Cactus Game Design Message Boards

T2-2P was just as bad with time outs, if not worse. I think the issue is with defense in T2, not with dominants.

Yeah, it's hard to finish games within time limits when people actually play defense

So do we:

1 - take away the requirement of equal defense/offense in T2 so that it can become like T1 where almost everyone plays offense heavy

2 - create cards over time that just make offenses so much more powerful that even equal size defenses can't stop them

3 - extend time limits to allow for games with defense to finish

I know there has been disagreement in the past regarding the amount of time allowed in a Redemption game.  I recently discovered what I think may be part of the reason why my perspective is different from some of my esteemed colleagues.

Before I played Redemption competitively, I played many other strategy games for many years.  As a kid, I played monopoly games with my family for hours.  I played RISK with my friends for hours.  My favorite game in the world is Fortress America, and almost every game lasts exactly 6 hours.  I've even played Diplomacy online through emails, and the game lasted for 6 months.  So really 45min or 60min is actually very short compared to a lot of other strategy games that I enjoy.

Other people probably don't play these other games on a regular basis though, and so they are comparing a Redemption game to things that are much shorter, like perhaps another card game like spoons or poker, or maybe even a light strategy game like Settlers of Catan or Ticket to Ride.

Anyway, I just thought this was an interesting connection.  What does everyone else think?

Are we talking about tournaments in real life, or just online games?

I know as a kid I had 6 hours free to play RISK, because I didn't have any other responsibilities. As an adult, I don't have that kind of time available, especially every week. I am certainly more willing to try to make that time available if it is time with my family, rather than time sitting in front of a computer with people I have never met in person.

Perhaps that is just me, though. 

You can't really compare a strategic card game with strategic board games...you'd have to compare to similar games (such as MtG, YGO, etc.).

That depends on what a person's background with games has been.  My background is in strategy board games, and so that influences my perception of time for games.  Other people probably do come to Redemption following a background in MtG, YGO, etc. and that would also influence their perceptions.

I'm surprised that I didn't think of this years ago

As brow already mentioned, you're comparing apples to oranges. CCG's by nature are designed to play out in short time spans.

1 - take away the requirement of equal defense/offense in T2 so that it can become like T1 where almost everyone plays offense heavy

2 - create cards over time that just make offenses so much more powerful that even equal size defenses can't stop them

3 - extend time limits to allow for games with defense to finish

You know what a better option than all of these ideas is? Play faster. I can understand (even if I disagree) the argument for wanting bigger time limits in T1 (thus allowing for larger decks), but in T2, there's literally no excuse. If 90% of players (and a higher percentage than that among top players) can manage to play within the current 75 minute time limit, I see zero reason to change it to give an advantage to worse players (and I do firmly believe that if a player is playing slowly, that has to do with their skill level). Mark, I would consider you to be a great player, and I've thoroughly enjoyed our games together, but you play more slowly than any other player I would even consider "good". I understand wanting to process and make sure all your bases are covered, but the game is inherently weighted towards people who can play faster, and especially under the current time out system, it's incredibly unfair to other players, because they get less time to unwind between games, and the games as a whole are more stressful coming down to the wire. I would encourage you to keep time on your games, and see how much time you take overall compared to your opponents. I have no idea what the actual number would be, but it might put things in perspective for all of us. I can't help but notice that the biggest proponent of increasing time limits is also one of (if not the) the only competitive players who benefits from them.

Quote from: Chris on March 08, 2013, 12:17:13 PM

I understand wanting to process and make sure all your bases are covered, but the game is inherently weighted towards people who can play faster,

It's like saying the game of basketball is inherently weighted towards taller players.  Spud Webb would tell you that's biased.

Besides, your paying Rob a disservice by eliminating his customers.

It is. Taller players have an advantage playing basketball. Should we set the net to 8' to compensate for shorter players?

You know what a better option than all of these ideas is? Play faster. I can understand (even if I disagree) the argument for wanting bigger time limits in T1 (thus allowing for larger decks), but in T2, there's literally no excuse. If 90% of players (and a higher percentage than that among top players) can manage to play within the current 75 minute time limit, I see zero reason to change it to give an advantage to worse players (and I do firmly believe that if a player is playing slowly, that has to do with their skill level).

At the T2 only, these are the timeouts that I know of that occurred in T2-2P, there may have (and probably were) others:

Round 1:

Kirk Dennison vs. Bill Voigt, Bill Wins 6-5.

Round 2:

Craig Fountain vs. Pat Wester, Pat Wins 1-0

Round 3:

Jayden Alstad vs. Jordan Alstad, Jayden Wins 5-4; Mitch Stewart vs. Justin Alstad, Mitch Wins 6-4

Round 4:

Kirk Dennison vs. Gabe Isbell, Kirk Wins 5-3

Round 5:

Jordan Alstad vs. Bill Voigt, Tie 6-6; Jayden Alstad vs. Mitch Stewart, Tie 5-5

Round 7:

Kirk Dennison vs. Jayden Alstad, Tie 5-5.

If you notice, there are some pretty high-caliber players there. Defenses can be incredibly strong in T2, such that even fast/highly-skilled players commonly timeout. However, I honestly don't see that as a problem. For example, I really enjoyed my games with Bill and Jayden, there was tons of back-and-forth, great plays, and a lot of trying to figure out how to break through the defense. They were actually strategy games, as opposed to some of my other games which went quickly just because my opponents drew few if any of their counters, and I got very fortunate draws, to the point I was able to roll them. T2 is going to necessarily be a longer game than T1, and I think most T2 players are just fine with that; if you want 15-30 minute games, there's a type for that.

Like the other Prof, I have no idea what lengths of games are like in other CCGs, so I am perfectly happy with spending an hour playing a card game, which is the minimum I expect to spend playing other games (even a card game like Bang! with 5 or more players can get to be about that long).

All that said, I don't like slow-play, but in my experience that happens a lot less in T2 than T1. The reasoning I think is because there is actually LESS diversity in T2 decks than T1 decks. A T1 deck may have 8-12 different Heroes and 6-10 different good enhancements, while a T2 deck will more than likely have 6-10 different Heroes and 4-8 different good enhancements, just with multiples of some of those. Which means I am not going to be quite as spread out, and my options are limited, thus I don't have as many options to consider. So it isn't slow-play that causes timeouts, it's the strong defenses in T2. And I am much happier about a timeout tie in T2 where there were tons of battles and good plays on either side, than a 4-2 timeout win in T1 because my opponent had to sit and think for two minutes every time he did anything.

It's interesting that Jayden timed out 3 of his games because he probably had the fastest deck at the tournament. So the fact that he was using a "speed" deck did nothing to shorten the game.

I would agree that T2 timeouts are mostly due to strong defenses. I believe that often times it is not beneficial to make a RA at all in T2 if you don't have an "answer" to what your opponent has for defense. This is compared to T1 where you can make your opponent play an enhancement and you know he will not have another copy of it (barring 154 card decks). In T2 your opponent still has up to 3 more copies waiting for you and you have to use up precious heroes in the process. Another factor is that your opponent's banding chain gains counters every successful block which makes it more difficult to get past in the later game.

Another factor in T2 is A New Beginning. T2 decks often have a fair amount of support cards that are helpful in getting your deck set up. ANB naturally restarts the support card accumulation.

All that being said, I still find that the majority of T2 games finish within the current time limits and I do not believe any more time should be given for T2. In 4 years of playing T2 at nationals (24 game sample) I had 1 timeout game. In that game my opponent and I (Gabe) actually called the game early as a timeout because our offenses were not going to be able to get past the opposing defense.

Kirk

Mark, I would consider you to be a great player, and I've thoroughly enjoyed our games together, but you play more slowly than any other player I would even consider "good".

Thanks for the compliment part of that.  But if the other Prof is right, then there were at least 8 timeouts at the T2-only.  None of those players are known for being slow, and most of them are well known for being great.  So I don't think the problem is just with me.

Prof, I believe you'll agree with me that it is somewhat a product of our "instantaneous" society.

This could go into it.  But I'm not trying to say that my perspective is better than the other side.  I'm just discovering that both sides could have a very reasonable explanation behind why they view the amount of time differently.

Maybe you're completely missing the point that T2 is a slow format by nature, thus more prone to timeouts than T1.

And what is the cause of it being a slower format?  I think it is because everyone is forced to play as much defense as offense due to deck building rules.  This completely fits with my perspective that if more people played defense in T1 that there would also be more timeouts there too.  And this completely fits with my perspective that the time limits in the game are prohibiting people from playing more than minimal defense at the top levels.  This whole line of reasoning seems pretty logical to me.

It's also highly amusing you point out that people are either 'known' or not known for being slow, then immediately follow up with this:

Quote

So I don't think the problem is just with me.

Again, I think it's logical to recognize that I have a reputation for slow play (which I feel is somewhat deserved, but not as much as my reputation makes it seem).  I also think it is logical to recognize that the Alstads and Gabe do NOT have a reputation for playing slow.  And it is logical to recognize that if these "fast" players are also timing out, then the problem of timeouts is NOT due to the person and is a broader problem.  This whole line of reasoning seems pretty logical to me, too.

Maybe now that I've spelled it all out and connected the dots for you, it will make more sense to you.

Quote from: Chris on March 08, 2013, 01:29:34 PM

Quote

If you notice, there are some pretty high-caliber players there. Defenses can be incredibly strong in T2, such that even fast/highly-skilled players commonly timeout. However, I honestly don't see that as a problem.

I know I keep bringing this up, but it's a serious issue I think needs to be addressed. I think it becomes a problem because of the current system of scoring. I'm not sure how many people will agree, but in my own experience, I tend to encounter time outs due to slow opponents than because of slow decks. While I agree this factor is lessened greatly in T2 (especially because most "slow players" tend to be newer, so they don't recognize cards at a glance), I think it's still a factor. I don't have issues with time outs on their face, it's when a player is being penalized for a bad draw that they would have recovered from or a slow opponent that it's an issue. That said, I didn't realize the timeouts in T2 were that prevalent.

I would actually be in favor of getting rid of the 3-2-1.5-1-0 system of scoring, and just going to a 2-1-0 (Wins/Ties/Losses) system. It would make it easier to score tournaments, and should discourage slow play quite a bit. I am actually probably going to propose that on the other side.

Quote

Quote from: The Guardian on March 08, 2013, 01:12:03 PM

It's interesting that Jayden timed out 3 of his games because he probably had the fastest deck at the tournament. So the fact that he was using a "speed" deck did nothing to shorten the game.

We don't necessarily know that; there could have been other mitigating factors (soul drought for instance) that influenced it. Then again, I just got out of a stats class, so that's where my mind is right now. 

His first timeout resulted from him running out of Provisions to avoid my monstrosity of a defense. His third timeout resulted from a late ANB that buried his SoG/NJ and late soul drought. I'm not sure what happened in the second one vs. Mitch, but I know Mitch benefited significantly from soul drought in a few of his games, so that would make sense.

Also, Kirk is correct on all counts.
[/quote]

I just shut him down early.  He didn't start breaking through till the end of the match after my d was nearly depleted (only 2 more block in the deck a dou and a burial).  Got 7 blocks off enhancements, hit his sog with confusion, and got some more blocks with arts and doms and hit on falling away.  My defense was on fire early-mid game, his kicked in mid-late match.  And dou really didn't hide souls in the game.  Most of the time I drew souls the following turn (this was the case in most of the games with the exception of the games against Josh and Justin where souls just didn't come out). 

Tell me, when 2 speed decks squaring off against each other in T1 clock a total of an hour and 45 minutes in a single game, and one of the people piloting such a deck is you, exactly what defense slash excuses do you have to fall back on now?

Actually I had a friend who wanted to see how online games worked sitting and watching us play that game.  He and I were both surprised at how often you were just sitting there without any cards moving on your side of the table.  If you remember I asked you probably 3 different times during that game if you were even still there, because I was wondering if you had accidentally disconnected.

All that to say that I don't think the length of that game was due any more to me than it was to you.

Did I miss any of the facts? Time to close the thread?

Good summary of the facts, and good suggestion.