Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Total Game Clock


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 whocaresman

whocaresman

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 46 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 16 February 2015 - 09:32 PM

I think it would be a nice idea to have a game clock of maybe 90 mins to 2 hours so people can't intentionally waste people's time like so many do on this site.  This will allow enough time for players to win the game if still possible but will prevent players from just moving pieces until their opponent quits in a game that is an obvious draw. 



#2 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 19 February 2015 - 12:03 AM

Moderator note: I opened this post up at the risk of bringing up a very sore subject. This topic has been well-hashed before. Many people have expressed an interest in all things ISF, including the total game clock system used there. An alternative option argued for here has always been some type of auto draw based upon number of moves. Of course, neither of these things has been enacted here yet, along with a double chasing ban.
The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#3 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Major

Posted 19 February 2015 - 01:40 AM

Unfortunately, the only solution is to hit the surrender flag.

 

I know it seems wrong, but the simple question is - what do you value more?  Getting your deserved win or draw or allowing some jerk to waste a half an hour of your life?

 

Once you surrender a few times it becomes easy.  Just ignore your ELO ranking and play the game to have fun.  You will be able to play 5 games every time you avoid the jerk that wants to take 15 seconds for every move and do nothing all game long.

 

Just my two cents.

 

Oh, and lets change the move clock down to at least 10 seconds (I actually vote for 5 seconds) now that the single player is done.


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#4 noblevillain

noblevillain

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 19 February 2015 - 05:52 AM

well there comes a point where if your a higher ranked player and your surrendering all the time you will get people who arent your playing level and be bored to death, but with that said i feel the format if possible should be changed (not sure if that's possible as i don't know much about the server), to a point where you can call in a mod to regulate. should nullify the use of a game clock, mod's might be overwhelmed though. 



#5 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Major

Posted 19 February 2015 - 07:31 AM

noblevillian,

 

Your correct that I play many "bad" games (but then again I'm sure many people play me and say its a bad game!).  But I have to say that some of the worst behavior is folks with 400-650 ELO from my experience.  They seem willing to do anything to preserve their points.  Some will even tell you so when its obvious you will win.

 

But the amount of time wasting is simply obscene.  Sometimes I decide that I'll play until I win - it almost always is at least another half an hour and sometimes as long as 50 minutes.  When you can take 15 seconds for every move that means that it takes me four minutes to move from my end to the opponents FOR ONE PIECE.   And I'm simply not playing anyone that starts the game by moving forward and backwards at 15 seconds a move.  Life is too short - surrender and move on.

 

Its just not worth it.  Look at it this way - before I found this website I didn't know stratego ELO existed!!!  So I'm not really missing out by having 300 ELO or 150 ELO or 200 ELO as opposed to 600 ELO.

 

And I would say that many good games are found with folks with lower # of games played as they join and work their way up.  I do know that I'm not the only one that has decided the heck with it in regards to ELO and don't waste their time when its obvious the game is over.

 

But you are correct that there are times I wish I could play three challenging games in a row.


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#6 noblevillain

noblevillain

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 19 February 2015 - 07:42 AM

ehh true, anyways, on the game clock suggestion its kinda hard to put a time on it, some people play aggressive (i play pretty aggressively myself) so their games are about 20 min on average, more defensive games around around 40, so hard to put a timer when you dont know the style of play 



#7 Luckypapa

Luckypapa

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 672 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 19 February 2015 - 11:23 AM

I played Napoleon and Karaiskakis in last Divisontournament. Both games took more then an hour, but were in my opinion good games from both sides. Sometimes I need 15 second per move, mostly I move within a few seconds. Bringing back the movetime is not the best option. I saw more screenshots whereby players ran out of the 5 minutebuffer.
Best to change is to put in the automatic draw after not attacking x-moves. Doesn't help Scott much, but is the best scenario.
Maybe Mick can help us out here.

Lucky

The secret of happiness is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you should do.


#8 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Major

Posted 19 February 2015 - 05:24 PM

Lucky, I would point that games in a tournament are different than games played on a Tuesday evening (at least for the vast majority of players).

 

I expect that folks will take more time in a tournament (not that that is necessarily good but understandable).  But playing is supposed to be enjoyable.  Do I occasionally do something playing quickly that I realize almost immediately that it wasn't the best move?  Yes, but so what.  Its a game.

 

The move clock should really be changed to at least 10 seconds - and preferably five.  Change the setup clock to 3 or 4 minutes.  And leave the buffer at 5 minutes. 

 

We aren't performing brain surgery, we play a game.


  • Sohal likes this

​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#9 TERMlNATOR

TERMlNATOR

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Miner

Posted 05 March 2016 - 07:58 AM

I agree with Lucky. Best to put in the automatic draw after not attacking x-moves.



#10 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 10 March 2016 - 02:21 PM

A 200 move auto draw without a capture by either side has been discussed as a starting point, but I think we'd have to change that number. The Prof has pointed out elsewhere that if each player gets 100 moves like that, then someone could conceivably take 15 seconds per move and purposefully waste 1500 seconds. That's 25 minutes. Right now we'd punish someone for draw refusal after only ten minutes and sometimes even less. So the auto draw at 200 total moves seems way off the mark.

Half that, or only 50 moves per player sounds better, timewise. At its worst someone could waste only 12.5 minutes. Of course, this assumes a player doesn't intentionally waste a piece he can spare with the purpose of restarting the auto draw counter. For that kind of person we would still have our draw refusal rules.

But this hopefully points out that the simple auto draw is a rather blunt club. Maybe it's not quite as blunt as the total game clock set at 60, 75, or 90 minutes (which would end the game suddenly and unceremoniously), but blunt nonetheless.

Adding some kind of features to the auto draw to help make it more intelligent seems needful in the discussion on auto draw. These factors could include game situations, such as a miner-less game. Or, perhaps, we could limit the number of moves the auto draw could count. For example, in the 50 move per person (100 total) move figure that I'm proposing we might say that this would only be allowed one time. The second time the counter would only allow 25 moves.

The other fact is, these numbers and ideas are based upon a 15 second move timer. Should that ever change to less, to 10, 7, or even 4 seconds then the auto draw could be set differently. It all has to work together.
The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#11 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,071 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Lieutenant

Posted 10 March 2016 - 02:47 PM

I think time-wasting should be kept out of any discussions about auto-Draw. The purpose of auto-draw is not to prevent timewasting, but to declare the game a draw when neither player is willing to make an attempt to win.
 
I think that 200 moves without capture is way too many. I do envisage a situation like the picture below, whereby one player needs to get from one side of the board to the other, protecting their miner with a high piece. In a situation similar to the below (where 0 represents a bomb), one player may need about 50 moves to get into the position whereby their miner can pave the way to the flag.
 
I can't envisage a scenario where a player would need more moves than this, although that's not to say it couldn't happen.
 
So I think 100 total moves without capture (50 each) is probably still a little short - maybe 120-140 is more appropriate.

O7ZEpqp.jpg



#12 taekes1089

taekes1089

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Major

Posted 04 February 2017 - 05:02 PM

I think the per play time should be limited to less than 10 seconds if you go above bronze and to 5 seconds above silver, and buffer time reduced to 1 minute since people should be more seasoned and quicker as they advance, and it should be harder.  I've had to withdraw many games even though the match was unwinnable for both players and the opponent won't accept a tie, which isn't fair and they shouldn't be rewarded with a win just because they're willing to spend hours online for the win, and I have better things to do in my day.  Especially if i'm playing against a lower ranked opponent, and they want all my points.  I mean, it's not like this game requires as much thinking as chess, so the clock should be adjusted lower.  Plus, I don't have time to take screen shots to prove that the other guy won't tie, it's a waste of time, and there is no guarantee they will be penalized.


Edited by taekes1089, 04 February 2017 - 05:03 PM.


#13 roeczak

roeczak

    Miner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 11 February 2017 - 11:53 AM

I think the rules of live are pretty good
4 sec move timer
15 min buffer
To prevent timewasters if anyone is idle for 5 minutes he automatically loses

Highest rating : 838 (Platinum Major)

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users