Author Topic: New Time Rule Proposal  (Read 4473 times)

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
New Time Rule Proposal
« on: September 23, 2016, 08:57:14 AM »
+1
In addition to the time limits for individual actions, I propose the following for Regional and National tournaments:

-Players play using a chess clock that runs for the player who is active and is paused when both players are undertaking an action (such as following a Mayhem or ANB).
-If the game times out and one player has used at least 2/3 of the time, his opponent wins with 5 lost souls.
-If a judge is called, the delay is assessed to the player who called the judge if the judge confirms his opponent's play. If the play is overturned, no penalty is assessed.
-If a judge is called for a question, the delay is assessed to the inquiring player.
-If a judge rules against the same player four times in a game, his opponent will win with 5 lost souls at the end of the game.
-A player may only call a judge for a question twice in a game.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline wyatt_marcum

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • NO, ITS A THREE LINER!!!!!
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2016, 05:46:41 PM »
0
I don't know about limiting judging. I had games at his nats with multiple judgings that were all deserved, where neither player was sure of how something worked. I do understand the using of chess cocks, however, who will pay for the clocks? players or hosts?.
これは現実の生活ですか。これはただのファンタジーですか。土地のスライドは、現実からの脱出でキャッチ。あなたの目を開きます。見て、空とを参照してください。私はちょうど貧しい少年、同情は要りませんので、私

Offline Drrek

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • The Bee of the Sea
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2016, 06:03:57 PM »
+8
Players should ALWAYS be allowed to call judges for rulings, that is what judges are there for and prevents players, especially younger, newer players, from getting bullied into accepting bad rulings from their opponents.  There is an argument for making sure time is extended for judge calls in games, but a player should never have to fear calling a judge to confirm a ruling.
The user formerly known as Easty.

Offline CountFount

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+23)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
  • I'll be your Huckleberry
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2016, 06:21:08 PM »
+1
I don't know about limiting judging. I had games at his nats with multiple judgings that were all deserved, where neither player was sure of how something worked. I do understand the using of chess cocks, however, who will pay for the clocks? players or hosts?.

There are apps
Now that we're a family, I can be the ulll-timate DAD.

Offline EmJayBee83

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • *****
  • Posts: 5486
  • Ha! It's funny because the squirrel gets dead.
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • mjb Games
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2016, 07:39:04 PM »
+6
In addition to the time limits for individual actions, I propose the following for Regional and National tournaments:
What--exactly--is this proposal trying to fix? Do you feel players are intentionally stalling to gain a competitive advantage or what?

This strikes me as a very large step down the slippery slope to uber-competitiveness that would be detrimental to the spirit of the game.

Offline Isildur

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4775
  • Mr. Deacon
    • -
    • Southwest Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2016, 08:20:52 PM »
0
I think having time added to the clock if a judge is called should be considered as a possibility. I definitely have had some games at Nats where 5-10 minutes of our 45(?) minute game was devoted to rulings and the game ended up being 4-4 or some sort of non full point win because we ran out of time.
3 Prophets Packs ftw

Offline Professoralstad

  • Tournament Host, Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+47)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10841
  • Everything is Awesome!
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2016, 08:26:01 PM »
+1
In addition to the time limits for individual actions, I propose the following for Regional and National tournaments:
What--exactly--is this proposal trying to fix? Do you feel players are intentionally stalling to gain a competitive advantage or what?

This strikes me as a very large step down the slippery slope to uber-competitiveness that would be detrimental to the spirit of the game.


It could fix two potential issues, that I see. First, it would keep players who tend to take longer turns or more time for each decision accountable. Second, it would keep players who feel, rightly or not, that their opponents are stalling or are taking too long from having to call judges over to monitor the situation. Both of those situations are rooted in an uber-competitve spirit, IMO, just without the hard evidence that time is the issue. It's not necessarily that people are intentionally stalling, it's just that some people take a much longer time than they should, and if the sum of their actions literally takes twice as long as those of their opponents, that is a problem.

Some problems/pitfalls are obvious: availability of clocks, adding complication to an already very complicated game (especially during battles involving a lot of cards/factors), the judging issues that have been brought up by others. But if there could be a simple/practical way to mitigate those problems, I would be in favor.
Press 1 for more options.

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2016, 10:06:18 AM »
+4
Here are the concerns I am seeing so far:

1. This would make people scared to call judges.
2. This would make people more competitive.

Here are my answers:

1. This would actually make it harder for people to bully new players, because if they get caught doing it 4 times they'll lose a game they would otherwise have won if they'd just played honorably. At the same time, it is not fair to top-table players to not win games because their RLK opponent is constantly challenging them on basic rules and situations and burning time waiting for a judge to come over and explain something very basic again.

2. People are going to be as competitive as they are going to be. One of my games at Nationals technically should have timed out before I won, but my opponent recognized that he had taken way more time than me and couldn't get through my defense so he let me take my last 3 turns in rapid succession to make sure I could get through his defense, which I could. But at my first Nationals, I had an opponent who was much older than me. He'd lost 20 minutes before the round was over, but proceeded to take forever to do everything from that point on. I was 15 and still pretty socially awkward so I didn't have the presence of mind to call a judge over (although by the time I was sure he was stalling and not just thinking a lot the damage had been done anyway), so I ended up winning 4-1. I still took 3rd overall, but clearly that game left a bad taste in my mouth. A decade later it's still the only game I remember from that nationals. There are already gracious and ungracious players (neither of which is wrong in a tournament setting), and I believe these rules will actually encourage respectful play.


Redemption has a unique vibe. I realized 2/3 the way through T1-2P that the top table was dominated by people who were laughing, smiling, enjoying the game, and caring as much about whether their opponents were having fun as they. Most of the tryhards fell off pretty quickly anyway. The goal of these rules is not really so much to correct a prevalent problem (though it is a problem frequently enough) as to prevent hard feelings because there is nothing on the books to confirm or deny the sense that one was unfairly robbed of a victory.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline coknight

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2017, 04:17:23 AM »
0
Here are the concerns I am seeing so far:

1. This would make people scared to call judges.
2. This would make people more competitive.

Here are my answers:

1. This would actually make it harder for people to bully new players, because if they get caught doing it 4 times they'll lose a game they would otherwise have won if they'd just played honorably. At the same time, it is not fair to top-table players to not win games because their RLK opponent is constantly challenging them on basic rules and situations and burning time waiting for a judge to come over and explain something very basic again.

2. People are going to be as competitive as they are going to be. One of my games at Nationals technically should have timed out before I won, but my opponent recognized that he had taken way more time than me and couldn't get through my defense so he let me take my last 3 turns in rapid succession to make sure I could get through his defense, which I could. But at my first Nationals, I had an opponent who was much older than me. He'd lost 20 minutes before the round was over, but proceeded to take forever to do everything from that point on. I was 15 and still pretty socially awkward so I didn't have the presence of mind to call a judge over (although by the time I was sure he was stalling and not just thinking a lot the damage had been done anyway), so I ended up winning 4-1. I still took 3rd overall, but clearly that game left a bad taste in my mouth. A decade later it's still the only game I remember from that nationals. There are already gracious and ungracious players (neither of which is wrong in a tournament setting), and I believe these rules will actually encourage respectful play.


Redemption has a unique vibe. I realized 2/3 the way through T1-2P that the top table was dominated by people who were laughing, smiling, enjoying the game, and caring as much about whether their opponents were having fun as they. Most of the tryhards fell off pretty quickly anyway. The goal of these rules is not really so much to correct a prevalent problem (though it is a problem frequently enough) as to prevent hard feelings because there is nothing on the books to confirm or deny the sense that one was unfairly robbed of a victory.

what is a tryhard?

Offline bmc25

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 407
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #9 on: August 07, 2017, 08:37:29 AM »
0

what is a tryhard?

Someone who tries too hard. Someone who only cares about winning. Someone who is so focused on winning they don't care if no one has fun as long as they win.
Benjamin Campbell

Offline The Schaefer

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: New Time Rule Proposal
« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2017, 09:04:32 AM »
0
I don't want to suggest players/hosts having to buy something for play but a chess clock would be a simple fix for time issues. Just use some time delay settings so that a player doesn't have their timer decrease for a certain length of time and that should handle any time stalling/wasting issues. Seeing as it would probably not work to have all players purchase one I think having some available via actual clocks or via an app that can support a time delay and only implementing them upon player/judge request might be doable. As for how to determine how much time each player would have, how much of a delay, and what to do if a player does have their time expire that would be another matter entirely.

 I do feel though that if a player can be awarded souls for an opponent not showing up at the start of a match then it would also be fair to award souls if a player has been stalling or taking excessively long turns as both eliminate the possibility of timeouts because of a player wasting time. I don't think this is too big of an issue. Who knows though maybe if something like this was implemented across the board T2 2P might not be prone to timeouts anymore. Though i doubt it.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal