Tales of Tribute turn timer is too forgiving, should be more dynamic to avoid intentional stalling

SilverBride

Veryamedliel wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There is a difference between learning patience in situations that require it, such as waiting for a package to arrive, and situations that don't. We know that it will take several days for our item to reach us so even though we want it now we patiently accept that we have to wait for it.

And you know beforehand you have to wait 90 sec max before your next turn. I don't really see the difference or problem. In fact, it's even better than waiting for a package, for which you may have to spend an entire day waiting at the delivery location to get it. Waiting 90 sec is nothing compared to that.

The delivery location is my house and I am signed up with all the major delivery services so I get a 2 hour window and text updates on its progress. Needing time to move a package from here to there is necessary.

It is not necessary to stare at 5 cards for 90 seconds before making a play.

MaraxusTheOrc

SilverBride wrote: »

Veryamedliel wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There is a difference between learning patience in situations that require it, such as waiting for a package to arrive, and situations that don't. We know that it will take several days for our item to reach us so even though we want it now we patiently accept that we have to wait for it.

And you know beforehand you have to wait 90 sec max before your next turn. I don't really see the difference or problem. In fact, it's even better than waiting for a package, for which you may have to spend an entire day waiting at the delivery location to get it. Waiting 90 sec is nothing compared to that.

The delivery location is my house and I am signed up with all the major delivery services so I get a 2 hour window and text updates on its progress. Needing time to move a package from here to there is necessary.

It is not necessary to stare at 5 cards for 90 seconds before making a play.

Well, that’s like, just your opinion.

SilverBride

It's a lot of players' opinion.

spartaxoxo

MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Veryamedliel wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There is a difference between learning patience in situations that require it, such as waiting for a package to arrive, and situations that don't. We know that it will take several days for our item to reach us so even though we want it now we patiently accept that we have to wait for it.

And you know beforehand you have to wait 90 sec max before your next turn. I don't really see the difference or problem. In fact, it's even better than waiting for a package, for which you may have to spend an entire day waiting at the delivery location to get it. Waiting 90 sec is nothing compared to that.

The delivery location is my house and I am signed up with all the major delivery services so I get a 2 hour window and text updates on its progress. Needing time to move a package from here to there is necessary.

It is not necessary to stare at 5 cards for 90 seconds before making a play.

Well, that’s like, just your opinion.

The Dude abides, but I don't. This isn't Cyrodiil, this is Tales of Tribute, there are rules, man.

Katheriah

There are some rare cases where my hand is getting complex enough for me to actually use the full timer. Usually near the end of the game.

I would not be against a timer penalty though, for example 30 seconds of inactivity gives you a 30% penalty. 60 seconds cuts 60% off.

spartaxoxo

Katheriah wrote: »

There are some rare cases where my hand is getting complex enough for me to actually use the full timer. Usually near the end of the game.

I would not be against a timer penalty though, for example 30 seconds of inactivity gives you a 30% penalty. 60 seconds cuts 60% off.

I don't think there should be penalties because stuff happens. Maybe the person uses up all the time on a singular turn because their pizza came, and the rest of the game is played normally.

It just should be some smaller amount of time to start with, and every card you play adds additional time to your timer, up to a max of say 2 minutes to accommodate those long, complex hand. If your inactive, then you'd only get the short timer. If you're actively playing, you get enough time to finish your hand. Seems simple enough.

SeaGtGruff

The timer seems okay to me as it is. I've had a few turns where I had trouble deciding what to do, and nearly didn't have time to finish my move before the timer ran out. It sounds like some players are too impatient, not to mention making assumptions about why the other person is taking a while to decide what to do-- assumptions which may very well be incorrect.

spartaxoxo

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

The timer seems okay to me as it is. I've had a few turns where I had trouble deciding what to do, and nearly didn't have time to finish my move before the timer ran out. It sounds like some players are too impatient, not to mention making assumptions about why the other person is taking a while to decide what to do-- assumptions which may very well be incorrect.

If you watch my video, you can see an example of a turn that went long because of thinking (cards weren't played instantly but I did play them at reasonable intervals) and a turn that went long because the other person was not trying (literally inactive).

peacenote

I have been on both sides of this, in ranked play. I often plan my moves while my opponent is going, and am done quickly, but I also run out of time - NOT intentionally stalling - in two instances:

1-- when people choose decks I haven't unlocked yet. Then I need to read/process/try to remember cards I haven't seen ever or often, and I tend to run out of time for my turns. (I am about halfway through High Isle; was still getting through Blackwood questing when it dropped and I wasn't going to quest out of order for the card game.)

2-- when I get good combos where I keep getting more cards. I have run out of time thinking about what I should do in those cases.

Plus, I am a thoughtful person in general. Whenever I play cards, even in real life, I am on the slower side. I also feel that cards in general are a strategy game, not a speed game, and as a result the 90 seconds doesn't even bother me if someone is stalling. 20 seconds seems way too low for the timer in my opinion. Maybe 60 would be ok but as it is I do run out of time sometimes.

If the game was playing attention to me, I am definitely not new but maybe not the most experienced. Intermediate, let's say. A lot of people seem to forget there are many folks in between "experienced" and "beginner" when these types of situations come up.

Overall I think it would be a shame to see the game rush legitimate players because some people abuse the system. I get it, it sucks, but if no one would concede to those people they would stop using the strategy. Just like if everyone dropped group when a fake tank popped in (so the person would fail at their goal - a fast dungeon clear) people might stop doing that so much.

spartaxoxo

peacenote wrote: »

Overall I think it would be a shame to see the game rush legitimate players because some people abuse the system. I get it, it sucks, but if no one would concede to those people they would stop using the strategy.

I agree that 20 seconds would be far too low. But, no they would still do it. They often start doing these things to be a sore loser. You get a card they wanted or they feel like they are going to lose, so they punish you for beating them. That sometimes they get people to concede rather than put up with a virtual tantrum is just icing on the cake .

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

It just should be some smaller amount of time to start with, and every card you play adds additional time to your timer, up to a max of say 2 minutes to accommodate those long, complex hand. If your inactive, then you'd only get the short timer. If you're actively playing, you get enough time to finish your hand. Seems simple enough.

If they do something like that I'd be done. It's already torture enough with the 90 second timer.

SeaGtGruff

spartaxoxo wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

Overall I think it would be a shame to see the game rush legitimate players because some people abuse the system. I get it, it sucks, but if no one would concede to those people they would stop using the strategy.

I agree that 20 seconds would be far too low. But, no they would still do it. They often start doing these things to be a sore loser. You get a card they wanted or they feel like they are going to lose, so they punish you for beating them. That sometimes they get people to concede rather than put up with a virtual tantrum is just icing on the cake .

But that's really just your assumption, isn't it? Even if (for instance) you happened to be watching a streamer who deliberately did that to their opponent-- and said aloud in their stream that that's what they were doing-- it doesn't follow that everyone who you think is taking "too long" is doing so for that same reason.

And even if the other person is inactive for a bit before they start to take their turn, it doesn't mean they're doing it out of spite or whatever. In my first several PvP matches I was totally unready for the calibre and tactics of some of my opponents, and there were times when I had to stare at the screen for a bit trying to digest what I was seeing and figure out what to do. That was especially the case when I would make a move and then *bam* my opponent would complete their move in just a couple of seconds, leaving my head spinning.

There was also a match where my opponent played several Rahjin combos during their turn, such that I was supposed to discard 6 cards at the beginning of my turn-- an impossible thing to do. The game wouldn't let me discard all 5 of my cards and hit the timer to end my turn, and for the life of me I still have no idea what you're supposed to click on to concede, so I was completely flustered. I actually started to type a whisper to my opponent that the game wasn't letting me do anything so I was going to just force-quit ESO to end the match, but the timer finally ran out before I could finish typing my whisper. And I later tried to add that player to my ignore list except it said "account not found," which presumably means they were either in offline mode or had put me on their ignore list first.

You are, of course, free to make all the assumptions you want about other people and their motivations, but it would be wise to keep in mind that they are assumptions. Your assumptions might be right some of the time, but that doesn't mean they're right all of the time.

SilverBride

@SeaGtGruff If I want to concede I just open my mail or something that takes me away from the ToT screen and I get a pop-up asking if I want to concede. It would be nice if there was a button on the screen for this, though.

But I'm curious why you wanted to put your opponent on ignore. They didn't message you or do anything other than win the match.

Arnoldthehawk

I just played a match with a guy [snip], who either intentionally stalled or was very very beginner, but I'm guessing the former. It took 26 [redacted] minutes for [redacted]'s sake. That's it. I'm done with beginners or cheaters in a suppose-to-be competitive scene. Ridiculous. If you can't solve your hand in 30-40 seconds, you DO NOT BELONG to the competitve scene, because then you are a beginner. Go back to practice.

[Edited for Naming and Shaming]

ZOS_GregoryV

Greetings all,

We have moved this thread to a more appropriate category.

Regards,
-Greg-

Arnoldthehawk

Thanks Greg.

AnduinTryggva

Treeshka wrote: »

I agree that the initial time should be very lower compared to current ninety seconds, and adjusted turn time should increase with combos. Just give a few more seconds for each combo a player does. If this does not happen at least first three or five turns should not be ninety seconds long.

To be honest, I am not in favor to have a dynamic timer in order to allow endless crow combos. In some cases the timer end is the only way to interrupt a combo chain and thus giving the opponent with less tavern luck a chance.

WitchyKiki

I am more concerned over people who purposefully stall games by undermining the other player and at the same time, trying NOT to win so they can extend a game forever and basically: troll. It's infuriating to try and be a good sport about the game and allow the other player their win, but they continue to try and stall by not accumulating points on purpose although they know they have the winning hand. It's the type of play that comes from sore winners.

If anything, make the timer shorter (60 seconds), and if a match drags on too long, because one player is trying not to win and stall the game, just finish the match after a certain amount of turns and grant the winning hand to whoever has the most points. It will discourage trolls from this behavior.

spartaxoxo

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

Overall I think it would be a shame to see the game rush legitimate players because some people abuse the system. I get it, it sucks, but if no one would concede to those people they would stop using the strategy.

I agree that 20 seconds would be far too low. But, no they would still do it. They often start doing these things to be a sore loser. You get a card they wanted or they feel like they are going to lose, so they punish you for beating them. That sometimes they get people to concede rather than put up with a virtual tantrum is just icing on the cake .

But that's really just your assumption, isn't it? Even if (for instance) you happened to be watching a streamer who deliberately did that to their opponent-- and said aloud in their stream that that's what they were doing-- it doesn't follow that everyone who you think is taking "too long" is doing so for that same reason.

@SeaGtGruff

I never said it was everyone who takes long and even linked a video that shows the difference in a long turn with thought (cards are getting played throughout) and one obviously done out of spite. The person in the video sees a card they want picked up, so they decide not to play anything at all. There was no discard and they'd already been playing normally so they clearly knew how to play a card and end a turn. They play no cards the entire turn. The next turn, I get enough points to win. They wait a while and then they concede the match rather than press end turn (back when doing that ruined a daily and prevented it from being turned in). Your example is someone playing and easily distinguished from someone idling.

As you experienced yourself, it is harder to concede than to just end your turn. If they had ended their turn, they would have had less menu to navigate and would have avoided a 10 minute penalty timer. It's obvious they chose to concede out of spite.

SeaGtGruff

SilverBride wrote: »

@SeaGtGruff If I want to concede I just open my mail or something that takes me away from the ToT screen and I get a pop-up asking if I want to concede. It would be nice if there was a button on the screen for this, though.

But I'm curious why you wanted to put your opponent on ignore. They didn't message you or do anything other than win the match.

I'm not entirely sure I know why, to be honest, other than I felt like they were deliberately trolling me because there was a point earlier in the game when they could have won by getting 40+ using the Crow patron while I had no way to get the 30+ needed to match ir beat their score, but they chose instead to keep buying a lot of powerful cards so they could rub my face in the dirt and get some kind of thrill from making a winning turn that netted them a huge score in a single turn.

I'm just assuming that was their intention, but it really upset me, especially since this was when I was playing in the "casual" queue because I mistakenly thought it meant "for fun, not for blood" or something along those lines-- i.e., "noncompetitive," in contrast to the "competitive" queue. I really sort of feel like players over a certain ranking have no business queuing for a "casual" match if they're apparently going to treat it like some way to get their jollies by smearing a bunch of low-ranked competitors in the dirt. But, hey-- it's PvP, so some of the big boys and girls are apoarently going to stomp on the poor little babies so they can feel all powerful and awesome and stuff. I don't understand how any self-respecting competitor can see that sort of thing as a "challenge," but that's just my opinion.

I didn't even get to make a final move, because their final move took them from below 40 to something like 66, while also subtracting from my own score and reducing it to 0, and when the message popped up that my opponent had just gotten 66 or whatever prestige and I needed to match or surpass that amount, the game instantly ended before I could even reach for my mouse. The match left me feeling so shell-shocked and disgruntled that I wanted no future contact with the person. And yes, I'm aware that ignoring someone doesn't prevent me from encountering them or potentially being matched up with them in any future matches.

Anyway, I eventually got over my shell shock and severely bruised baby bottom. I was close to giving up on PvP matches after that experience, but I figured that if I didn't get back up on that horse and try to ride it again, I'd never learn.

SilverBride

@SeaGtGruff

I've had players do that to me too. They could have used crow and gotten way more prestige than I could ever have caught up to them and they knew it, but as you said I think they wanted to drag out the inevitable. In cases like that I just end my turn without playing my cards to try to hurry it along and not get the conceding penalty.

The Rajhin deck is a deck for trolls. If someone chooses it I try my best to start using it against them as soon as I can. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't, but I believe in giving a taste of their own medicine.

spartaxoxo

I don't like using the crow except as a finisher because I've had it backfire on me when trying to use it as a early lead too many times. You only get to use it once, so better be sure your cards are good before you do

DinoZavr

On the average each FOURTH game i play in ranked my opponent waits a minute before making any actions to make me feel bored and escape. This is not right. I guess the game should start with 20 seconds per move as first several moves are, normally, no-brainers.
It could be done like in chess - after a certain amount of moves opponents are awarded an extra time.
As it is for now - if you have decided to annoy your opponent the single game takes 20-25 minutes, which is unbearable.

SeaGtGruff

SilverBride wrote: »

@SeaGtGruff

I've had players do that to me too. They could have used crow and gotten way more prestige than I could ever have caught up to them and they knew it, but as you said I think they wanted to drag out the inevitable. In cases like that I just end my turn without playing my cards to try to hurry it along and not get the conceding penalty.

The Rajhin deck is a deck for trolls. If someone chooses it I try my best to start using it against them as soon as I can. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't, but I believe in giving a taste of their own medicine.

So far, I have only one extra deck on PC NA (Red Eagle), and none on PC EU, so my only experience with the other three decks has come from when my opponent (player or NPC) chooses one.

I used to cringe whenever Orgnum or Rajhin were chosen, but now I don't mind it because, as you say, "I try my best to start using it against them as soon as I can." It's certainly much more difficult to do that against other players than against NPCs, but either way it can come down to the luck of the draw at times.

Anyway, it's interesting to me how my attitudes toward the various patrons have evolved over time.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I don't like using the crow except as a finisher because I've had it backfire on me when trying to use it as a early lead too many times. You only get to use it once, so better be sure your cards are good before you do

You get to use it only once if the patron is neutral and your opponent doesn't use it at all, but if your opponent uses it first then you can use it two times (assuming your opponent doesn't use it again).

I got challenged by another player while I was about to pick up the daily challenge from Kishka, so I decided to accept. They used the Crow patron on their very first turn, so I thought, "They must be just learning to play," and I thought I should go easy on them just to be nice. The next thing I know, they're using a different patron on every turn, and it dawned on me that they were trying to get a patron win in four moves (not four more moves, but a total of four moves in the entire match). I had to start using the patrons myself just to counteract their strategy, even when there were better moves available to me. I ended up winning the match, but not by much!

SilverBride

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

I got challenged by another player while I was about to pick up the daily challenge from Kishka, so I decided to accept. They used the Crow patron on their very first turn, so I thought, "They must be just learning to play," and I thought I should go easy on them just to be nice. The next thing I know, they're using a different patron on every turn, and it dawned on me that they were trying to get a patron win in four moves (not four more moves, but a total of four moves in the entire match).

Any time my opponent uses the Crow early on, even when they only get 1 power from it if any, I suspect they are setting up for a patron win, so I make sure I leave at least 3 moves away from them getting it because of Tithe. Although someone once got a patron win using both Tithe and Currency Exchange in the same turn so 3 isn't always enough.

Iron_Warrior

Base timer should be 20s with 10s added for each combo you make. The game just takes tooooo long

SeaGtGruff

I really think those players arguing for a much shorter timer are being way too impatient.

That's just my opinion, but the fact is that there are plenty of times when there's more involved than simply choosing which cards (if any) to buy from the Tavern, as sometimes the order you play your cards in can make a difference.

For instance, when you buy cards they go into your discard pile, not your played-cards pile, so it's better to buy any cards you think you want before playing a card (or, similarly, using the Saint Pelin patron) that lets you move any cards from your discard pile back to the top of your draw pile.

And as anyone who's played the game knows, sometimes it's better-- and sometimes it's worse-- to buy (or remove) a low-cost card from the Tavern even if you don't really want it, just to see what it gets replaced with rather than going ahead and buying a so-so higher-cost card that looks like your best choice among several not-so-great options.

And not everyone is some whiz-kid cardsharp who's able to make lightspeed snap decisions about what to do and what order to do it in. Allowing players a bit of time to consider their moves is a good thing (in my opinion), not a bad thing.

And I imagine that the devs gave a good deal of thought to what length of time to allow, given that during some of the early streams where the card game was being announced and discussed the dev in the stream mentioned how there were a lot of matches being played between the devs at the office during development, so I'd think they settled on a length of time that was "not too long and not too short."

SilverBride

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

...I imagine that the devs gave a good deal of thought to what length of time to allow, given that during some of the early streams where the card game was being announced and discussed the dev in the stream mentioned how there were a lot of matches being played between the devs at the office during development, so I'd think they settled on a length of time that was "not too long and not too short."

They may not have realized that some players would use this to troll their opponent and try to force them to concede.

Also, this would not work if 90 seconds of inactivity wasn't really too long for most players to tolerate turn after turn. But it is.

Rooatouille

I think the timer is fine as is. I realize that some players abuse the timer to try and force a concede out of their opponent, but I personally haven't ever encountered this tactic and I've never even considered conceding just because somebody used their whole turn timer.

I think the main consideration we have to have when discussing a lower turn timer is how that would negatively affect those players out there with limitations that significantly impact their ability to play at a "quick" pace. I am a relatively quick player, but I have friends who have personal limitations that directly influence how quickly they can actually play even when they know exactly what they want to do. The current time limit allows them enough time to play the game even with these constraints and anything lower would probably create such significant accessibility barriers so that they wouldn't even play ToT anymore.

While it may be a bit inconvenient and cheeky if an opponent chooses to sit and wait out the entirety of their turn timer in an attempt to either elicit a concession or out of some passive-aggressive saltiness -- there's nothing saying that we as individuals have to give in to that trolling and baiting. We are never forced to concede against our own will and we can just as easily wait the 20-30 seconds extra if our opponent really wants to do the same.

SilverBride

I've encountered this several times. And the thing is they don't just do this for one turn. They do this for every single turn of the match.

While I find this very irritating I will not concede to that tactic. I will whisper them if possible that their tactic isn't going to work and if that doesn't stop them I start using the full 90 seconds back at them. But this is a problem for many of us and I'd love to see some kind of solution.