Massive Assault Official Forum
   
It is currently Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:06 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

What kind of time limit fits you best
one day limit for turns;penalty for 2-3 days; forced defeat after 3 days 13%  13%  [ 2 ]
two day limit for turns,penalty for 3-6 days,forced defeat after a a week 25%  25%  [ 4 ]
three day limit for turns;penalty for a week delay;defeat after 2 weeks. 63%  63%  [ 10 ]
Total votes : 16
Author Message
 Post subject: POLL - introducing time limit on sending turns in clanwar
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 9:16 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
i should say i feel disappointed by how clanwar goes...it goes EXTREMELY slow .
people who play with me are lagging like hell for example Redfox not sent turn for 6 days.And majority of people in our clan agree that.war should go faster.the way it goes it can take month to finish a game.if we start battles each week it's logical we should finish it within a week or if large map in 2 weeks.
instead sometimes turns are not sent for whole weeks.
of course if people have serious RL troubles they should write to moderator to make them sleeping.but if they just voluntarily delay finishing of game to slow enemy advancement - this is not acceptable.
so the question is - what kind of time limit we want?
i belive there should be 2 sorts of penalties
1) monetary penalty for small delay
2) forced defeat if turn not sent within limit without reason
3)

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 9:23 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 693
Karma: 0

Location: University of Tennessee, USA
That actually doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

I'd prefer a little more leeway though...not such that somebody can get around the system, just in that every now and then something happens and you can't get back for a while, so it'd be nice to have a couple "RL Days" every month or so. For example, I'm one of the fastest turn-takers I've found, but my current torture...I mean "job" prevents doing quite that well for a couple weeks, so I've had to put off a few games (non-tourney and non-clanwar delayed first, of course) here and there.

_________________
Q: How many ADHD people does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Oooh look, a kitty!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 10:03 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf

Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 8:50 am
Posts: 1443
Karma: 0
think we need more options, i'd vote for 3 days limit forced defeat after a week. (so a combination of 2 & 3)

_________________
Have fun, that's an order! If you win even better!!
Clan War Site: http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar/

Dragonshard Fan Site: http://www.rpgplanet.com/dragonshard/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 10:37 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
yes option 3 actually mean defeat after week and 1 day so on week two
but again i dont know how to edit this thing

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 4:08 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
Frankly, I think the three day limit is correct, but players should be able to kill the game after three days and their opponent loses once they do. If you have a three day limit - something I believe in strongly - then you should enforce it, or rather let the players enforce it (thus leaving the game, as it should be, in their hands). Someone fails to meet the deadline and the game is ended on them, too bad, they lose and the war carries on.

I see no reason to start messing about with warnings. If you can't commit to the schedule, then stay out of the war until you can. Three days is hardly fast paced as is, wtihout warnings and the like. Say three days, let the players enforce it using the finish button, and let the organisers simply count up the results and end the broken games.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 4:32 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 8:12 am
Posts: 603
Karma: 1

Location: New York
Why don't we do it that way already? Oh, yeah, because that would make sense. </sarcasm> ;)

_________________
Never stop fighting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 5:41 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
Quitch wrote:
Frankly, I think the three day limit is correct, but players should be able to kill the game after three days and their opponent loses once they do. If you have a three day limit - something I believe in strongly - then you should enforce it, or rather let the players enforce it (thus leaving the game, as it should be, in their hands). Someone fails to meet the deadline and the game is ended on them, too bad, they lose and the war carries on.


This isn't a individual battle here. This is a team effort. The team should not be punished for the inactivity of a player. I believe that all the clans would agree with me, as all have had problems with lagging players through no fault of their own. I would be more willing to advocate assigning a new defender after the end of a specefied period. If the second defender lags out, then the game can be ended with the appropriate result. With that rule, the clan leader would be very encouraged to make sure the second player is a steady one.

This is what we have done currently, but with a specefied limit, it would encourage the players to stick to the task better or let their leaders know if they are leaving for any amount of time.

I would like to see an approach that took a specific player's activity into account when choosing a turn limit. Perhaps some kind of incentive (cheaper attack?) to set a shorter turn limit, if both players agree. Even better would be a system where the clan battle leader knows the activity level of each player, and the turn limit can be assigned automatically depending on what the activity of both players are. It would probably be good to give an incentive to both clans to encourage them to assign players with like activity levels.

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 6:00 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
It is the teams responsibility to ensure the player can meet the demands placed upon them. This is not a team effort, but the effort of several teams, and the other teams shouldn't be held by one, regardless of whether that problem is the result of several team members or one.

Taking 15 minutes, once every three days is not a trying demand. If someone can't keep up with that, why are they playing in the clan war? I don't see anything wrong with making exceptions if the organisers are informed in advace, but I don't see the point of this warning nonsense. The bruden of responsibility should be on the players and the teams they play for, not the organisers. If a player overruns the time limit without having stated in advance they will be unavailable, then they should lose the battle and it should be up to their team to decide how best to deal with the situation.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 6:01 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
It is the teams responsibility to ensure the player can meet the demands placed upon them. This is not a team effort, but the effort of several teams, and the other teams shouldn't be held by one, regardless of whether that problem is the result of several team members or one.

Taking 15 minutes, once every three days is not a trying demand. If someone can't keep up with that, why are they playing in the clan war? I don't see anything wrong with making exceptions if the organisers are informed in advace, but I don't see the point of this warning nonsense. The bruden of responsibility should be on the players and the teams they play for, not the organisers. If a player overruns the time limit without having stated in advance they will be unavailable, then they should lose the battle and it should be up to their team to decide how best to deal with the situation.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 8:24 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
Quitch wrote:
It is the teams responsibility to ensure the player can meet the demands placed upon them. This is not a team effort, but the effort of several teams, and the other teams shouldn't be held by one, regardless of whether that problem is the result of several team members or one.


I agree, that's why I proposed an alternative. I know that the current system doesn't work well, because as is its been the organizers that have negotiated over every single instance of lagging. We need a system in place to know exactly how to deal with it so it doesn't rely on always being able to find the right people online.

Quitch wrote:
Taking 15 minutes, once every three days is not a trying demand.


Certainly not trying, but when things do arise, I believe the proposed result is too severe. Have you lost a game by timeout before? A game where you were far along, or even had a serious advantage? I have, and they were 14 day limits. I went on vacation, and didn't get to them in time. It was not fun, and boy does it hurt your ratings to have a lower ranked person beat you that way.

But the fact you're dealing with planets in an epic war makes it that much worse. I can see how the attackers could have this severe of a result, as they lose nothing over the cash they used for the attack, but the defenders are going to have huge implications.

Quitch wrote:
If someone can't keep up with that, why are they playing in the clan war?


We have a problem here. In some of the clans a majority of the players have very little to do with the war. They play their turns (sometimes), but their priorities are elsewhere, and when other matters conflict, they choose to deal with other matters over MAN. If we insisted that only those willing to make the clan war a priority, the clan war would cease to exist.

Of course we do need clan leaders willing to communicate with the organizers at least every couple days, and are quick to assign defenses, but so far that hasn't been too horrible of an issue (at least lately).

Quitch wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with making exceptions if the organisers are informed in advace, but I don't see the point of this warning nonsense. The bruden of responsibility should be on the players and the teams they play for, not the organisers. If a player overruns the time limit without having stated in advance they will be unavailable, then they should lose the battle and it should be up to their team to decide how best to deal with the situation.


With a designated system in place, how is this an additional burden? The organizers have to go through and check all battles anyways, and its easy to sort by those that are over time. We just send a message to the offending clan, and if they don't reassign a defender we finish the game with the lagging player losing.

So in the instance we have a player go over time we can have the following process take place (according to my proposal):

1) A message is sent to that clan's leader indicating which battles are over time.

2) If no turns have been taken and no defenders are reassigned within a specified period of time (a day), the game is finished.

3) If a second player was assigned, we flag that in the newly created game, and cancel the old game without result (very easy to do with the tournament manager, this whole process would take a couple minutes).

4) If the new game goes over time, it is finished automatically.

Hmm, thinking about it, we could automate this more. If we decide on a 3 day turn limit, we can set the first battle to have a 4 day limit, giving time for the clan leaders to reassign a lagging battle. The second battle would be given a 3 day limit. This would eliminate any organizer responsibility, other than making sure the clan leaders watch their players' turns, and watching for games that have been finished by time-out

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 9:41 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
if any one goes to vacation or has lot of work he should inform moderators in advance to put him to sleep...

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 10:03 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
If you wish to extend the time per turn, say seven days, then fine. What I take issue with is the utterly pointless warnings and the like. Make the cut-off point a cut-off point. It should be down to the player to keep the game in order, and the team to ensure communication is good enough that they assign the right person at the right time.

The time limit itself isn't the issue to me, it's the actions proposed. Choose a limit and then stick to it. Don't say it's a 3 day limit when it's not. A 3 day limit followed by warnings is a limit for as long as the warning period is, so why not just make it that long in the first place?

I want to just hit the finish button when my opponent is away too long, not have to wait while I inform the organiser, who informs the clan leader, who in turn contacts the member, and then of course the chain has to go the other way before the issue is resolved. How can anyone believe this is a good way of doing things? By sending a member to a planet a clan leader is giving that person the responsibility for that battle. If they can't hold up that responsibility that is an issue for their leader, but should have no effect on the other clans.

If people feel other things come above MA, as I'm sure some things do, then they need to let the organisers know in advace. That should be the only time someone is allowed to overrun their time, no other. The finish button should be enforced. The reason should have to be a good one too, I for one am tired of tournaments where everything offline is treated as more important. You are making a level of commitment by entering the war, both to your clan and the other clans, and you should uphold that.

A weak system, like the one suggested in the poll, will not do that. It involves as much fannying around as we have now, just with a shorter time period before it begins.

If you were in a sports team and continually missed events because you felt you had something else to do, you're be kicked off the team. This should be no different. No one is forced to join a clan. Doing so means you are committing a certain amount of time to this game, and no one should think otherwise.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 11:53 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
2 Quitch - i agree proposed system IS weak...
but when i offered really harsh system (strict 1-3 day turn limit and then autofinish) it created so much SCREAM even in my own clan so i abandoned the tries to enforce it.

the people are lazy...they can not be forced to send turns on regular basis..they feel they first should care about their RL jobs cars wife kids pets and all such stuff and only then play MA...and if we try to kick out everybody who not play fast we will have to kick out 90% members of clan and clanwar will die...

and btw - are you Quitch in clan?

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:30 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 8:12 am
Posts: 603
Karma: 1

Location: New York
Quitch has a good point there, there is a certain level of commitment for being in a clan and playing the wars. All the members of my clan are committed to doing well in the war. Anyone who isn't, is gone. I've already removed two people from the clan for inactivity. I'm even getting them all to learn about the .beat internet time so we can organize events more efficiently. Well, that's all I got for now, gotta get back to work before the dragon lady catches me.

_________________
Never stop fighting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 5:36 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
@Mrakobes

If these people aren't prepared to make a move every three days then this really begs the question: why are they in the clan? If someone can't put 15 minutes every three days in, can't rearrange a couple of things to accomodate their clan responsibilities, then we should ask ourselves if they should be entering this sort of tournament at all.

I'm a member of FoR, currently crushing your members in the LCW.

While some may balk at making moves every three days, the lack of tight regulation is what puts me off the war. I don't want to have to wait 14 days between turns. Even I'm lazy with my turns, and it's because there's no real reason to give them high priority. My 7 day non-clan games take more precendence because I need to get them done, but in the clan wars I can just let it drag on and on, and then into a warning before I need lift a finger.

How such a rule every came into existence when defenders were receiving no money for contested planets is beyond me.

There's nothing wrong with having other priorities, but you should have realised when joining a clan you were comitting to fighting for it in things like tournaments. If not, then you shouldn't belong to a clan, simple as that. It should be like any other team, if you don't put in the time then you get dropped, there are plenty who will and who are waiting to take your place.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 5:44 pm 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
yaaawn...Quitch...it's theoretically right what you say but try making ALL clan leaders to agree that clanwar battles should be autofinished after 3 days....begin with maelstrom

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 6:26 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
Seven days would be fine with me, I just want autofinish, period. No warnings, no messaging, no penalties, just the finish button.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 8:46 pm 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Posts: 53
Karma: 0

Location: Seattle WA USA
Quitch wrote:
There's nothing wrong with having other priorities, but you should have realised when joining a clan you were comitting to fighting for it in things like tournaments. If not, then you shouldn't belong to a clan, simple as that. It should be like any other team, if you don't put in the time then you get dropped, there are plenty who will and who are waiting to take your place.



I can't really say too much as I currently don't belong to a clan, but I must agree with Quitch's statement quoted above. I have lots of priorities but I can always find time for one more turn sometime in the 24 hours of any given day and I would think that as a member of a clan in a tournament, each player would find time to put forth a turn within a given time limit.

Of course if they can't, It's like Quitch said, there's others willing and waiting to take a spot in a clan.... Myself included.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:39 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
Quitch wrote:
Seven days would be fine with me, I just want autofinish, period. No warnings, no messaging, no penalties, just the finish button.


My last suggestion was this:

Quitch wrote:
If we decide on a 3 day turn limit, we can set the first battle to have a 4 day limit, giving time for the clan leaders to reassign a lagging battle. The second battle would be given a 3 day limit. This would eliminate any organizer responsibility, other than making sure the clan leaders watch their players' turns, and watching for games that have been finished by time-out


Thus the responsibility is in the hands of the clan leaders. Not the players, as all they see is that they can finish a game after 4 days. If the defender is reassigned, they get a new game with a 3 day limit and the old game is gone, and it impacts the player very little. If the opposing clan leader is dilligent, the maximum wait you get on one turn is 7 days worst case. If the clan leader isn't, then you click finish and you won in 4 days time.

The clan leaders who add the players to their clan are then responsible to make sure their team doesn't have any underserved and instant defeats. Not the players, not the organizers.

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 27, 2004 11:43 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
Maelstrom makes sence
so the rules is
all games made with 7 days limit
- 3 days time limit - if it reached the guilty player reassigned
if not reassigned or if again delay - autofinish.
is THIS okay with all?

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y