Longer time limit for turns.



  • Please give longer time limit on turns, maybe an extar 2 minutes? - appreciate the timer stops the problem of people not taking turns, or taking forever, but the new time limit is too short, especially if you have to make trades!



  • @administrators I very much second this motion



  • I agree with that. maybe the solution should be 30s per action and not per player turn.



  • I think as you do more things on your turn, the limit could increase.

    As the game gets to the final turns, sometimes the turns take longer too. So for each action of some kind that you take, an extra 30 seconds could be added on.



  • All this can be abused. A player will just keep offering new trades and the game takes them as a new action. Maybe trying to play one of the development cards too to reset whatever system is tracking him.

    A much better solution (also used in PlayCatan): A player has 3 minutes for a turn. If the time is up the other players have the possibility to vote if that player should be kicked or not. NO AUTOMATIC AI BS! Seriously, using AI without a players consent is far worse than any other solution. It is not satisfying to win if the AI messed up someone's longer-than-usual turn and then the next player wins.

    Maybe improve that system and let a player ask for more time - then other players vote if it is OK or not. of course other players could be unfair and not allow giving more time but it is still better than not knowing when AI kicks in.

    The main problem at the moment is probably that in some cases the timer does not kick in and people abuse it. Maybe fix that and add my proposed solutions. Using AI in a human game is a huge mistake. This is unbelievable that you would ever think it was a good idea.



  • 90 sec is fine by me, 120 sec is still ok but not more than that.

    I have rarely ran into issue with timelimit as long as you are focused on the game and plan ahead while other people make their moves.

    If you start thinking only after you roll the dices then indeed even 120 or 180 sec would not be enough.

    3 min per turn for sure is way too much in my opinion - 20 point games would last 2h every time then.



  • Initial placements might take longer than 3 minutes. When you have a lot of resources and you want to trade different resources with different people, you might need more time. Maybe you need to think in which order to build your stuff. Either trade bricks for wheat and build a settlement on sheep port, then trade sheep 2-1 for other stuff... or trade sheep first, then build a settlement on 3:1 port and trade bricks there... Sometimes it takes all your resources and correct order of using them to get the last few points and win. Let people make these moves rather than forcing them to end their turn.

    Overall I agree that 90 seconds on average is more than enough, BUT the AI should never interfere with the game when you suddenly take longer than usual for whatever reason. Maybe you have to answer a phone call suddenly or whatever. People should be allowed to take a few longer turns. It should be up to the other players to say if it is OK or not.



  • Poker sites solve this problem by using time banks. Basically you get X seconds per turn, say 60. Aside from that you have a time bank of Y seconds, say 240. If you need more than your X seconds for a turn you start depleting the time bank. Every turn you don't use your time bank it regains Z seconds, say 30, but the time bank can never get bigger than its initial Y seconds. This way you cannot stall endlessly, but you also have a chance to take more time if the situation calls for it.
    Of course the numbers I posted here are pulled out of thin air and would need to be tested to work well.



  • You wouldn't want to extend the time limit 30s for just offering a trade. Only extend the time on completed actions like building something or a successful trade. The base time limit would account for proposed trades and thinking.



  • I agree that extra time for initial settlement placements would be a good idea. First player gets three minutes and each player after that would get two minutes for each settlement; i.e., the player who placed settlements 4th and 5th would get 4 minutes, two minutes for each settlement. Settlement placement is half the game in my book. Short times for initial settlement placements give a big advantage to experienced players. Not a lot of fun to be locked into a game where you make a mistake in initial settlement placement with a really slow player. Might be discouraging for new players.



  • I disagree with this. I've played games with ass holes who fall behind and then slow the game down by taking the maximum amount of time allowed, hoping I'll quit. Giving them more time per turn only makes this problem worse.



  • There are always going to be players with bad behavior. It should not block you from making the game better for the good players. The timer should be a "soft" measure to make people make people make their turns in reasonable time. Going over time occasionally should be allowed. So what if they start stalling intentionally? You can report them after the game and hope the admin bans them.



  • @Wilbert This is a good idea! Also, I think it would be good simply to make a quick game option for those who want to play faster. ..



  • @Wilbert said:

    Poker sites solve this problem by using time banks. Basically you get X seconds per turn, say 60. Aside from that you have a time bank of Y seconds, say 240.

    This is a great idea, Wilbert!



  • Only thing this doesn't address is how to prevent players from stalling while reviewing a trade. The obvious fix for that would have to make the trading interface such that it can be manipulated easily even on other players turns, and that it can run alongside the rest of the interface, so you can still take actions, even when. You've offered a deal. That way, it's your own responsibility to act in time, and players can easily do so. Such an interface can be found in a previous implementation of this game.


Log in to reply