Game Variants that could speed up play

This is the home for suggestions for site improvements, changes to house rules, and new variants.
Forum rules
It's okay to suggest new rules variants in this forum, but proposing new *maps* should be done in the linked "New Map Variant Proposals & Voting" subforum.

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Mar 2019, 08:06

I have to say I am particularly worried about builds.

I know a lot of people seem to change their builds during the phase. I know this because people sometimes get confused about the ordering when you have multiple builds and you then decide to change one. If we did this for Builds in particular, people wont be able to change them if they were the last to submit orders.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 11793
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 941
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Mar 2019, 08:11

I actually wonder whether when we post a new thread with a poll or whatever we may need to have the two separate approaches, one that just blocks press if specified and the other that both blocks press and makes the orders finalize as you enter them. I think I would need to put a confirmation box on the orders though, warning people that since this is a game with that option then entering your orders would automatically finalize you. Otherwise people are going to be furious if they had not realized they were in such a game and then fell foul of it.

And that brings up another issue in my mind. What about misclicks? At the moment, we always advise people to refresh your orders and check them before finalizing, so you can catch mistakes etc. If the orders finalize on submission, you may be too late. The more I think about it, the less I like the auto-finalize option.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 11793
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 941
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Mar 2019, 12:29

That’s why I suggested a 10-15 delay from the last retreat submitted. I definitely want people to be able to immediately double-check their orders.
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator (Forums only)

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1401
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby asudevil » 14 Mar 2019, 16:03

I’d support no messages and auto finalize build retreats after 15 minutes
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.

Want to play fantasy football this season here...Reigning Champion
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16509
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1351
All-game rating: 1497
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Mar 2019, 19:57

super_dipsy wrote:I have to say I am particularly worried about builds.

I know a lot of people seem to change their builds during the phase. I know this because people sometimes get confused about the ordering when you have multiple builds and you then decide to change one. If we did this for Builds in particular, people wont be able to change them if they were the last to submit orders.


To repeat, I wouldn’t want to have any turn adjudicate immediately after orders are set. Our site’s interface isn’t really set up that way.

However, adjudicating 15 minutes after the last order was submitted seems fair.

I’d be totally fine with making the change solely to retreats, especially since waiving a build during the build phase (whether electively or because no valid centers are vacant) seems like it is treated by the system as a missing order.

For retreats, that’s not the case.
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator (Forums only)

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1401
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Mar 2019, 20:50

NoPunIn10Did wrote:especially since waiving a build during the build phase (whether electively or because no valid centers are vacant) seems like it is treated by the system as a missing order.

Thiis is not classed as an NMR. Build phases are exempt.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 11793
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 941
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Mar 2019, 20:54

super_dipsy wrote:
NoPunIn10Did wrote:especially since waiving a build during the build phase (whether electively or because no valid centers are vacant) seems like it is treated by the system as a missing order.

Thiis is not classed as an NMR. Build phases are exempt.


I know that it's not penalized with an NMR, but it shows up as "1 build left" or something like that in the summary, which must mean the system thinks there's an order missing.
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator (Forums only)

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1401
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby GhostEcho » 14 Mar 2019, 23:44

NoPunIn10Did wrote:
GhostEcho wrote:I really don't like anything that's going to automatically finalize, outside of a live game context.


Say more about that. What role does the current finalization functionality play for you during retreats and/or builds?


It really depends on the game. I don't like finalization much to begin with and avoid it when I can - I like the hard deadline (time-dependent communications are a standard tactic of mine) but people tend to whine about not finalizing if it's an option, especially as the game goes later, so when I do play, I tend to use it a bit once I feel people have mostly stopped talking.

If builds and/or retreats were no-press, I'd imagine I'd finalize those a lot more, but I really like the time to think about a build, if that time nominally exists. I'm not sure I'm against it in principle (by analogy to F2F, get 'em in as fast as possible), but the change would take away a bit of analysis time.

...Basically, if we're auto-finalizing builds once "everyone's in", why not moves? I'm sort of thinking through my instinctive reaction "out loud" here: I think the issue is I don't really like finalization to begin with when playing with long (non-live) deadlines, and getting it forced on me at all would make me unhappy.

But I'm not really the main playerbase of the site, either.
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
"I'm not panicking, I'm watching you panic. It's more entertaining." - Elli Quinn
"[Diplomacy:] No dice or chance. Just calculated insincerity." - Counter Trap
User avatar
GhostEcho
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1822
Joined: 10 Aug 2008, 04:56
Location: Baltimore
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1008)
All-game rating: (969)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 15 Mar 2019, 12:50

So, if it were only for retreats, and no press was allowed that phase, would you still find that to be a problem?
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator (Forums only)

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1401
Timezone: GMT

Re: Game Variants that could speed up play

Postby Mr.E » 17 Mar 2019, 11:55

Let's say I've made an intelligent choice. I've joined a game with deadlines I'm comfortable with because I know I'll be able to access the game within these periods. I've chosen a game where I can finalise, when I choose it. But I also need those deadlines to be in place. So I've chosen, let's say, deadlines of 3-1-1. That gives me time to communicate with players effectively during Movements, and - whether or not I communicate in Retreats and Builds - it gives me the time I need to enter orders in those phases.

In my game, I access the Spring Retreats phase 4 hours into the phase. It's first thing in the morning, for me. I enter my orders but I don't finalise. Why not? Well, because I might not get on site again until tomorrow. I'm at work all day - and I can't/won't go online when I'm working, and I choose not to when I'm on a break (usually because my breaks are either non-existent or shorter than they should be anyway!) When I get home from work, I have family time. And, while I may get some time later in the day, I might just feel too damn tired that day to bother, or else I may feel I'm not going to do myself any favours by doing that. I want to use the 24-hours this time. If I didn't need to, I'd finalise - that's what finalising is all about, after all.

However, I happened to be the last person to enter the retreat order, or maybe even the only person who was required to retreat (dammit). Now, 15 minutes after I've retreated, the phase finalises. I don't get on site again until almost 24 hours after I entered my order... and I've lost almost 24 hours from my Fall Movements phase; I've lost 24 hours from the time I have to negotiate in. It doesn't matter that I was trying to manage my game time, within the deadlines I chose, I don't have the option of doing just that.

Forcing shorter Retreats phases doesn't just impact the Retreats phase.

What can I do about this? Well, potentially, I can wait until the Retreats phase is almost over. I can gamble that, within the last hour of the Retreats phase, I can be certain that I'll be on site to order my retreat. Until, well, I can't for some reason. I haven't NMRed - but that's not the point: my unit has been disbanded. I don't have the choice. And I've had to do this because I am managing my game time. I've lost a strategic option. What's worse is that I'm down one unit on what I should have had in the Fall turn.

Forcing shorter Retreats phases potentially impacts on a player's position in a game.

But let's say it's the same situation in the Fall Retreats phase. It isn't that I've lost out on negotiation time, it's now that I've missed out on decision time over my adjustments. I now don't have as long as I would choose to have to make that decision. The game has moved on more quickly than it should have, because deadlines are meaningless in a Retreats phase.

Indeed, I may not even get an Adjustments phase! Because my unit that needed to retreat has been disbanded, as I tried - and failed - to get on as late as possible in the Retreats phase, I now don't have the option of disbanding an alternative unit. Perhaps mine was the only potential disband that needed to be made - well, that option has gone completely now, because it's been disbanded already. I may not even see the Adjustments phase!

Forcing shorter Retreats phases potentially removes a player's choices in an Adjustments phase.

None of the above is acceptable.

How often will it happen? Perhaps not very often. Does it matter if it happens once? YES - absolutely. THIS is a huge reason to become disengaged from a game.

For the longest time (I've taken the time to look back and check this) finalisation has been optional. The site's position has been finalise when you're ready, and you don't have to finalise if you don't want.

Now the proposal is to force finalising by auto-finalising after a period of time, whether you want that to happen or not. Is that because it is something that is needed? No, it's to move games on more quickly. As soon as games are forced to finalise, albeit it in the Retreats phase, or the Retreats and Builds phases (initially)* that option is removed from players.

To move games on more quickly.

So, games can then have a 1 day Retreats phase because almost everyone can usually guarantee to get online within a given 24-hour period. It doesn't matter anymore that players have actually chosen to join a game with a 24 hour Retreat phase, or why they've chosen that deadline; as soon as the last player with a retreat to order has ordered, the game will finalise a period of time after that, whether players have all agreed to finalise or not. It is no longer an option to finalise, it is now forced.

Two different concepts have been married, here: removing negotiations from Retreats and Adjustments, and forcing finalising. Both will enable games to move on more quickly, because that's 'important'. Which, again, is the only reason for doing this, because having a phase that is unnecessarily long might diminish engagement. Nobody seems to be asking whose engagement is diminished by playing to the deadlines they chose to play within, but I can't help but wonder. Who is tied to a game of Diplomacy so closely that they can't take a break until a deadline has been reached? Who are these Pussycats?

Removing communications from Retreats and Adjustments is one thing. It is something I don't have a problem with, but there are reasons for keeping it, too.

Forcing everyone to finalise orders by default is very different.

*And I've not mentioned the thin end of the wedge. If we're going to auto-finalise in Retreats - and Adjustments - why not Movements? The thrust of the site is now to move games on quickly, after all.

Oops. I mentioned it.
Last edited by Mr.E on 17 Mar 2019, 15:17, edited 1 time in total.
Respect neither opinions nor beliefs; only respect the person and the right to express them.
Play by the rules but be ferocious.
User avatar
Mr.E
Premium Member
 
Posts: 143
Joined: 20 Feb 2017, 09:27
Location: Yorkshire
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 974
All-game rating: 974
Timezone: GMT

PreviousNext

Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest