Timing-out loophole [Implemented on Casual]

[Dukasaur]

Concise description:

• Eliminate the loophole by which players avoid taking a card they should have taken by timing out.

Specifics/Details:

• When a player times out, the system will do a check to see if he earned a card (which is to say, made a successful attack during his turn) and if he earned it, will award it to him regardless of whether he ended his turn normally.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• The benefits are twofold:
  
  1. Eliminate cheating, especially in nuclear/zombie games. The idea of nuclear is that sometimes you just get the wrong cards and have to nuke yourself. That's part of the risk you take when playing that setting. There are certain players who will cheat the system. When they have four cards they will start timing out to avoid taking a fifth, and thus avoid nuking themselves, thus giving them an advantage over people who play fair. Let's make no mistake. Calling this a "loophole" is really too nice. This is quite simply, a cheat, away to avoid the risk that the setting entails and thereby subvert the spirit of the game.
  2. While eliminating cheating is my primary concern here, there is an ancillary benefit. Sometimes people time out for unintentional reasons -- their Internet goes down, they get a phone call and forget to finish their turn, whatever. So there will be a secondary benefit for these people.
• The question arises, why this wasn't fixed long ago? In the early days, the site had a tremendous number of speed games going. Running out of time and not getting your card was seen as the price you pay for being too slow. Over time, however, speed games have dwindled. It no longer makes sense the the huge majority of games (24 hour games) to allow a loophole because of speed games. However, in case that is an option you would like to support, I'm okay with an amendment to plug the loophole for 24-hour games only.

[mrswdk]

Pretty sure this suggestion has been made before (or a C&A report filed against someone deliberately missing turns) and all the clan nerds kicked up a fuss about how deliberately timing out isn't game abuse, it's just tactics.

I think the next modification to this site should be to include a tag in the usernames of all the clan nerds, so that everyone else can avoid them more easily.

[Mad777]

Pretty sure this suggestion has been made before (or a C&A report filed against someone deliberately missing turns) and all the clan nerds kicked up a fuss about how deliberately timing out isn't game abuse, it's just tactics.

I think the next modification to this site should be to include a tag in the usernames of all the clan nerds, so that everyone else can avoid them more easily.

To make it clear, if the Community goes to a « buy-in » then the code to be change, webmaster is ready to update it as long as we have enough support, on the other hand if the majority feels this to be a normal way to play then nothing will change and we will still seeing C&A about it.

[IcePack]

Pretty sure this suggestion has been made before (or a C&A report filed against someone deliberately missing turns) and all the clan nerds kicked up a fuss about how deliberately timing out isn't game abuse, it's just tactics.

I think the next modification to this site should be to include a tag in the usernames of all the clan nerds, so that everyone else can avoid them more easily.

Clans already have rules in place regarding this for the most part, so that makes no sense.

My personal opinion is it’s strategy, even though I don’t use it. If it was going to be implimented I would think it would be for 24 hour only as duka mentioned, speed game is a whole diff animal

[mrswdk]

It makes sense to only implement this suggestion for 24-hour games. As you say, speed is something different.

Allowing people to do this on a 24-hour game is pointless though. It's not a strategic feature, it's a glitch.

[Dukasaur]

Poll added. 3 options -- all games, 24-hour games only, no.

[BuJaber]

Yes definitely. I must be so honest that this has never even occurred to me. That is an insane advantage in nuclear/zombie games and possibly some escalating. Fix please.

[mrswdk]

Hopefully with enough community support we can get this suggestion moved right to the top of the list of suggestions that team CC like but can't be bothered to implement.

[IcePack]

I voted no, but if it was to be implimented 24 hour is my opinion

[nhrockski]

I like the strategy envolved with the option of timing out and not collecting a spoil. Don’t change it please . if you do change it players may choose to only deploy and not conquer a tert . Would that then be “cheating “ .

[Hooch]

So aside from clan games it is completely acceptable to do this, excluding questions of fair play?

[IcePack]

So aside from clan games it is completely acceptable to do this, excluding questions of fair play?

Correct. Its a long debated topic but currently other than someone complaining or saying it’s cheap tactics, it’s perfectly within the rules to do so

[Mad777]

So aside from clan games it is completely acceptable to do this, excluding questions of fair play?

Correct. Its a long debated topic but currently other than someone complaining or saying it’s cheap tactics, it’s perfectly within the rules to do so

As far ruling I show to admin that there is a controversy about taking spoil and one or the other should be change disregards, if you read this tab it says:

"You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region,..."

But in this tab it says:

Missing Turn: (note that it doesn't stipulate "Running out of time" so it's a vague section)
"If you run out of time you will lose any troops that have not been deployed and any spoils that have not been awarded."

[IcePack]

So aside from clan games it is completely acceptable to do this, excluding questions of fair play?

Correct. Its a long debated topic but currently other than someone complaining or saying it’s cheap tactics, it’s perfectly within the rules to do so

As far ruling I show to admin that there is a controversy about taking spoil and one or the other should be change disregards, if you read this tab it says:

"You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region,..."

But in this tab it says:

Missing Turn: (note that it doesn't stipulate "Running out of time" so it's a vague section)
"If you run out of time you will lose any troops that have not been deployed and any spoils that have not been awarded."

It’s not vague when you consider past discussions and C&A cases etc.

[betiko]

This is not a yes or no from me. It will depend on the game.

Speed Escalating/flat rate: no. Some settings are made to rush you and actually finish your turn to get your spoil reward in 1/2mn games. Same goes for freestyle.

Nuclear/zombie: that is a yes. People not taking their spoil are cheating. If you have a bad combination but you need to attack... suck it up. And take that spoil. This removes strategy... it doesn't add any. Having to deal with unwanted spoils makes games more difficult.

[Hooch]

Not something I do, and I dislike, but long answer, no, until the ruling on it is changed and I will put forward it is more likely people card dodging than power cuts, leave it as is.

[DoomYoshi]

Not something I do, and I dislike, but long answer, no, until the ruling on it is changed and I will put forward it is more likely people card dodging than power cuts, leave it as is.

I'm not sure what you mean "until the ruling on it is changed". That's exactly the point of this thread, discussing whether or not the ruling should be changed.

[Shiz]

If you don't want a card, don't conquer a territory. Just deploy and end your turn. If you conquer a territory, you should get a card, at least in 24-hour games.

[mrswdk]

Not something I do, and I dislike, but long answer, no, until the ruling on it is changed and I will put forward it is more likely people card dodging than power cuts, leave it as is.

I'm not sure what you mean "until the ruling on it is changed". That's exactly the point of this thread, discussing whether or not the ruling should be changed.

Yeah but the rule HASN’T been changed has it dummy?

[LiveLoveTeach]

I like the strategy envolved with the option of timing out and not collecting a spoil. Don’t change it please . if you do change it players may choose to only deploy and not conquer a tert . Would that then be “cheating “ .

It wouldn't be cheating to deploy and end... If you don't want a spoil, then don't conquer a territory... that's exactly the point.

If you choose to conquer a territory, then you are choosing to accept spoils, regardless of what they are, helpful or harmful.

Your other option is to play no spoils games.

[Hooch]

Not something I do, and I dislike, but long answer, no, until the ruling on it is changed and I will put forward it is more likely people card dodging than power cuts, leave it as is.

I'm not sure what you mean "until the ruling on it is changed". That's exactly the point of this thread, discussing whether or not the ruling should be changed.

In so far as it is illegal, not whether it should be a forced card down ones throat.

Clearly at present aside from clan games it is perfectly acceptable to dodge cards.

1) Why does this differ?
2) If it was or is an issue why isn't it punished?

Yes forcing a card on players saves someone/no one having to look into every accusation which at present isn't needed.


--------------
Duk at present maybe 120 people may vote on this, is that a mandate?
Again, I like the idea but think it should be across 'all' forms of the game and if it is deemed required I'd prefer it was actually spelt out as foul play otherwise leave it be.

[DoomYoshi]

So you are only willing to agree to the technical change if there becomes a rule against it? There will never be a rule against it because it would be easier to change the programming than adding another rule that requires enforcement. So you are actually setting impossible pre-conditions for the change. This suggestion is in lieu of a rule. There already is a rule in clan play as you mentioned (although I thought nuclear was banned in most clan wars, so I'm not sure I've ever heard that rule).

I think maybe I am misunderstanding something critical in your argument because I am reading your argument as: it is allowed, therefore it should be allowed; it can't be not allowed until it isn't allowed; since it can't be not allowed and allowed at the same time, I reject the suggestion. Or perhaps you are saying that you just don't see it as a problem and therefore reject the suggestion. If so, why not say so?

[ltcomdata]

I am not understanding the "loophole" that this poll wants to change.

If you want to avoid taking your turn in order to not have to play your spoils, then you can only do that twice in a row before you are kicked out for missing too many turns. Therefore, you will have to take your turn at some point and cash in those spoils or lose the game. Skipping a turn at some point during the game seems to me to be fair strategy, even in 24-hour games with nukes; it is a trade-off: yes, you might avoid nuking yourself right now, but you are also giving your opponent an extra turn.

So, I guess I don't see what the problem is, or how this "loophole" turns into cheating...

Can someone explain it to me?

[Dukasaur]

Not something I do, and I dislike, but long answer, no, until the ruling on it is changed and I will put forward it is more likely people card dodging than power cuts, leave it as is.

I'm not sure what you mean "until the ruling on it is changed". That's exactly the point of this thread, discussing whether or not the ruling should be changed.

In so far as it is illegal, not whether it should be a forced card down ones throat.

Clearly at present aside from clan games it is perfectly acceptable to dodge cards.

1) Why does this differ?
2) If it was or is an issue why isn't it punished?

Yes forcing a card on players saves someone/no one having to look into every accusation which at present isn't needed.


--------------
Duk at present maybe 120 people may vote on this, is that a mandate?
Again, I like the idea but think it should be across 'all' forms of the game and if it is deemed required I'd prefer it was actually spelt out as foul play otherwise leave it be.

I'm not sure if I understand your question. Most people do consider it foul play, but there's no actual rule against it.

There's no rule for two reasons. One, this cheat is common enough that it would clog the C&A board if we started actioning it. The C&A mods are just volunteers with finite time like the rest of us. Furthermore, C&A requires people to bring forth complaints. The majority of players don't take the time to read the logs after a game. It is quite likely someone has cheated you out of a game in this manner and you didn't even notice. Rules which require manual enforcement are going to be rarely and inconsistently enforced. The only way to have a rule consistently and reliably enforced is to make it built-in to the actual game mechanics.

The second reason, as I said in the OP, is historical. Speed games used to be a huge part of this site, and in speed games, especially freestyle speed, leaving yourself enough time to end your turn normally and get a card was part of the challenge..

[Dukasaur]

I am not understanding the "loophole" that this poll wants to change.

If you want to avoid taking your turn in order to not have to play your spoils, then you can only do that twice in a row before you are kicked out for missing too many turns. Therefore, you will have to take your turn at some point and cash in those spoils or lose the game. Skipping a turn at some point during the game seems to me to be fair strategy, even in 24-hour games with nukes; it is a trade-off: yes, you might avoid nuking yourself right now, but you are also giving your opponent an extra turn.

So, I guess I don't see what the problem is, or how this "loophole" turns into cheating...

Can someone explain it to me?

This isn't about skipping a turn. If you want to skip your turn, go ahead, I have no problem with you.

This is about people who take their turn, but do not end it, so that they don't get a card. Normal rules of Risk, from which CC is copied, state that if you successfully attack someone during your turn, you will get a card. But sometimes, people who don't want a card will successfully attack, but then let their time run out so that they don't get one. This is usually in nuclear or zombie, but once in a whlle in escalating also.

Let's say you're playing a nuclear game. You have four cards, and you own three of the territories that you have four cards. If you get a fifth card, you know you will be forced to nuke at least one and possibly two or three of your own territories. Most of us, playing within the spirit of the game, accept that as the risk you take with nuclear, take their fifth card and next turn nuke themselves, for better or for worse. There are some people, however, who will not take that fifth card. They use the timing out cheat. At the end of their turn, instead of pressing "End" (or reinforcing) they simple let the clock run out, so that their turn ends after an hour and they don't get the card. Thus, they pervert the spirit of the game, and do not accept the risk inherent in playing nukes.

The suggestion is that at the end of your turn, if you have earned a card (by making an attack) you should get one, whether you press "End" or not.

Does that explain it sufficiently?