Author Topic: Poll: For Online Gamers (Read 5376 times)

soul seeker · « **on:** February 12, 2010, 09:23:45 AM »

Two questions:
1) When you play Redemption online, how long do you expect or hope a game to last? (need a solid quantifiable number) > 1 hour = 4
     1 hour = 7
   1 hour < = 2

2) If you have recently played in ROOT or are currently playing in ROOT, then what is your opinion of a time limit enforcement (assuming T1 game)? Not in Root In RooT
   a.) no time limit 4 4
   b.) 1 hour 2
   c.) 1.5 hours 1 1
   d.) 2 hours 1

No spam or joking, this is needed data.

Ironica · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:28:54 AM »

1) The very few times that I can play, I usually expect a T1 game to last around an hour. Can't say much about T2 though (since I only played twice and one of them lasted three hours and we weren't even close to finishing before we both had to leave).

2) Though I do not play ROOT, I would think an hour limit would work best (since it is an official tournament except for the fact that you have to click each card to see the numbers and ability (instead of looking at them all at once like you can in RL)).

Red · « **Reply #2 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:39:48 AM »

1:I have not played on rts since last year. But normally I expect one to last 30 min at the most.

2:None.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #3 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:59:03 AM »

1) I usually expect an online game to last about 1 hour.

2) A time limit is a bad idea for ROOT. It would be too easy for it to lead to arguments, since it is not enforced by a judge but rather the players. As much as we all love each other in a brotherly Christian way, we are also mostly competitive by nature, and we all want to win. It would be too easy for someone to stall, take a "necessary" break (could be real), or abuse the time limit in their favor some other way. Also, it would be one more thing to keep track of, which isn't that bad, but there could be some problems.

Just my thoughts. If there was going to be a ROOT time limit, it would have to be at least 1.5 to 2 hours. But my first vote goes for a) No limit

D-man · « **Reply #4 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:23:11 AM »

1) About an hour.

2) I vote for a). I'm not a big fan of time limits either. I agree that time limits in online games are too easily abused. Besides, there's no reason that any particular game has to be done at a certain time (aka no "next round" as in a regular tournament), so as long as both players are fine with it, it seems like they should be able to take as long as they want. If there had to be a time limit, I'd put it at 2 hours.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:42:25 AM »

1) about an hour 2 if I'm playing someone slow.

2) A. Time limits + online = bad.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:54:40 AM »

1. 1-2 hours.

2. I would actually be in favor of some sort of time limit (maybe 2 hours) in order to end the reign of the super turtle decks in ROOT. There's simply no reason not to use a 100 card deck right now and just outlast the opponent.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #7 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:18:25 AM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on February 12, 2010, 10:54:40 AM

1. 1-2 hours.

2. I would actually be in favor of some sort of time limit (maybe 2 hours) in order to end the reign of the super turtle decks in ROOT. There's simply no reason not to use a 100 card deck right now and just outlast the opponent.

Actually, there are plenty of reasons. One is speed. I played a friend with a silver offense vs his 100+ turtle and cut through it for a very handily win. (His defense would of been set up fully in a turn or two) Two is offensive power. Turtle decks need a huge defense to survive so their offense though strong is slow. Three is draws. Though bigger packs more punch, it also has a high anti good draw factor.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #8 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:22:06 AM »

Agreed. I have a 100+ card deck, and it sometimes does okay, but more often than not I fall victim to a horrible draw, or a decent draw vs. a blitzkrieg type offense.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #9 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:27:38 AM »

1) I usually expect the games to take about an hour, though I do understand if they take longer.

2) I would love to see ROOT go to a time limit; An hour and half (Double standard t1 limit) Should be more than sufficient to get in a game between two 'normal' decks. If the idea is to emmulate a real-life tournament, than real life tournament decks should be used; if you're crazy enough to take a 150+ to a physical tournament, kudos to you. I highly doubt all that many people claim to have working 150+ physically built.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #10 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:33:28 AM »

Actually I played against a 120 deck last tourny and we both finished far before the time limit.

STAMP · « **Reply #11 on:** February 12, 2010, 12:20:10 PM »

1) 46.5 minutes

2) n/a

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #12 on:** February 12, 2010, 12:29:54 PM »

1. About 1 hour

2. I don't support a time limit for the reasons stated by Professoralstad

Master KChief · « **Reply #13 on:** February 12, 2010, 02:58:19 PM »

1. 1 hour.

2. no time limit for reasons prof alstad stated.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #14 on:** February 12, 2010, 03:01:46 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on February 12, 2010, 09:23:45 AM

Two questions:
1) When you play Redemption online, how long do you expect or hope a game to last? (need a solid quantifiable number)

I like half an hour. if it goes longer, it's fine, but it's nice to take a short time.

2) If you have recently played in ROOT or are currently playing in ROOT, then what is your opinion of a time limit enforcement (assuming T1 game)?
a.) no time limit
b.) 1 hour
c.) 1.5 hours
d.) 2 hours

a. I really don't think it's necessary. I don't currently play ROOT, but I used to.

lightningninja · « **Reply #15 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:56:34 PM »

1. Half an hour... I'd prefer no more than an hour or I get bored. Two of me playing would be 15 minutes.

2. 1.5 hours... online takes a while and for slower players, they can't do it in an hour. But after that it becomes tedious and makes people not want to play root (this is a large reason I quit).

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #16 on:** February 13, 2010, 06:28:22 PM »

1. One hour at the very most. I expect it to take an hour if I'm playing a very, very slow player who stays the whole time, or a normal player with a few breaks.

2. I would ardently argue for a restriction, but not of time. The thing I hate most about playing on RTS isn't when an epic game takes three hours, but when someone just types "brb" with no indication of why they're going or when they'll be back, just leaves without any explanation, or says they have to go for some reason or another, tells you when they'll be back, gets back early and then fusses at you for not being there when you do check back when they said they would be there. The rule I would want is that if you leave without saying why for more than five minutes, you forfeit. If you leave the game, explaining why, you must say when you are coming back and be there five minutes before through five minutes after you said or forfeit. If you leave the game for over an hour for any reason, you forfeit.

Ironica · « **Reply #17 on:** February 13, 2010, 09:31:05 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on February 13, 2010, 06:28:22 PM

2. I would ardently argue for a restriction, but not of time. The thing I hate most about playing on RTS isn't when an epic game takes three hours, but when someone just types "brb" with no indication of why they're going or when they'll be back, just leaves without any explanation, or says they have to go for some reason or another, tells you when they'll be back, gets back early and then fusses at you for not being there when you do check back when they said they would be there. The rule I would want is that if you leave without saying why for more than five minutes, you forfeit. If you leave the game, explaining why, you must say when you are coming back and be there five minutes before through five minutes after you said or forfeit. If you leave the game for over an hour for any reason, you forfeit.

I do like that rule better than a time limit...

especially since a time limit would result in this:

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 12, 2010, 11:27:38 AM

An hour and half (Double standard t1 limit) Should be more than sufficient to get in a game between two 'normal' decks.

Who wants to be 'normal'

When you have all the cards available and play online, I think it's more beneficial to not be rushed through a game so you can take your time to examine everything that's going on (most my loses at tournaments are due to trying to rush and forgetting something important) and to make any type of deck that you want (for those who love turtle decks).

And yes, one of my two pairs of shoes that I own are flip flops

.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #18 on:** February 13, 2010, 09:54:48 PM »

Who doesn't love turtle decks?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #19 on:** February 13, 2010, 10:54:33 PM »

Just an update for those of you campers keeping score

Average expected game length = 56.7 mins
Total votes for time limits:
None = 9
1 hr = 0
1.5 hr = 2
2 hr = 1

soul seeker · « **Reply #20 on:** February 14, 2010, 01:06:03 AM »

I was going to point that out too, but I was going to break the numbers down a bit more on the OP.

I do find this interesting though: most people (like 80%) expect the game to be an hour or less and YET most (if you take both in RooT and out) don't want an online time limit. Very interesting.

Master KChief · « **Reply #21 on:** February 14, 2010, 01:11:22 AM »

thats because the norm for most games take less than an hour. however, super turtles reside outside the norm...and im happy to see at least one category cultivate/benefit such an archetype.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #22 on:** February 14, 2010, 01:29:42 AM »

Quote from: Master KChief on February 14, 2010, 01:11:22 AM

thats because the norm for most games take less than an hour. however, super turtles reside outside the norm...and im happy to see at least one category cultivate/benefit such an archetype.

. Most games I've played take about an hour, or a little more if both decks are fairly large defenses. However, I think that there are enough slow/methodical players and a wide enough variety of decks where a time limit could cause problems. I just don't want to see arguments like "he stalled on purpose", etc. With no judges watching the game, it would be impossible to tell who would be in the right. I know we're all honest, but our version of the truth can too often be clouded by our own competitiveness. I don't think adding an element that could lead to such problems would be a good thing.

And FWIW, I have seen/heard few if any complaints about length of games. Has it been a problem for anyone?

Red · « **Reply #23 on:** February 14, 2010, 08:08:06 AM »

My post is readable now.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #24 on:** February 14, 2010, 09:10:26 AM »

I haven't read the whole post, but the way it is now, ROOT games have no time limit, correct? This is a large reason I am not in it, because I know so many people will be playing super slow decks because they can get away with it, and I get bored (and have other things to do). That said, however, I think it is a good thing for at least some category somewhere to have no time limit, because then you are able to play with some of those super slow but fun archtypes that never win tournaments because they always time out (like deck d/c ANB decks or heroless decks). IMO, it is inconvenient that we have made that category the only one socially acceptable to play in your underwear, but I guess it would be difficult to organize a no-time-limit category in a real-life tournament, so in the end, I will put my vote in for no time limit.

News:

Author Topic: Poll: For Online Gamers (Read 5376 times)

Ironica

Warrior_Monk

Ironica