koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Feb 26, 2007 - 23:50 |
 
|
| Krulemuck wrote: | It is so extremely frustrating that all of you people can write, but only a few can actually read.
THE TURN TIME LIMIT DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY END YOUR TURN.
YOU STILL HAVE TO CLICK THE END TURN BUTTON.
So, after finishing your turn you can actually:
- Chat with your opponent without a hurry
- Run to the toilet
- Grab a snack
Without any rush at all, after having resupplied with food, having relived yourself, and discussed in length how sneaking a star player in after agreeing to the game makes your opponent a menace to the community, you can:
CLICK END TURN.
Ranked and Factions NEED the turn time limit DESPERATELY, because the computer makes the game ridicolously easy to play (compared to the board version!) which leads to extremely few "real" mistakes. Limiting the time availiable to figure out the best move clearly helps to figure out who is better at playing this game, which is what the ranked and faction divisions are about.
Keyword: "Competitiveness" |
WE KNOW HOW TO READ, DO YOU?
Dang! no 36pt? |
_________________
Open [L]eague Tournaments - NOW recruiting!! Old/New style skill progression! - Secret League - All Stars! |
|
freak_in_a_frock
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 26, 2007 - 23:52 |
|
The reason we are not debating it, is because it hasn't been tested yet. Until we fully test out the new rule it is all just speculation.
Half the people arguing against it haven't played with the rule in effect (and if they have then they are lying about not playing in ranked anymore). It is as bad as those that are arguing against LRB5 without play testing it. This thread should have been locked as soon as it was created, and any more that sprung up around it should have been closed too, until we have all had time to fully understand what this rule is going to change within the game and community. But since we all know that this thread won't die we might as well all talk rubbish in it for a few at least a week, and then we can compare our findings. |
|
|
Composer99
Joined: May 18, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 26, 2007 - 23:58 |
|
| Quote: | | It is so extremely frustrating that all of you people can write, but only a few can actually read. |
Can the frustration. You are the one demonstrating the lack of reading ability. Most of the objections to the rule involve RL situations impinging on BB games at inconvenient times (e.g. in the middle or beginning of your turn) - when they actually impact your ability to play the game. Sure, you don't actually end your turn until you enter the command to do so, but when unforeseen circumstances call you away when you're three actions in, having that ability is not much of a help, is it? |
|
|
HasniM
Joined: Dec 30, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 00:29 |
|
I agree with the concern that chatting during play slows down play, and may be negatively effected by enforcement of the 4 minute rule.
On a side note, I've played with slow people, in both ranked & unranked, and while they may be kinda slow at the start of the turn, when that whistle blows, they get hustling to finish their turn promptly.
And yes, sometimes they forget to click the turn done, or it doesn't take. I think it would be nice if the 'end of turn' put up a flag of somesort, so you know you did it right.
Another suggestion would be a 1 minute warning, say 3 minutes into the turn.
I also think there should be a pause button of some sort. Or for better flavor, a Time Out. Maybe you only get 3 a game, or 2 a half, or whatever. Or perhaps the other coach has to agree to it or something. But seriously, I can't imagine a 'live' game having a problem with somebody taking a break to go to the bathroom or answer a call from work.
Finally, if the 4 minute rule gets implemated, there definatly needs to be an exception for academy. And really, I think that at a minimum, unranked should have it be optional.
Ok, finally finally, it seems that the 4 mintue rule unfairly penalizes slow typers, or people that refuse to run voice-chat software during their games. I would much rather chat with the guy I'm playing then limit my comments to 'grats' or 'good job' when they score.
Just my 2cents. |
|
|
El_Jairo
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 00:49 |
|
I just played my first game in [R] with the turn limitting thing.
It doesn't change a lot. It reduces somewhat the time you take for thinking through your turn and chat. Chatting was done mainly during set-up times (not limitted).
Personnally I see implentation of such thing causing more harm than good. I don't see the added value of this rule. Which was clearly invented to keep tourney games under the cap of two hours.
I feel on an internet site this rule should not be imposed.
I like a good chat during games and now even less people will tend to chat.
This is a simple fact, only after your turn u can chat.
I guess power players will be happy with it being imposed, so now theyr cherry will be softer en faster dead.
I remember I used to have a problem to keep my turns under 4 mins. But now I normally never exceed 3 mins. My point being: new players will struggle more to get involved in [R]. I don't think this is the intention.
If this thing should be implemented I feel that both coaches agree to imlement this rule in their game. Giving everybody the choice this will make things easier for everybody. Even make it possible to shorten turn time. In the end, all the time-consuming dice rolling is automated so it shoud be no problem to stay under 3mins.
So my basic thoughts about this are: keep it optional. If it were imposed things are going to shift in the divisions/users. |
_________________
By the way Pheadrus, do we need anybody to tell us what is good and what is bad?
NAF n°: 21249 |
|
Longshanks
Joined: Feb 02, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 01:04 |
|
Well I've just read 13 pages of posts (which will probably be 15 by the time I finish this  ) so at least credit me with having listened to the arguments for and against. I maybe have one new thing to add, the rest someone else has already stated but I'll give my viewpoint anyway.
For the record I don't agree with the 4minute rule enforcement. I'm willing to give it a try and despite being a father with all those domestic interruptions, I suspect the number of occasions where I will lose some parts of my turn will be very rare indeed, at least with some understanding from my opponent. I don't have any problem now fitting my moves and a reasonable amount of chat, within a 4 minute turn.
Experience will show one way or the other whether it is a workable. My opposition to the change is -
1. It's unnecessary. Like many others who have already posted I've yet to experience a significant problem with slow play. Online BB is much faster that IRL.
2. It does not recognise the difference between an online experience and a face-to-face one.
The one satisfactory argument I've seen in favour is Christers position of closer compliance with the LRB. I accept his reasoning why Fumbbl should try to be LRB compliant but I don't believe a strict/slavish adherence to the LRB is either necessary or beneficial for Fumbbl. All the suggestions of a pause button or other ways of resolving the timing "problem" (and I use that word guardedly) are effectively house rules. And Christer has made it clear he doesn't want house rules. Fair enough.
But...
Is the +/- 40TS restriction in LRB? Not to my knowledge. So it's a house rule. Presumably it was introduced in the best interests of the community/online BB experience? If Christer was prepared to implement a house rule to govern ranked matches, why is a house rule for the 4 minute rule out of the question? It's inconsistent.
I couldn't find it on the online versions of the LRB but I'm reasonably certain in the published version of the rulebook it included JJ's design notes. I don't have a copy any longer but I have a vague memory of JJ endorsing houses rules - if players didn't like a rule, they, or the commissioner, was free to vary it. So house rules aren't disallowed under LRB as far as I'm concerned. I think the feedback is consistent enough that for the good of the community, another house rule might be in order.
Just as an aside, I think its commendable that Christer is at least willing to listen to that feedback rather than presenting this change as a fait accompli.
Some will think I'm being pedantic, but can Christer/anyone else, stop claiming Fumbbl/this site is aiming to be as LRB compliant as possible? More accurately it is Ranked that is aiming to be compliant. The time option will not apply in unranked - ergo U is not as LRB compliant as it good be.
And move my teams to U? No way, unless awards can be extended to U as well. I like my awards ! 
By the way, 13 pages of post and no mention of PIE ???? |
|
|
Gritter
Joined: Jun 29, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 01:13 |
|
I have only come across 2 coaches in nearly 400 games on fumbbl that played so slowly they ruined my enjoyment. I never played them again.
Many people have expressed the same sentiment.
The old adage of "if it aint broke dont fix it" would seem to apply here....
That said i am in favour of it for ranked tourneys and especially the smacks. The enforced faster pace of play will help the truely better coaches show that they are better.
I would also be in favour of the rule if the client supported a timeout rule. But as of right now thats not the case.
One of the things that got me hooked on fumbbl after years of FPS games and other more stressful time draining online games was the adult and almost relaxed family atmosphere it has. The presence of 14 year olds with mile wide egos here is the lowest i have come across in a community on the net!
I would encourage the admins to think of how best to foster a community rather than follow an LRB, as they have done a very good job of the former so far in my experience... |
|
|
Fool
Joined: Sep 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 27, 2007 - 01:25 |
|
| Krulemuck wrote: |
Ranked and Factions NEED the turn time limit DESPERATELY, because the computer makes the game ridicolously easy to play (compared to the board version!) which leads to extremely few "real" mistakes. Limiting the time availiable to figure out the best move clearly helps to figure out who is better at playing this game, which is what the ranked and faction divisions are about.
Keyword: "Competitiveness" |
LOL... Ranked/Faction has nothing to do with who the best players are.. but everything to do with who is the most patient and calculating at cherrypicking.
Ranked/Unranked Tournaments where you have no choice about what team or coach you will play against is where the real competition is. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
|
|
|
| |
Old style skill prog...
Search
