|
|
Optihut
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 17:58 |
|
Pirog wrote: | Why would it be better to not take the communities opinions into consideration just because he doesn't want the site to be run like a democracy? That a slight or large majority doesn't get their will through doesn't mean that the decision maker doesn't give a shit about them. I'm glad that Christer actively engages in discussions regarding this new feature even if he had made up his mind to implement it anyway. |
I agree with Pirog. I feel that a democratic approach is bad, because we'd end up meeting the lowest common denominator, averaging out solutions all the time. On the other hand, someone who decides alone and doesn't listen to anyone would essentially be a hit and miss approach. Taking the opinions of the community into consideration and then having a single person reach an informed decision really is the best way in my opinion. |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
  Posted:
Feb 28, 2007 - 18:00 |
|
Pirog wrote: | Quote: | Is I have stated before, it is your place Christer and you can do whatever you want and I will gladly stay. However, I think you need to decide whether its a democracy or a dictatorship. Either give us a poll with a set of options and implement the winner or do what you want to do.
I would imagine constantly debating the issue and seeing many disagree with you can only be depressing |
Why would it be better to not take the communities opinions into consideration just because he doesn't want the site to be run like a democracy? That a slight or large majority doesn't get their will through doesn't mean that the decision maker doesn't give a shit about them. I'm glad that Christer actively engages in discussions regarding this new feature even if he had made up his mind to implement it anyway. |
Because it would take away the tension of continuously trying to please everyone. We all know Christer cares, ok? Having to deal with everybody's needs but being the one leader, he risks to look bad no matter what he does.
I can understand the whole thing being tiring for his nerves.
If he states this is a dictatorship, people would continue to throw out requests and suggestions, but would stop thinking they have the right to get an answer and would consider every answer to their pleads what it really is: a kind act by Christer.
And I know what I'm talking about, cause I had a bit of a discussion with Christer after strongly opposing the time limit thing and the way it was dealt with in the beginning. I made the same mistake, thinking I actually had the right to confront his decisions. I did it in the best interest of the community from my point of view (of course) but this led to a misunderstanding with Big C (that I still regret).
ps: Hey, maybe it was only me, and you all STILL think that everything you get is 100% a gift from Christer. In this case, ask yourself if you really don't feel a 0,000001 % of Fumbbl is yours... I think it's understandable if it happens. |
_________________
|
|
|
| |