Conquer Club

Real Time Round Limits

Currently, round limits are in turns. I suggest that there be an option to also make them in real time:

• Allow a real time limit to be set at game creation (1 month, 3 months, 1 year, etc)
• When such time limit is reached, one additional round will be played after the current round, at which time the game will end.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• A major problem with round limit games is that near the end players stop attacking and sit there.
• This is especially pronounced in no-spoils 20 round limit games (which seem to be the norm for tournaments). Basically in 90% of games after round 10 no one attacks.
• Most non-limit games end faster than round-limit ones because players attack more. However, some do not - and these excessively long games are problematic in tournaments.
• This would prevent excessively long games without motivating players to refrain from attacking.

I don t really how it could solve the problem. The point of not attacking in round limit games is that it s not in your overall interest and the game has a round deadline. If the game has a time deadline you are back to square 1. You are still in a better position not attacking. Also, people would play with the timer... Taking the turns as fast as possible or waiting for the last hours depending on what is in their interrest.

I feel this would be a useful additional option, particularly for tournaments, where you can have hugely variant game completion times even if you make games at the same time and with identical settings. It would also allow a little bit more freedom in tournament design. The current round limit is good, but it kind of forces TOs to use a lower round limit because statistically, you are likely to get that one game that takes so much longer to progress than the others, and hold up the tournament, if higher limits are used.

betiko wrote:I don t really how it could solve the problem. The point of not attacking in round limit games is that it s not in your overall interest and the game has a round deadline. If the game has a time deadline you are back to square 1. You are still in a better position not attacking. Also, people would play with the timer... Taking the turns as fast as possible or waiting for the last hours depending on what is in their interrest.

Games currently work something like this (I'm generalizing, and this is for no spoils):

Most games (say 90%), given no round limits, end in ~15 rounds. Even if if they take ~20 rounds, the later ones are much faster as only a few players are left. However, a few games (10%) stalemate and take 100+ turns.

The problem is those 100+ turn games - and how to remove them in tournaments without harming the other 90%. Adding a 20-round limit hurts most games, as there's no incentive to attack/eliminate people. So every game ends up taking 20 rounds with no eliminations. My suggestion would fix this: there would be no reason to stalemate until near the time limit - but because most games never get there in the first place, they would proceed normally.

Sure, people could try to game it. But to what end? It's not as if hitting the round limit somehow helps anyone, and I don't know anyone who finds it fun. This a problem of misaligned incentives, not player abuse.

If I know that taking my turn slowly or quickly could affect how many rounds I could play (and therefore the amount of armies I can get over someone else), especially if I am about to reach the round limit, then it can and will be "abused".

Great idea, and I encourage you to come up with a way around this, as you've got support from a TD already I can see great use for this in tournaments

JamesKer1 wrote:If I know that taking my turn slowly or quickly could affect how many rounds I could play (and therefore the amount of armies I can get over someone else), especially if I am about to reach the round limit, then it can and will be "abused".

Great idea, and I encourage you to come up with a way around this, as you've got support from a TD already I can see great use for this in tournaments

I have to admit I don't really see this being an issue - sure, you could take slower turns I guess, but people do that already for lots of reasons, and this is a huge (and legal) part of freestyle strategy. While it's not exactly ideal to have people waiting, I don't think it would be particularly harmful, nor that it would happen enough to make games last even as long as the current round limits do. And it would only become an issue near the limit, by which time most non-stalemate games will already have ended.

However, there's a simple fix - add a minimum round limit. So if you want a two-month game, you could have the limit be two months or 20 rounds, whichever is longer. Then the worst possible outcome from delay would just be the same round limit we have now.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

A major problem with round limit games is that near the end players stop attacking and sit there.
This is especially pronounced in no-spoils 20 round limit games (which seem to be the norm for tournaments). this is not the norm
Basically in 90% of games after round 10 no one attacks.
totally disagree most of my private games are set to 20 round limit. 90% stop at round 10 ha bull.

codierose wrote:totally disagree most of my private games are set to 20 round limit. 90% stop at round 10 ha bull.

How many of those are no spoils standard games with 6+ players? Any?

Just look at any of the no spoils tournaments, easily 90% of games go into stacking mode by round 10.