[Rules] Limit total number of missed turns allowed

[Ogrecrusher]

Concise description:

• If a player missed more than x turns, they should be kicked, even if they are not missed in one go.

Specifics:

• I have seen a couple of examples similar, but in a game I'm in right now, a player has missed a total of SEVEN turns, 3 times they've missed 2, then returned in a blaze of glory. I think that if you miss 5 turns in any game, you should be kicked.
  A week of my life has been spent waiting for this guy!! It's also affected the balance of the game, because when he's skipping turns, we're unsure if he's gone for good this time.

[max is gr8]

Just to summarise here, it's been suggested many times. But you should have eliminated them if they were missing too many turns. 3 turns in a row shows that the person has been gone for half a week but say if a game lasted 4 months. And they missed 5 turns in total it wouldn't be fair for them to be kicked.

If you want people gone from games eliminate them. Or add them to your ignore

[Karl_R_Kroenen]

Concise description:

• If a player missed more than x turns, they should be kicked, even if they are not missed in one go.

Specifics:

• I have seen a couple of examples similar, but in a game I'm in right now, a player has missed a total of SEVEN turns, 3 times they've missed 2, then returned in a blaze of glory. I think that if you miss 5 turns in any game, you should be kicked.
  A week of my life has been spent waiting for this guy!! It's also affected the balance of the game, because when he's skipping turns, we're unsure if he's gone for good this time.

I agree with Ogrecrusher.

It is also disrespectful to the other players to wait 23hr 59mi for "turn-misser" to miss.

Or there perhaps a rating checkbox of turn-misser.
Deadbeat, to me, means that the player missed 3 turns and is rated appropriately.
Quitter, to me, means that the player is still taking turns but isn't aggressively attempting any strategy or gameplay.

I also do favor just eliminating the turn-misser...

[Baron Von PWN]

Just to summarise here, it's been suggested many times. But you should have eliminated them if they were missing too many turns. 3 turns in a row shows that the person has been gone for half a week but say if a game lasted 4 months. And they missed 5 turns in total it wouldn't be fair for them to be kicked.

If you want people gone from games eliminate them. Or add them to your ignore

A fix for this might be to "forget" missed turns after a certain period of time, say after a month or so.

[max is gr8]

Rejected Thread

[jesusfreak16]

Rejected Thread

that suggestion was probably too radical.


I agree with Ogrecrusher.
(I also suggested this a couple months ago, but the 'radicals' spammed it up. )

[drunkmonkey]

Just to summarise here, it's been suggested many times. But you should have eliminated them if they were missing too many turns. 3 turns in a row shows that the person has been gone for half a week but say if a game lasted 4 months. And they missed 5 turns in total it wouldn't be fair for them to be kicked.

If you want people gone from games eliminate them. Or add them to your ignore

Just because they missed turns doesn't mean they're weak enough to eliminate. Maybe that works in 1v1, but in any other format it's ridiculous to assume 1 (or even 2) missed turns automatically leaves someone vulnerable to elimination.

[max is gr8]

No it isn't. You can at least weaken them. The people are getting a rough deal anyway. Two turns lacking in reinforcement means 2 turns of being vulnerable. I've seen it before. Someone leaves with the whole of africa in W2.0 in their control and return with no continents. Once they broke through the initial wall they slaughtered him. If you aren't happy with deadbeats either: play more private games or tournaments, they happen but not as frequently. Or stop playing entirely.

Missing turns is still bad for players.

[drunkmonkey]

Or stop playing entirely.

Kind of a dickish comment, don't you think?

I was in a flat rate game where a player started deadbeating in round 30 or so, and had 1 card. There were 4 teams left, and we all had at least 60 troops. If any of the 3 active teams would have tried to eliminate this player, they would have surely weakened themselves to the point the other 2 teams could have easily moved in for the kill. Not to mention, had he returned, he'd have hit back at full strength, since he wasn't holding a bonus anyway. It's not always as simple as "he missed two turns, which means he's at a disadvantage, therefore you can eliminate him."

[packrat31306]

Concise description:

• If a player missed more than x turns, they should be kicked, even if they are not missed in one go.

Specifics:

• I have seen a couple of examples similar, but in a game I'm in right now, a player has missed a total of SEVEN turns, 3 times they've missed 2, then returned in a blaze of glory. I think that if you miss 5 turns in any game, you should be kicked.
  A week of my life has been spent waiting for this guy!! It's also affected the balance of the game, because when he's skipping turns, we're unsure if he's gone for good this time.

I agree with Ogrecrusher.

It is also disrespectful to the other players to wait 23hr 59mi for "turn-misser" to miss.

Or there perhaps a rating checkbox of turn-misser.
Deadbeat, to me, means that the player missed 3 turns and is rated appropriately.
Quitter, to me, means that the player is still taking turns but isn't aggressively attempting any strategy or gameplay.

I also do favor just eliminating the turn-misser...

I also agree with Ogrecrusher. I think it's annoying and disrespectful. There are even times when people can deliberatly miss turns so they can get a powerful set at the end for blocking. I'm not saying this happens all the time, but I have seen it.

The only problem with eliminating the turn-misser is that sometimes it's not benificial to the strategy of the game. If player one is a crucial target but player 2 is deadbeating, how is that fair? Especially if it's an assassin game.

[max is gr8]

I was in a flat rate game where a player started deadbeating in round 30 or so, and had 1 card. There were 4 teams left, and we all had at least 60 troops. If any of the 3 active teams would have tried to eliminate this player, they would have surely weakened themselves to the point the other 2 teams could have easily moved in for the kill. Not to mention, had he returned, he'd have hit back at full strength, since he wasn't holding a bonus anyway. It's not always as simple as "he missed two turns, which means he's at a disadvantage, therefore you can eliminate him."

Right so your telling me that you receiving lets say... 4 units a turn, to defend yourself is not as good as after two turns have passed receiving 8 units in one go AFTER your turn?

The fact is, players know if someone is expected to receive units. You can't gain a tactical advantage like you used to, when you got your troops at the beginning of turns. You miss out on autodeploys. Potential Cards, your possibly necessary defense for the next round.

If you miss turns once a week lets say, every week you are unavailable on a sunday (let us say for example), you are going to have a massive disadvantage every monday, when you return. You cannot fight back against attacks. You cannot utilise your troops immediately. I don't see how your argument is compelling at all.

Or stop playing entirely

Kind of a dickish comment, don't you think?

Not at all, it proves the point that you will never avoid turn missers, if you make games where a player gets kicked after missing one turn it wouldn't work, you could miss a turn by logging in ten minutes too late and get kicked.
Put it this way, a timelimit system wouldn't be fair, sequential is different to freestyle. A round limit wouldn't be fair either. Ridding people of deferred troops wouldn't be fair either. The problem has been one since the beginning of CC people missing turns. The 3 turns in a row has worked for this long, it will work for another 4 years.

Also, to get across another point:
Would you rather lackattack spent his time working on this rather than, advanced fog of war, changing weather systems. New game variations, map coding capabilities, more options for games and general improvement or would you want him to do this? There are lots of things on the To-Do list which are far more deserving of this idea anyway. AND this has already been rejected.

Either way this needs to be merged with the other thread, it is the same in principal.

[wolfpack0530]

I say 2 missed turns PERIOD!! Not consecutive, PERIOD!!! Kick em out. the log would read like this.

Player 1 missed turn in round 3
Player 1 missed turn in round 11

Player 1 has been kicked out for missing too many turns!

[jesusfreak16]

Rejected Thread

that suggestion was probably too radical.


I agree with Ogrecrusher.
(I also suggested this a couple months ago, but the 'radicals' spammed it up. )

They already rejected 3 total missed. If you want to suggest that two total be the maximum, put up ur own thread.

[Bruceswar]

I say 2 missed turns PERIOD!! Not consecutive, PERIOD!!! Kick em out. the log would read like this.

Player 1 missed turn in round 3
Player 1 missed turn in round 11

Player 1 has been kicked out for missing too many turns!

Nah this would totally ruin games. I have some games that have been going over a year 1 player gone would gift away the game to another player.

[wolfpack0530]

I say 2 missed turns PERIOD!! Not consecutive, PERIOD!!! Kick em out. the log would read like this.

Player 1 missed turn in round 3
Player 1 missed turn in round 11

Player 1 has been kicked out for missing too many turns!

Nah this would totally ruin games. I have some games that have been going over a year 1 player gone would gift away the game to another player.

Sure, to each there own, but in my humble opinion, if a game isnt decided in a years time, then someone made some mistakes along the way. Build games usually happen because players are being to timid in the early and middle rounds. Then everyone left has huge stacks and nobody attacks because they do want to weaken themselves too much. These games get soooo stale, and boooooooorrrrriiiiinnnnnggggg, and meaningless, and dreadful, and did i mention boooorrrriiiinnggggg An autokick is EXACTLY what these deadlocked buildgames need, to inject some sort of hope for an ending. I would suggest, that once a game hits round 200, a random player is automatically autokicked for no reason whatsoever, other that to just end the game. Some would say that isnt fair, but if it were known to all players that round 200 is the autokick round, and then every 10 rounds after that another is autokicked, then it would make for some exciting auto assaults!!

Some would say that patience is the key, but i would say that if you cant win a game in 200 rounds, then you dont deserve to win. But that is just me, and i am talking in general, so i hope nobody takes what i said personally.

Honestly, this doesnt affect me personally that much at all. I have only missed 2 turns ever (joined feb 09), and i have so many games going that i dont mind waiting at all. This is just my humble opinion

[Bruceswar]

I say 2 missed turns PERIOD!! Not consecutive, PERIOD!!! Kick em out. the log would read like this.

Player 1 missed turn in round 3
Player 1 missed turn in round 11

Player 1 has been kicked out for missing too many turns!

Nah this would totally ruin games. I have some games that have been going over a year 1 player gone would gift away the game to another player.

Sure, to each there own, but in my humble opinion, if a game isnt decided in a years time, then someone made some mistakes along the way. Build games usually happen because players are being to timid in the early and middle rounds. Then everyone left has huge stacks and nobody attacks because they do want to weaken themselves too much. These games get soooo stale, and boooooooorrrrriiiiinnnnnggggg, and meaningless, and dreadful, and did i mention boooorrrriiiinnggggg An autokick is EXACTLY what these deadlocked buildgames need, to inject some sort of hope for an ending. I would suggest, that once a game hits round 200, a random player is automatically autokicked for no reason whatsoever, other that to just end the game. Some would say that isnt fair, but if it were known to all players that round 200 is the autokick round, and then every 10 rounds after that another is autokicked, then it would make for some exciting auto assaults!!

Some would say that patience is the key, but i would say that if you cant win a game in 200 rounds, then you dont deserve to win. But that is just me, and i am talking in general, so i hope nobody takes what i said personally.

Honestly, this doesnt affect me personally that much at all. I have only missed 2 turns ever (joined feb 09), and i have so many games going that i dont mind waiting at all. This is just my humble opinion

So if you work very hard to build a nice lead, then come round 200 you are auto kicked. Seems like a damn good waste of a game and would downright piss people off. Maybe you think those sorta games are boring but others might enjoy a long slow game. BTW if player A auto attacks B then C is able to sweep up. Why do you think these turn into build games. Everybody wants to win that is why.

[nippersean]

Do people who tend to play very long games have a propensity for missed turns?

100 rounds - a long game, 3 turns missed that's 97% attendance.

You won't get into most clans with that record.

I agree with 3 missed turns in a game - over. The answer to long games is don't miss 3 turns - it wouldn't be harsh it would be fair.

You wouldn't be robbed if you built up a strong position over 200 rounds. You'd just be ejected for not following the rules - i.e missing 3 turns in a game (I think plenty of chances - bizarre 200 rd games or not.)

Also what % of games do go over 200 rds? Are these exceptions a reasonable basis to block a ruling. A ruling that would stop people missing say 5 / 6 turns in 30 rds? I would guess this is a far more usual and annoying scenario for the vast majority of people.
Occasionally due to unforseen circumstances, missed turns are inevitable. Of course if you lose i/net access or something you may miss a turn in multiple different games which would not be impacted by this ruling.

Three missed turns in the same game seems to me to be still very generous.

[wolfpack0530]

I say 2 missed turns PERIOD!! Not consecutive, PERIOD!!! Kick em out. the log would read like this.

Player 1 missed turn in round 3
Player 1 missed turn in round 11

Player 1 has been kicked out for missing too many turns!

Nah this would totally ruin games. I have some games that have been going over a year 1 player gone would gift away the game to another player.

Sure, to each there own, but in my humble opinion, if a game isnt decided in a years time, then someone made some mistakes along the way. Build games usually happen because players are being to timid in the early and middle rounds. Then everyone left has huge stacks and nobody attacks because they do want to weaken themselves too much. These games get soooo stale, and boooooooorrrrriiiiinnnnnggggg, and meaningless, and dreadful, and did i mention boooorrrriiiinnggggg An autokick is EXACTLY what these deadlocked buildgames need, to inject some sort of hope for an ending. I would suggest, that once a game hits round 200, a random player is automatically autokicked for no reason whatsoever, other that to just end the game. Some would say that isnt fair, but if it were known to all players that round 200 is the autokick round, and then every 10 rounds after that another is autokicked, then it would make for some exciting auto assaults!!

Some would say that patience is the key, but i would say that if you cant win a game in 200 rounds, then you dont deserve to win. But that is just me, and i am talking in general, so i hope nobody takes what i said personally.

Honestly, this doesnt affect me personally that much at all. I have only missed 2 turns ever (joined feb 09), and i have so many games going that i dont mind waiting at all. This is just my humble opinion

So if you work very hard to build a nice lead, then come round 200 you are auto kicked. Seems like a damn good waste of a game and would downright piss people off. Maybe you think those sorta games are boring but others might enjoy a long slow game. BTW if player A auto attacks B then C is able to sweep up. Why do you think these turn into build games. Everybody wants to win that is why.

Well i think that working real hard over the course of 200 rounds to build a nice lead is folly. If someone cant win the game in 200 rounds then they might suck. If someone cant win a game in 200 rounds, then their strategy may be flawed. if someone cant win a game in 200 rounds then they probably dont deserve to win anyway.

If anyone thinks that the majority of players on this site enjoy these 200 round game stalemates, then that person is delusional, misguided, and flat out wrong!!!

When the board has every player with 1500+ armies, the strategically best option is not to attack. Every player uses this strategy, because if anyone attacks, then they are suiciding and ruining the game for the others. Spoils become meaningless, bonuses become meaning less, and it becomes a battle of patience, and waiting, till infinity. IF someone actually enjoys that, then i will never understand why, because it is boring and fruitless. The majority of players on this site, absolutely hate such games.

Those few who do like such games, can start their own usergroup. But the site as a whole needs to fix this. Drop the deadbeats, and increase the escalating rate to an exponential system. once the spoils get up above 100 (or whatever limit they decide on) it starts increasing by huge amounts each cash instead of just 5.

Once again, i am not talking about anyone in specific, and i am not attacking you brucewar. Just posing my position ( and trying not to single anyone out)

[max is gr8]

Do people who tend to play very long games have a propensity for missed turns?

100 rounds - a long game, 3 turns missed that's 97% attendance.

Occasionally due to unforseen circumstances, missed turns are inevitable. Of course if you lose i/net access or something you may miss a turn in multiple different games which would not be impacted by this ruling.

Three missed turns in the same game seems to me to be still very generous.

Well each month I probably miss around:
3 Days due to certain full evening Commitments
2 Days due to the shift that occurs with freestyle (i.e. turns getting later or earlier)

Those three days I can get a one day replacement for. The other 2 you can't avoid, unless I stop going to school

[A.D.]

"You are automatically kicked out from the game as a deadbeat if you miss 3 consecutive turns".
There must be a limit for no-consecutive missing rounds too.
In game 11108509 blue has lost 11 turns (!) and still playing

[blakebowling]

Please fill out the form

Code: Select all

[b]Concise description:[/b]
[list]
[*]xxxxxxx[/list]

[b]Specifics/Details:[/b]
[list]
[*]xxxxxxx[/list]

[b]How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:[/b]
[list]
[*]xxxxxxx[/list]

[hmsps]

not being funny but why the need to fill out a form, can you not see all that you need to see i.e. 3 consecutive turns should just be changed to 3 turns, its all the red tape with suggestions and the fact that if its a change to a pretty colour at st patricks day or something is fine but most others are poo poo'd by mods at a very early stage probably at the behest of lack who cant be bothered unless it gets the mula in

[Robert The Red]

"You are automatically kicked out from the game as a deadbeat if you miss 3 consecutive turns".
There must be a limit for no-consecutive missing rounds too.
In game 11108509 blue has lost 11 turns (!) and still playing

I agree with you. but brace yourself for a deluge of reponse claiming it casualness out of the game.

I personally dont think it would make the game less interesting for casual players and believe it would add a little motivation to play the game, after all why join one if you cant be bothered to take your turn, i know we cant always be available to play that affects all, but with 24hrs to take a turn it is pretty casual and if you are likely to be away from the game longer then you get someone to sit it for you, there is always plenty of volunteers.

I think it should be 5 no consecutive missed turns to be kicked out but keeping the old rule of 3 consecutive turns which ever happens first applies the same.
Robert The Red

[chapcrap]

How about 3 missed turns per 100 rounds or something like that?

If a game goes super long, like some of them do, then I can understand some more misses.

[A.D.]

@blakebowling, I really don't understand this "fill the form" in a forum, specially when English is not my mother tongue and I can't manage the speech like you... but if neccesary, I'll do my best to follow the site rules:

Concise description:
I suggest the "kicked out from the game as a deadbeat" rule must be applied to no consecutive rounds too. There must be a total lost rounds limit in a single game, added to the 3 consecutive default.

Specifics/Details:
*A player must be kicked out from a game when reach a fixed lost rounds (5, 8, 10...)
or
*A player must be kicked out from a game when reach a ratio round lost/game lenght (3 in 30, 5 in 50, 10 in 100...)
(other formulas can work too)

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
A casual miss can be forgiven, but deadbeat behaviour must be punish, it avoid other players to play and make game experience worse. Get out of a game it's light and right punishment.