Reducing Time Limit for Turns

[Juslas]

There is a better place to search the answer to turn time limit than this poll. Actual server data of time taken to take turns. Also I strongly question fellow forum members statistics on time taken between turns. They are much more of feelings than facts.
One slower than you player can bug you plenty, overshadowing all of us taking turns promptly (several times a day). We even have time to flood this forum with comments how annoying those slow players are. And yet it is easy enough to just launch an another match and get paired with a faster opponent.

Also slowest game mode has been neglected by this (2 or) 3 day proposal. For random 2v2 the benefits and troubles are same as 1v1. But for Super Titan arranged 2v2 faster pace is a not good at all. Team members can be from other side of the globe and have schedules that differ a lot. They need time to communicate about strategies. Doubles idea is to have a partner and together achieve victory. With some partners communication can be minimal and not time consuming. But there are teams that go great lengths to plan their strategies and moves together (over great distances).

I can remember earlier times when Alex had pulled statistics from servers. And they have proven that assumptions made on forum were exaggerated. Real data should be used to aid us on this matter, too.

[jchris98]

I don't know what server data would accomplish. It seems to me that if people wish for a shorter day limit, then it should happen.

[Jaxxin...]

I'm all for looking at the server data, though it is backwards-looking. It will show us the percentage of turns that go longer than 2 or 3 or 4 days. I'd guess 10-30%, which is a big enough chunk of the game to consider a change.

That will be backwards-looking though, it shows people's behavior when they know they have 4-6 days per turn. My argument for making it two days is to completely obliterate that mindset and force new behavior. Once people know they only have two days, they'll visit more often. It's human nature...people adapt...Plus newcomers won't know anything else, and when they commit to play they will assume they'll visit with more frequency.

Though 2 days might be "too short" for some, my argument is that it will encourage many MORE than that to stick around.

[jchris98]

I agree completely with jaxxin. Besides, those that play slow will adapt.

---

And how many people would quit because they don't have enough time? In my opinion it's far less than those who will stay around because people move more often.

[Duckie37]

How about a profile options to select game type time limits so you can say I would like a 2 day limit but if no other person is available then default.

[gyzn]

I have voted (4 days) and want to weigh in as well beyond that.

First, thanks to Alex and Adam for this truly awesome game. This is the only game and one of the very few apps where I feel I have a connection to the developer, which is great.

Also great to reach out for feedback here regarding a game design decision although with two challenges to interpreting the survey results: a) the forum is not representative of all players, and probably biased towards frequent, dedicated players and b) the poll does not provide other alternatives like 7 days or 12 hours. Therefore, even if 3 days is the middle choice, it may not be a “fair compromise” as some wrote – it is only the middle choice of the three given.

So in addition to the poll results, here some of my thoughts about this in a more nuanced way than “choose 1 of 3”:

What are the possible reasons that players wait long with taking turns?
A: They are losing, want to draw out the inevitable, and wait the max time limit.
B: They have started more games than they have time to play, and don’t make all their turns in their next “playing session”.
C: They are on vacation, traveling in China, celebrate holidays, have tests at school, climb Everest or some other multiple-day absence.

What are the possible reasons that players are annoyed if opponents take forever?
(Because not everybody gets annoyed with slow opponents – I don’t! I get annoyed if I open the game and there are no turns to take, which is different problem.)
A: They are close to the win, and want to get it done.
B: They open Outwitters, and don’t see any Your Turn games, and are disappointed with the lack of play.
C: They play a turn, and want to see immediately how their opponent reacts.

Maybe there are additional reasons, but those are all I can think off. The reason I list all this is because of the following: I think time-limit reduction is considered because some are annoyed, or the game is less fun without it. I also think that reduced time-limit will accidentally negatively affect others. This is a bad combination, and I think therefore that other measures than time-limit reduction are better.

So for each of the above, here the impact of time-limit reduction:
Slow A: They are abusing the game (using a permitted loop-hole), and whether 3 or 4 or 7 days, will always take that long. The game must not be much fun for them, and I would assume only a small percentage is that way.
Slow B: They will quickly learn not to start so many, and it will self-regulate.
Slow C: It is important to note that almost all of us will be that category every once in a while, on vacation, or on a business trip. Common courtesy would dictate to let games peter out before, but that is not always possible. I could be leaving for a five-day business trip tomorrow without much notice. Or specifically in the 2-day-limit scenario, people who don’t play on the weekend could be under much pressure.

Annoyed A: Just wait, it will happen soon.
Annoyed B: Just start more games! I hope all those who want quicker limits have 35 games open and going at the same time; if you do, only a small number of those ever reach 1-2 days in my experience.
Annoyed C: I don’t think that is the idea, this is more like long-distance chess. Also, if you forgot the history or previous turns, you can just look them up in replay.


So to summarize my post that has gotten much longer than planned:
I don’t claim to have all the insight, or that I can represent any unrepresented group. (But I do think of myself as a very new and also very involved player.) It is also always risky and arrogant to say “the majority isn’t right in this case”.
But I fear that a relatively small group (the ambitious, frequent, dedicated players) wants to stop the “abusive” behavior of another relatively small group (those who maximize the turn limit). But by doing so, a very large group (many players will at some point be on vacation) gets hurt, and can’t really do much about it. (The small abusive group may have to stop their delay-tactics, but the large group will still go on vacation and lose the games because of it.)
Because of this, I think limiting terms to anything much less than a week could have unintended consequences and hurt a large groups of player (even if infrequently so), even though it sounds like a good idea to many people. If every time I go on business trip I lose my game and go back to Fluffy, I don’t know if I want to catch-up again.

I’m also curious how many players there are after all anyway, but will start a new thread for that.

[jchris98]

Are guests able to vote in this poll? Because if they are, I think it will show the opinions of the true base of outwitters, not just the forum members.

[gyzn]

(01-05-2014 02:00 PM)jchris98 Wrote:  Are guests able to vote in this poll? Because if they are, I think it will show the opinions of the true base of outwitters, not just the forum members.

They are not. (I know for sure since I wasn't logged in when I tried voting, and I had to login.)
This is good though; if you're not logged in, you can simply click "vote" a hundred times, and you can't track if that was the same person 100 times or 100 people. You could do IP tracking or something, but the better and easier way is to require logging in.

I do however agree with your concern - with this, only a fraction of users will participate with a risk of bias.

[jchris98]

(01-05-2014 02:06 PM)gyzn Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 02:00 PM)jchris98 Wrote:  Are guests able to vote in this poll? Because if they are, I think it will show the opinions of the true base of outwitters, not just the forum members.

They are not. (I know for sure since I wasn't logged in when I tried voting, and I had to login.)
This is good though; if you're not logged in, you can simply click "vote" a hundred times, and you can't track if that was the same person 100 times or 100 people. You could do IP tracking or something, but the better and easier way is to require logging in.

I do however agree with your concern - with this, only a fraction of users will participate with a risk of bias.

I must say that this may be biased then. Because while people can create an account, will they really spend the time just to vote in a poll?

[*Ireth*]

Jchris98, i did take time to creat an account, because it matters for me a lot to get the turn time limited. I have 30 games and sometimes i can play only in the morning, and during the day none of my opponents respond. I always have 3-7 games stuck for 4-6 days. I don't travel to China often so i have 5 minutes every 3-4 hours to play and i wanna do that and not wait foverer.