Fixing the issue with time

[mudkipmaster]

who is to pay for these clocks? who buys batteries, does upkeep, stores them between events, etc? if they are for events only, how are new/junior players to learn how to use them before going to said events if they're not available to use at league?

...oh, players need to buy their own? we TOs/LLs can't even get all players to bring their own randomizers/damage counters to events, what happens when neither player in a match has a clock?

'mom

I'm going to agree with PokéMom here, we often have many players who forget to bring their dice/damage counters to an event. So how are we going to handle it when a player forgets to bring his/her personal clock?

 

[untitled]

i assume your talking about charging people for events, but a large part of pokemon's appeal is that the events, aside from pre-releases, don't cost anything for players, and charging people because of clocks would very disagreeable.

If you were talking about tos lending people theirs, then the tos would be responsible for getting extras, which may come out of their own pocket, and we aren't talking about cheap burn and poison counters here. And how would people share timers in middle of a match when they're already using it.
i again direct you to that same post. I never said anything about charging people for premier events.


that wasn't my point. It would come to be very annoying for players to constantly press the button for the timer, and suck a lot of enjoyment out of matches, and why bother playing if it's more annoying than fun. The two games have very different tones. Chess is a serious mind game while pokemon is more of a fun game, and trying to share restrictions is rather absurd.
how is pressing the button any more annoying than shuffling after a deck search, checking pairings, or signing the match slip after a game? The overall time spent pressing this button during a game would be no more than 15 seconds. It's not enough to suck enjoyment from the rest of the game.


my point was that if your trying to remove faster decks from stalling, they're still going to abuse the rules. I don't understand why a players turn should end due to an arbitrary timer. So long as they're making their plays in a timely manner then there shouldn't be a problem, and timers would restrict long turns that are playing several cards.
if you make it so they can't abuse the rules, how are they going to try? Limiting them to half of the clock prevents them from abusing the rules. Do you mind explaining how they would abuse the rules?

I believe i've explained this part in the op, but you have as much time as you need for every move with a timer. Just so long as your overall game finishes before your time runs out, you could take 10 minutes just to play one card if you wanted.

these aren't even half of my grievances, as then we start getting into consequences that would only inhibit the game, and i don't understand how it would be a good change even if it were easy to implement.
what are your other grievances?

171717171717171717171717

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

i again direct you to that same post. I never said anything about charging people for premier events.

You said it in an earlier post, and I wasn't sure which post you were talking about.

how is pressing the button any more annoying than shuffling after a deck search, checking pairings, or signing the match slip after a game? The overall time spent pressing this button during a game would be no more than 15 seconds. It's not enough to suck enjoyment from the rest of the game.

How is pressing a button continuously not annoying? Between everything else you have to do in a turn having to remember to press the button would become very annoying very fast. You might think it isn't, but there are others who do.

if you make it so they can't abuse the rules, how are they going to try? Limiting them to half of the clock prevents them from abusing the rules. Do you mind explaining how they would abuse the rules?

I believe i've explained this part in the op, but you have as much time as you need for every move with a timer. Just so long as your overall game finishes before your time runs out, you could take 10 minutes just to play one card if you wanted.

Giving half the time to a faster deck is more than it will need in general, and would harm the opposing slower deck in this regard. They might not slow play, but they'll no longer need to.

what are your other grievances?

Very well then I'll give you some other ones

What happens if a player forgets to press the button?
What happens if a player doesn't have a clock and there aren't any left?
What happens if the clock ceases to work during the match?
What happens if a match needs to be frozen during a ruling?
If I run out of time, do I automatically lose?

This is to name a few.

 

[losjackal]

Giving half the time to a faster deck is more than it will need in general, and would harm the opposing slower deck in this regard. They might not slow play, but they'll no longer need to.

I lied, I said I was done talking. But this point is too good to let pass by without highlighting it.

The presumption has been that the Fast Deck purposely chews up more than half the time by slow playing. Thus we need chess clocks.

However, the side effect is that the Fast Deck will now have precisely half the time, locking out the Slow Deck of ever having any more than half.

I'd have to imagine there are a fair number of matches now where the Slow Deck player is benefitting from the time made available by the Fast Deck player. Fast Deck players aren't all evil this way. But the chess clock proposal is limiting everyone to 15 minutes, which just in fact might put a much bigger nail in the coffin of people choosing to play these slow decks.

 

[untitled]

you said it in an earlier post, and i wasn't sure which post you were talking about.
i meant this post. http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2146677&postcount=56


how is pressing a button continuously not annoying? Between everything else you have to do in a turn having to remember to press the button would become very annoying very fast. You might think it isn't, but there are others who do.
shuffling is no different than this would be, yet shuffling takes probably 40x more time than this would in a game. Yet, you don't see anybody quitting because they have to shuffle their deck. Having to shuffle every deck search is way more monotonous than having to press one button at the end of all your turns.


giving half the time to a faster deck is more than it will need in general, and would harm the opposing slower deck in this regard. They might not slow play, but they'll no longer need to.
a slower deck should be able to finish in half the time. Also, this point isn't worth anything since we have the same issue now. What happens when two slow decks play each other? Do they run out of time then? Most of the time they don't. Not all fast deck players are "evil," no, but why should the outcome of a match be decided by whether or not you get paired against a "good" fast deck player, or an "evil" fast deck player? That's completely unfair.


very well then i'll give you some other ones

what happens if a player forgets to press the button?
too bad, basically. Hopefully your opponent or a judge is nice enough to point it out. After you forget a couple times, you're probably not going to forget again. It would most likely be an issue for the first couple weeks they are implemented, which is why they would be first implemented for a prerelease or battle roads. It would rarely make a difference in the outcome of a game, anyway.
what happens if a player doesn't have a clock and there aren't any left?
again, they would be provided by the to.
what happens if the clock ceases to work during the match?
they've used these clocks for chess this for chess with success; it would be no more of a problem in pokemon. This would be a very rare occurrence, and with a couple extras on-hand it would be a 2-minute fix. 2-minute extentions are common in the game anyway, and rarely hold up a tournament.
what happens if a match needs to be frozen during a ruling?
they get an extention, just like they would now. The clocks would probably run negatively, so after time runs out it starts going to -0:01, etc. Then, you can tell when your extention is up as well.
if i run out of time, do i automatically lose?
yes, after your +2 turns run out.

this is to name a few.

Replies in bold. It undid my capitalization, for some reason; sorry.

 

[FunnyBear]

You said it in an earlier post, and I wasn't sure which post you were talking about.



How is pressing a button continuously not annoying? Between everything else you have to do in a turn having to remember to press the button would become very annoying very fast. You might think it isn't, but there are others who do.



Giving half the time to a faster deck is more than it will need in general, and would harm the opposing slower deck in this regard. They might not slow play, but they'll no longer need to.



Very well then I'll give you some other ones

What happens if a player forgets to press the button? His time runs down
What happens if a player doesn't have a clock and there aren't any left? Double game loss. What happens if both players forget their decks?
What happens if the clock ceases to work during the match? Then the other player's clock is substituted. The judge will split the remaining time equally. I have had to do this once in judging a dozen chess tournaments.
What happens if a match needs to be frozen during a ruling? The clocks are stopped by depressing both buttons
If I run out of time, do I automatically lose? Yes
These issues came up in chess too, and OP went along just fine.

This is to name a few.

---------- Post added 11/18/2011 at 07:51 PM ----------

[/COLOR]

.... Chess is a serious mind game while Pokemon is more of a fun game, and trying to share restrictions is rather absurd.

LOL, you've obviously never been to or coached a scholastic chess event.

 

[Caleb]

Why not just have chess clocks for top cuts are larger events? States, Regionals, Nationals and Worlds. I can understand not having them for cities and battle roads given the vast number and varying attendance at these events, but if you limited it to top cut you could at least somewhat find some middle ground. The costs wouldn't be too terrible and you would at least get a timer for top cut (given you maybe have to wait for top 64 instead of top 128 at US Nats).

Just a suggestion, you could even grant players some extra time. 45mins per person maybe?

 

[untitled]

Why not just have chess clocks for top cuts are larger events? States, Regionals, Nationals and Worlds. I can understand not having them for cities and battle roads given the vast number and varying attendance at these events, but if you limited it to top cut you could at least somewhat find some middle ground. The costs wouldn't be too terrible and you would at least get a timer for top cut (given you maybe have to wait for top 64 instead of top 128 at US Nats).

Just a suggestion, you could even grant players some extra time. 45mins per person maybe?

Yet another very good way to make this work. Top cut is the main area where people get stalled out. It's an issue in swiss as well, but nowhere near as bad as in top cut. Better somewhere than nowhere.

This dramatically reduces the price of the clocks, by reducing the number of them necessary. At least one judge is always there to ensure the button gets pressed at the end of every turn. Having less clocks also reduces the chance there's a technical issue.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

i meant this post. http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.p...7&postcount=56

And I commented those in this post: http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2146766&postcount=60

shuffling is no different than this would be, yet shuffling takes probably 40x more time than this would in a game. Yet, you don't see anybody quitting because they have to shuffle their deck. Having to shuffle every deck search is way more monotonous than having to press one button at the end of all your turns.

While shuffling may be a similar culprit it has a fully understood point that many players would want to do whether they had the choice or not. Chess clocks would only put another medium into the game that would frankly only annoy players by it's arbitrary insertion into the game.

a slower deck should be able to finish in half the time. Also, this point isn't worth anything since we have the same issue now. What happens when two slow decks play each other? Do they run out of time then? Most of the time they don't. Not all fast deck players are "evil," no, but why should the outcome of a match be decided by whether or not you get paired against a "good" fast deck player, or an "evil" fast deck player? That's completely unfair.

If that were true then a game should be done within the normal time limit to begin with. Most slow deck match ups don't go to time because one sets-up first and then blocks the opponent. Also when did anyone bring up weather getting paired against a deck is a good or a bad thing? Also how is a pairing unfair? They're blind and random.

too bad, basically. Hopefully your opponent or a judge is nice enough to point it out. After you forget a couple times, you're probably not going to forget again. It would most likely be an issue for the first couple weeks they are implemented, which is why they would be first implemented for a prerelease or battle roads. It would rarely make a difference in the outcome of a game, anyway.

How is that possibly fair? I forget, so I get punished? Last time I checked people aren't penalized harshly when they forget to draw or take a prize unless it changes the game state.

yes, after your +2 turns run out.

:lol:

NO! What if I'm winning by a large margin and I run out of time, but my opponent hasn't? I lose? That isn't fair or reasonable. Before you try to refute, let me say that it has to be an all or nothing deal with these, and for that precise reason chess clocks would be doomed to fail in this fashion. Time should only be an indicator to look at the primary win condition (prizes) to determine a winner (something Chess lacks), not something that determines a winner based on who uses the most of it first.

@FunnyBear

Saying players lose because they don't have clocks would be a horrendous rule, and would be in horrible taste.

Let me reiterate again that Pokemon is not Chess. Trying to implant what works in Chess isn't going to guarantee success in another game. While the TCGO may use it, it has the ability to micromanage the match, and inhibit such actions as slowplay, but Judges can't do that, and Chess clocks would only offer a half-baked solution.

 

[mudkipmaster]

Very well then I'll give you some other ones

What happens if a player forgets to press the button? His time runs down
What happens if a player doesn't have a clock and there aren't any left? Double game loss. What happens if both players forget their decks?

Nope.jpg

So let's say Timmy from the Junior division forgets his clock and it's his first time in a tournament. The TO doesn't have any extra clocks and neither do the players...so we're just gonna say "Sorry Timmy, you automatically lose"?

Plus if we all have a clock, won't that put more pressure on us to make our moves faster giving us less thinking time? Causing us to make irrational decisions in the end.

 

[untitled]

and i commented those in this post: http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2146766&postcount=60
you said that they only charge for prereleases. I said charge a little extra for prerleases. You never addressed that.


while shuffling may be a similar culprit it has a fully understood point that many players would want to do whether they had the choice or not. Chess clocks would only put another medium into the game that would frankly only annoy players by it's arbitrary insertion into the game.
i really have trouble believing you're serious on this one. You think it's more annoying to press a button for 15 seconds than it is to be slowplayed out of a win. You honestly think than people will quit this game because they have to spend 15 seconds pressing a button for every 20 minutes they play the game. The driving to the event, the shuffling, the signing of the match slip, the checking of the pairings, the random deck checks, the ordering of your deck for cut, etc, all added up are not enough to make anybody quit or get annoyed. But adding 15 seconds to that time will cause people to get so annoyed they will quit the game. It just doesn't add up to me.


if that were true then a game should be done within the normal time limit to begin with. Most slow deck match ups don't go to time because one sets-up first and then blocks the opponent. Also when did anyone bring up weather getting paired against a deck is a good or a bad thing? Also how is a pairing unfair? They're blind and random.
lojastical said that not all players using fast decks slowplay when they're up against a slow deck, and that it hurts a slow deck to only get half the time when paired against an opponent playing at a normal pace. So, suppose slow deck player a gets paired with fast deck player a, and slow deck player b gets paired with fast deck player b. Fast deck player a plays at a normal speed, and fast deck player b plays as slowly as possible. Both slow deck players got setup and had the game in control. Slow deck player a wins the game, slow deck player b gets slowplayed out of the win. It was unfair that one player won because his opponent finished their moves in a reasonable time frame, while the other player lost because their opponent did. Both slow deck players played equally well, yet one lost and the other won. How is that fair?


how is that possibly fair? I forget, so i get punished? Last time i checked people aren't penalized harshly when they forget to draw or take a prize unless it changes the game state.
it's not really a harsh punishment. It only even matters if the game goes to time. It's not like you get an automatic game loss for forgetting to press a button. Besides, i like to think pokemon players are smart enough to catch their mistake in a reasonable time frame 99.999% of the time. After all, how often does somebody lose because they forget to set prizes and don't remember to before searching their deck? Very, very rarely.


:lol:

No! What if i'm winning by a large margin and i run out of time, but my opponent hasn't? I lose? That isn't fair or reasonable. Before you try to refute, let me say that it has to be an all or nothing deal with these, and for that precise reason chess clocks would be doomed to fail in this fashion. Time should only be an indicator to look at the primary win condition (prizes) to determine a winner (something chess lacks), not something that determines a winner based on who uses the most of it first.
half of the arguments you've used also work for the current system. What if i'm playing rossbox, and i have an absolutely godly setup, and nothing is stopping me from winning. Then time is called, and he's up by one prize after our +3 runs out. I lose. That isn't fair or reasonable, either.

@funnybear

saying players lose because they don't have clocks would be a horrendous rule, and would be in horrible taste.
i agree with this, which is why i again say that to's should provide the clocks.

let me reiterate again that pokemon is not chess. Trying to implant what works in chess isn't going to guarantee success in another game. While the tcgo may use it, it has the ability to micromanage the match, and inhibit such actions as slowplay, but judges can't do that, and chess clocks would only offer a half-baked solution.
it most certainly is not guaranteed success, but it's not the guaranteed failure you act like it is.

17171717171717171717

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

you said that they only charge for prereleases. I said charge a little extra for prerleases. You never addressed that.

You obviously didn't read the whole post then, because I addressed it in the second paragraph.

i really have trouble believing you're serious on this one. You think it's more annoying to press a button for 15 seconds than it is to be slowplayed out of a win. You honestly think than people will quit this game because they have to spend 15 seconds pressing a button for every 20 minutes they play the game. The driving to the event, the shuffling, the signing of the match slip, the checking of the pairings, the random deck checks, the ordering of your deck for cut, etc, all added up are not enough to make anybody quit or get annoyed. But adding 15 seconds to that time will cause people to get so annoyed they will quit the game. It just doesn't add up to me.

People can tolerate those because there is a fully understandable cause behind those. Chess clocks are not a necessity for the game, and only complicate the game. I may have over exaggerated by saying a massive number of players may stop playing, but I'd be willing to bet that implementation of would eventually lead some players to quitting, and drive new players away. There is a clear difference between necessary gameplay mechanics, and regulations, and excessive regulations.

lojastical said that not all players using fast decks slowplay when they're up against a slow deck, and that it hurts a slow deck to only get half the time when paired against an opponent playing at a normal pace. So, suppose slow deck player a gets paired with fast deck player a, and slow deck player b gets paired with fast deck player b. Fast deck player a plays at a normal speed, and fast deck player b plays as slowly as possible. Both slow deck players got setup and had the game in control. Slow deck player a wins the game, slow deck player b gets slowplayed out of the win. It was unfair that one player won because his opponent finished their moves in a reasonable time frame, while the other player lost because their opponent did. Both slow deck players played equally well, yet one lost and the other won. How is that fair?

How do you know that the player is slow playing? You may perceive it as so, but that doesn't mean they are. Also how do you know that the game would have been influenced by time in first place? But for the sake of argument let's say they are, why does that justify changing time rules to help a specific type of deck? Also what if either of those decks takes more than 15 minutes to win? Then they auto-lose by the Chess clocks rules. The game doesn't care how well you play, it's blind in that aspect, and time is just a monitoring tool to determine when to check for how is ahead on the primary win condition (prizes), and that is all.

it's not really a harsh punishment. It only even matters if the game goes to time. It's not like you get an automatic game loss for forgetting to press a button. Besides, i like to think pokemon players are smart enough to catch their mistake in a reasonable time frame 99.999% of the time. After all, how often does somebody lose because they forget to set prizes and don't remember to before searching their deck? Very, very rarely.

I've witnessed players forget to draw a prize at several points. I've also witnessed players forget to draw, and several other necessary actions, and they sometimes don't notice for several turns. You may like to think otherwise, but people forget things, and with something like time, which would be crucial with Chess clocks, then that could indeed jeopardize the game, and not being able to reverse it is harsh in that degree.

half of the arguments you've used also work for the current system. What if i'm playing rossbox, and i have an absolutely godly setup, and nothing is stopping me from winning. Then time is called, and he's up by one prize after our +3 runs out. I lose. That isn't fair or reasonable, either.

Why should you having a god hand matter at all? Again the game is blind. It doesn't care you lose by a single energy, you still lose the match. Your situation may not be fair to you, but by using Prizes as the primary win condition then it's completely fair. losing because It's been my turn for a total of 15 minutes, even though I'm ahead on prizes is not.

i agree with this, which is why i again say that to's should provide the clocks.

TOs don't always get funding for these things, and having them pay out of pocket is would be absurd.

it most certainly is not guaranteed success, but it's not the guaranteed failure you act like it is.

I have qualms with this idea because it alters the entire face of the game, and I don't see that as a good thing.

 

[untitled]

you obviously didn't read the whole post then, because i addressed it in the second paragraph.
you said it would come out of the to's pocket. I specifically said it would come out of prerelease money. I don't see how that's addressing it.


people can tolerate those because there is a fully understandable cause behind those. Chess clocks are not a necessity for the game, and only complicate the game. I may have over exaggerated by saying a massive number of players may stop playing, but i'd be willing to bet that implementation of would eventually lead some players to quitting, and drive new players away. There is a clear difference between necessary gameplay mechanics, and regulations, and excessive regulations.
there is a fully understandable cause behind the chess clocks - to prevent unfair wins. It's not necessary, but neither is signing the match slip. That's to prevent unfair wins and/or confusion, too. Signing the match slip is more necessary, but people could still play pokemon without signing the match slip. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing for the game.


how do you know that the player is slow playing? You may perceive it as so, but that doesn't mean they are. Also how do you know that the game would have been influenced by time in first place? But for the sake of argument let's say they are, why does that justify changing time rules to help a specific type of deck? Also what if either of those decks takes more than 15 minutes to win? Then they auto-lose by the chess clocks rules. The game doesn't care how well you play, it's blind in that aspect, and time is just a monitoring tool to determine when to check for how is ahead on the primary win condition (prizes), and that is all.
right, that's just for the sake of argument. There's no way to know for sure, but it's a possibility, and it's probably happened before. Players can lose on time with the current rules, or the chess clock rules.


i've witnessed players forget to draw a prize at several points. I've also witnessed players forget to draw, and several other necessary actions, and they sometimes don't notice for several turns. You may like to think otherwise, but people forget things, and with something like time, which would be crucial with chess clocks, then that could indeed jeopardize the game, and not being able to reverse it is harsh in that degree.
true. I think you make it sound much more extreme than it would be, but i don't like what would happen to a player who forgets to press a button. Still, i think that's more fair than losing because an opponent took more than their fair share of the shared clock.


why should you having a god hand matter at all? Again the game is blind. It doesn't care you lose by a single energy, you still lose the match. Your situation may not be fair to you, but by using prizes as the primary win condition then it's completely fair. Losing because it's been my turn for a total of 15 minutes, even though i'm ahead on prizes is not.
yeah, it is. That's how it works on the online system. I haven't heard a single complaint about that being unfair.


tos don't always get funding for these things, and having them pay out of pocket is would be absurd.
again, i said that some prerelease money would go to this. It wouldn't be out of pocket.


i have qualms with this idea because it alters the entire face of the game, and i don't see that as a good thing.
the lv. X and ex mechanics also altered the face of the game. You could argue that the change from 40 minutes to 30+3 altered the face of the game. Were those things bad, too, just because they were changes?

17171717171717171717

 

[mudkipmaster]

yeah, it is. That's how it works on the online system. I haven't heard a single complaint about that being unfair.

Sorry, didn't realize we played our tournaments online...

the lv. X and ex mechanics also altered the face of the game. You could argue that the change from 40 minutes to 30+3 altered the face of the game. Were those things bad, too, just because they were changes?

Depends on your definition of "bad"

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

you said it would come out of the to's pocket. I specifically said it would come out of prerelease money. I don't see how that's addressing it.

First I apparently misunderstood said post, but that aside...
:lol:
That's funny, TPCi/P!P would totally allow that to happen with the current rate for pre-release, and I'm for keeping the pre-releases cheap, and upping the price doesn't help this.

there is a fully understandable cause behind the chess clocks - to prevent unfair wins. It's not necessary, but neither is signing the match slip. That's to prevent unfair wins and/or confusion, too. Signing the match slip is more necessary, but people could still play pokemon without signing the match slip. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing for the game.

Shuffling, signed match slips and the like are to prevent blatant cheating. Stalling (a grey area) doesn't warrant such regulation, the easy solution is and always has been clear, if you suspect stalling ask your opponent to speed up or to quote Bullados

Put your hand in the air, and in the loudest voice you can muster, go with one single word...

JUDGE!!!

slightly out of context, but still appropriate.

right, that's just for the sake of argument. There's no way to know for sure, but it's a possibility, and it's probably happened before. Players can lose on time with the current rules, or the chess clock rules.

So in a situation where people are losing due to time rulings we should go with the ones that hurt people for going over 15 minutes even though they're ahead on prizes.

true. I think you make it sound much more extreme than it would be, but i don't like what would happen to a player who forgets to press a button. Still, i think that's more fair than losing because an opponent took more than their fair share of the shared clock.

And because the extreme cases of accidents should be ignored, and given lower priority.

yeah, it is. That's how it works on the online system. I haven't heard a single complaint about that being unfair.

TCGO has different standards set-up by calculations, and neither Judges or players are robots. TCGO is an imperfect system, with some idolized standards. To hold the actual game to such standards.

What do you think emot? :lol:

the lv. X and ex mechanics also altered the face of the game. You could argue that the change from 40 minutes to 30+3 altered the face of the game. Were those things bad, too, just because they were changes?

Gameplay and ruling regulations are different beasts. Gamplay mechanics determine what's viable, but Rules determine how the gameplay can approach it's objective, and such a radical change to the rules would change the entire directive of the game.

P.S. I can use emotes too. :wink: