Timeout without warning

[jeebus]

Of course we need a timeout, but give me a warning 15 or 30 seconds before it happens! I have now experienced a few times that an extremely complicated turn makes me time out and my opponent says nothing, just resigns me (even if I tell them I need some time to think). Both times this happened recently, I had the victory, so this is a convenient way for players to win despite having actually lost (which of course they would have IRL).

Maybe if I was forced to play (because I saw I was about to time out), I wouldn't have enough time to secure the win, but at least I would have a chance. I can't just play because I have a vague feeling time is running out.

What is the timeout anyway? Until this is fixed, maybe I have to play with a timer by my side.

[AdamH]

I think the timeout is 4 minutes. It seems like a pretty glaring oversight that a time limit is enforced in a game in some way without any in-game indication of when it's coming up. A countdown starting at one minute left with an audio cue (if sounds are enabled) when it starts seems pretty important to have.

...but it will probably be a long time before this gets added, so yeah I'd get that timer. You just have to remember to set it in the middle of a complicated turn

[jeebus]

Yeah, I think you're right. It's a glaring oversight that should have been implemented in the first place, but at the same time it's not something that causes a problem very often. When it does cause a problem though, it could easily make you lose the game, which is a lot more serious than many of the bugs that actually have been fixed.

[josh bornstein]

[advance warning:  No snark intended!]  :-)

This is sort of tangential to the gravamen of your OP, but...

Can you talk a little about the types of games where this has happened to you?  What cards or card-combinations were at play, that resulted in turns where 4+ minutes passed when you were thinking about what move to make?

I can't think of a single game I have played where I thought about what move to make for more than 30 seconds (...this is almost certainly a comment about my overly-casual and substandard play, rather than a comment about your slower and more-considered play.) I am not including, of course, the specific situation of games played soon after a new set of cards is introduced and we're all much slower when we come across a new, complicated, card--but that is not what you're talking about, right?

I'm genuinely curious, and I expect other readers/players are as well.  In fact; if players have come across particular kingdoms that are very complicated, I'd bet a lot of players would love to play out those games as well, to see how they would do, how they'd deal with those complicated cards.

[jeebus]

Actually I already answered you. Right before creating this thread, I read your comment in the other thread and replied to it: http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=2878.msg13447#msg13447

[Martin plays Piano]

Josh,
if you look at some Dominion League matches of the higher categories on YouTube, you will discover some games that last 90 minutes and longer - with 25 turns per player, that makes 2-3 minutes on average - especially the first move is often a lengthy affair - this is enjoyable playing without the usual hectic pace.
All this is not necessarily my world either, but it shows the difficulty of doing justice to both the pros and the flash-players here - the current 4-minute rule can only be a bad compromise, which inevitably leads to complaints.

I had suggested an optional time agreement elsewhere, which the host selects between fast, medium, slow and no time limit, and to which all players must agree. Unfortunately, however, I have the feeling that nothing has been implemented here for a long time.

[markus]

The timer is not for the turn, but for each decision. You can for example play 1 Copper / start playing your Actions at a slower pace to have more time for thinking. Therefore, showing the time counting down wouldn't lead to people stopping to think when it approaches 0, but they would just click something to reset it and then think again.
And some would say that you're perfectly allowed to do that as long as you are indeed thinking. Whereas now it's clear that the timer is there to resign people who are afk and the full time may not be used at each decision.

While I think it's sometimes fun to think a lot for league games, I can also understand (and sometimes feel myself) that you don't want that any decision to take more than 4 minutes in a random game. (Nevertheless, it's bad manners to resign on the opponent without notice.)

[jeebus]

Markus, you're wrong about what would happen with a timer or warning. In the game i linked to above, I had no option of anything to click to reset the timer. I still had actions to possibly play and so couldn't click Copper.

In a "random game" I agree that you almost never need to take 4 minutes, but in certain complicated games, you do need that in the last turn or turns. (These games usually have few turns, so even though each turn could be longer than normal, that doesn't necissarily make the game longer than a slog of 25-30 turns with quick turns.)

EDIT: That's beside the point anyway. The point was that as long as it's possible to think for 4 minutes, you should be able to do that when necessary to play the game well. Currently you have to stop in good time before that - or else have a timer outside the game.

[markus]

The point was that as long as it's possible to think for 4 minutes, you should be able to do that when necessary to play the game well.

I guess that's the part that I disagree with for a random match. I see that 4 minutes timer as a simple solution to be able to resign players who are afk while at the same time allowing for people to reconnect with connection problems. I would be surprised if I had ever used that fully to think about my move in a random match.

Just to be clear, I'm all in favour of having a proper timer for random matches with reasonable time limits that can be fully used by the players (i.e. no slow-rolling possible). And then of course it has to be displayed.

[Rabid]

Yes a downside of showing the timer is that it makes it easier for people to troll slow play.
And worse it make people think it is acceptable to use 4 minutes for each action "because that's what the timer says".

[markus]

Yes, that's what I tried to get across. I wouldn't mind a chat message with a 1 minute warning, but don't show 4 minutes ticking down all the time.

[AdamH]

Yes a downside of showing the timer is that it makes it easier for people to troll slow play.
And worse it make people think it is acceptable to use 4 minutes for each action "because that's what the timer says".

If this gets in the way of a better interface for the people who want to use the software for what it was intended for, then the trolls have handily won.

The answer is to deal with the trolls properly, not to make the software worse to accommodate them.

[jeebus]

I never wanted to advocate for a ticking timer. As I said, a warning when there's 15 or 30 seconds left.

[Rabid]

I think some very competitive players will think this.
Not just trolls.
"And worse it make people think it is acceptable to use 4 minutes for each action "because that's what the timer says"."

[jeebus]

Again, if there's a warning 15 seconds before it happens, it will not make anybody think this!