#35289: "Stop skipping in multiplayer tournaments"
Qué aconteceu? Por favor selecciona debaixo
Qué aconteceu? Por favor selecciona debaixo
Por favor revisa se xa hai un informe sobre o mesmo tema
De ser afirmativo, por favor VOTA por este informe. Aos informes con máis votos se lles da PRIORIDADE!
# | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
---|
Descrición detallada
• Por favor, copia e pega a mensaxe de erro que ves na túa pantalla, se houbera algún.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Por favor, explica o que querías facer, o que fixeche e o que pasou
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Por favor, copia/pega o texto amosado en inglés no canto do teu idioma. Se tes un pantallazo deste erro (boa práctica), podes usar Imgur.com para subilo e copiar/pegar a ligazón aquí.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• É este o texto dispoñible no sistema de tradución? Se é así, foi traducido fai máis de 24 horas?
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Por favor explica a túa suxestión de maneira precisa e concisa para que sexa o máis sinxelo posible entender o que queres dicir.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Qué había na pantalla cando se quedou bloqueado? (mensaxe de erro?, pantalla en blanco?, unha parte da interface do xogo?)
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Qué parte das regras non se cumpriron na adaptación da BGA?
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• é visible a violación das regras na repetición? Se o é, en que número de movemento?
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Qué acción de xogo querías realizar?
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Qué é o que tratache de facer para activar esta acción do xogo?
• Qué sucedeu cando o fixeche (a mensaxe de erro, mensaxe na barra de estado do xogo, ...)?
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• En que paso do xogo ocorreu o problema (cal foi a instrucción actual do xogo)?
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Qué sucedeu cando tratache de facer unha acción de xogo (mensaxe de erro, mensaxe na barra de estado do xogo, ...)?
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Por favor, describe o problema de visualización. Se tes un pantallazo deste erro (boa práctica), podes usar Imgur.com para subilo e copiar/pegar a ligazón aquí.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Por favor, copia/pega o texto amosado en inglés no canto do teu idioma. Se tes un pantallazo deste erro (boa práctica), podes usar Imgur.com para subilo e copiar/pegar a ligazón aquí.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• É este o texto dispoñible no sistema de tradución? Se é así, foi traducido fai máis de 24 horas?
• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
• Por favor explica a túa suxestión de maneira precisa e concisa para que sexa o máis sinxelo posible entender o que queres dicir.
At present a tournament game can end if one player is over time and is skipped by another player. In games involving more than 2 players this can adversely affect a player who is not over time and does not make the decision. It would be better if such tournament games could only end on time because the maximum duration had been reached (which awards position more fairly on time remaining) or at least if the tournament organiser could set that as an option.• Cal é o teu navegador?
Google Chrome v88
Historial de informes
So maybe if they are 2 or 3 days late vs 5 min. While I get the issue with people using it to win, it's also silly to join a tournament and then just not participate either. There should be some accountability.
I also think on any 3+ player game, there should be a vote to skip by all the players. So a majority. Then someone over 10 sec if a jerk wants to kick to not lose but the others want to give him an extra minute the sensible majority would rule.
1) When a game finish by reaching game maximum duration, all positive time players should be tied. Basically it's the same then when you skip a player. Otherwise a player that is loosing can even win the game Unfairly, because all positive time players played by the rules.
Just for the negative time players should be a distinction. For example in a tournament of 5 players if 2 are negative. The most negative player get 0 points, the 2nd most negative get 2 points, and the 3 positive players will split (4+6+8 = 6) points to between them.
2) On tournament creation we should have an option to not allow skip players by time, or only skip if they are already 12/24/36/48 hours negative, or at least only skip if all positive time players agree. In addition only the most negative player could be skipped.
This will give more fun to the games, since some people have trouble because live in different time zones. And the target of the tournmaments is everyone to have fun. Skiping players removes all the fun.
If so, we still need a time deadline for the Minority.
Seems like there may need to be some kind of a reasonable compromise to keep games moving but also to acknowledge the impact of these time zone differences in timed tournaments on BGA.
Especially games with many small steps in between as Targi are close to impossible to play in time (2,5 days for one person in 5 days duration, making about minus 1 day due to sleeping) while normal daily life.
Only kicking by votes of all other players would be more fair idd.
And after kicking the game should continue without the kicked player, but with an automated replacement (bot of the same level as the kicked player for example) or something if possible.
I have no objection to skipping of player in tournaments otherwise,but agree about the timezone issue. Would also be great if players could be grouped by timezone in the first round, rather than level. But a big part of the problem is that organisers fail to take account of timezone differences when estmating time needed per game.
The tournament organizer should be able to skip players for being out of time if needed (but setting maximum game length should handle that most of the time.)
It is maddening to win or lose based on someone going over by an hour on a single turn (or multiple turns) of a game i had been playing for a week or so, especially when i am in a different timezome from my competitors. :(
And until recently, usually half the games in a PI tournament end on time outs.
I’ve all but given up on random tournaments, even though i love them
I would suggest that in Multiplayer elimination tournaments that if a player is "skipped" the game still continues, that player can't rejoin, and the game only ends if the number of players that haven't been skipped is the number of players that allowed to move on in the tournament.
Games are 4 players and only 2 can go to next round. In a game, a player has quit and one of the 3 players left has been screwed despite the fact he won the game...
I suggest, skip players should not be able in tournament or if so the others would be able to finish the game without being tied but without elo impact...
The way it is now, skipping an out of turn player becomes an opportunistic "move" one can make to improve their tournament position, so the tournament becomes less about how good you are at the game, but rather how good you are at manipulating the meta-game. An opportunistic player in a losing position can make themselves the winner by seizing the opportunity to skip another player who went a few minutes over, but was still taking their turns. This happens all the time in tournaments, often late in the game, which robs everybody else at the table of experiencing and learning from the end result of the strategy they've been investing time and thought into. It is very frustrating for those of us who would rather improve their skill and compete at the actual game, rather than get a slightly better position in an ultimately inconsequential meta-game.
There is no need to allow a player to skip another player.
Many times the one who is winning is placed lower because another player is skipped.
I the tournament above 3 out of 4 quarterfinals (Step 2) were decided by someone skipping other players.
In two of the games the one who chose to skip got into the semifinal that way.
In my game, I had used the least time, was winning the game, but a last round skip resulted in three winners, and only two players got into the semifinal, so I was eliminated.
Just remove the Skip option in tournaments (at least multiplayer). It will be a great improvement!
I lost a lot of game where maybe I was first ,just because someone decided to skyping another player.
* For fast turn-based games, the clock turns off at night. Do that for tournaments, too, based on each player's timezone.
* If there is skipping in a multiplayer elimination tournament, have all other players automatically advance.
* Skipping in multiplayer swiss... negate the game and boot the timed out player from the tournament. Either split the points evenly or replay it if possible.
* Just turn off skipping altogether. However, that would introduce other ways to game the system.
Time is not computed correctly for the games where multiple players play together (6nimmt, can't stop express, lucky numbers ..)
In turn-based tournaments I often experienced that because I go to bed early I'm the one whose clock is running during the night. So even though I'm playing regularly, I run out of time. Sometimes a game is nearly finished and I get skipped, even though there is enough time to finish the game within the time limit defined in the tournament.
Although I think the propositions here are more specific, and give good view of the problem
We also need to take away the incentive for a player that is losing to skip a player that is ahead of them (and is actively playing) just because they have used their time.
You are actually rewarded for bad behaviour: when you are in last place and you boot another player, you have a better result.
It also counts as a draw vs the remaining player, so if you play against higher ranked opponents you gain ELO.
Currently there is no way to create a tournament with fair rules. Which makes playing in tournaments very annoying at times. And it is also a pretty common thing.
One example: I played in a viticulture tournament, 3 players only the winner advances. One player kicks another with 7 more days in the round. The game is now a draw between the 2 remaining players. And the "winner" is determined by some random rule, I actually could not tell but it seems to be the newest account advances... So now I am out of the tournament, after having invested time and for no reason.
That is just a bad experience which detracts me from playing in tournaments. So I guess I will not extend my premium account the next time. Not that anyone cares about that :-)
Because the voting system doesn't reflect all the users who want the system kept in place. Check out the forums and you'll see this suggestion is far from universally loved.
Please leave the system as is, allowing people to boot me if I don't play within the time frame I committed to.
I am again grinding my teeth having been eliminated from a Catan tournament when a player out of time has their turn skipped by another player who is well behind me both in the game and on time. Here is the table number. I am blue and I have 6 VP in the lead and 6 days of time left to play. White skips Brown's turn and goes through with 4VP, 2 days of time left to play and goes through while I am randomly dumped out.
#381216918
Move #378
Progression 50%
I feel cheated not just out of the tournament but also out of the time, energy and thought put into the game and the opportunity to finish the game properly and the potential ranking point reward.
Solutions. I don't think it should be possible to skip a player's turn in a tournament, the game will end anyway once its maximum time is reached, in this case there were 12 days left! If it is then the number of VP should determine the winner or the time left &?or the person who chooses to skip should not be eligible to progress.
This is not a one-off.
#37504457
Move 266
White skips Red and again I (Blue) am out of the tournament, note that this time he keeps playing against himself till he wins as the rest of us quit! White has 3 VP while I have 6 VP and I am out again.
boardgamearena.com/table?table=401326244
I didn't run out of time and technically, I had already won the game. This is so frustrating!
Please make the decision to skip a player who is out of time a shared decision.
At this table it was not time remaining as the players with second, fourt and fifth most time left reached next round!?
Me and 1 other player stayed in the game and finished, but the other player was randomly not selected to continue in favor of players who quit.
The player who was skipped should be ineligible, but the other players should just continue the game and the highest scoring players advance like a normal game.
Furthermore, in tournament games it doesn't make the next game happen faster. You still are waiting the same amount of time until the next game in the tournament round.
Screenshot: 64.media.tumblr.com/c8bacc56f6f4217e9233181dda67b7fc/e097776694d5a6fb-cd/s2048x3072/ef0171aec82751ebadac4ab434c6cec820eb1b2b.pnj
Really, time should only count for reputation. Winning should be determined by points. It's not hard to figure out who is in the lead, most games are tallying the points as they go anyway, and it would solve this entire problem. This should be across the board, not just for tournaments also. The reputation lost is enough of a detriment to stay on time. This would just remove the inclination for people to cheat by kicking people who are out of time.
It is VERY SAD when someone uses the skip button in a 2p tourney game, and it happens all the time. The tourney sets a maximum duration for the game, that will ensure no game takes too long, but for players to have the option to skip other players turns is detrimental to the gaming spirit.
I think requiring a consensus for expelling is a one size fits all improvement, as that way all factors (including whatever the current process for determining winner/score is) can be considered in the given situation.
In the case that different scenarios are better for different tournament styles/games, I like the idea of that being an option in tournament settings.
My idea for tables with more than two players is simply to continue the game by skipping turns or randomizing them for the person ejected. This way, all the players continue the game and the final ranking is based on the scores actually achieved. It seems to me perfectly unfair that the final ranking should not reflect the players' investment or the score they could have achieved. Some people use it to rig tournaments, and I think it's better that way, since in real life it's a decision between skipping the absent player's turn or restarting the game without him or her. It would also be a fairer solution for all tournaments!
I do think it can be necessary to have the option to kick someone from a match or a tournament, for example if someone is extremely out of time without a solid reason given. But it should never be done lightly in a tournament and I do agree with others that it should not be just one player's decision. Another option is to make the rule a bit more dynamic. You could give a penalty from the moment they're out of time, but only give the option to kick a player after they are a certain percentage of their given time past that deadline. What that percentage should be could either be determined by the tournament organizer or by BGA if they want to make the programming easier. My suggestion would be somewhere between 50%-150%.
The time allotted to a player is halfed, so kicking is easily happened well before planned table duration.
If you remove skipping, you need to replace it with something else.
We need 2 things:
- More power to tournament admin (but this could be abused and people would complain to moderators etc...)
- More freedom for games to define what happens when someone leaves or is booted form a game.
For the second point, see
boardgamearena.com/bug?id=121841
For the first point, I don't know of any generic suggestion but there is this one that is related (about removing players before start of tournament):
boardgamearena.com/bug?id=43968
I think someone should make the effort to create a well structured suggestion about giving tournament admins some freedom as to what happens when a game cannot be completed.
But I'll say this:
Some speed settings are much more prone to people leaving (like very fast paced turn-based) and games with many players have a higher risk that two of the players would only log once per day which is usually what really slow down games.
When creating a tournament, you should think about that kind of details.
- Eliminate skipping
- ALL players who did not run out of time by the end of the game advance to the next round. Timed out players are eliminated
It seems simple enough where it creates a much more fair outcome for the players who respected the time limit.
It does mean that potentially 3 players may advance when only 1 normally would, but this should be possible to handle in the regular tournament system though that tries to balance player count across games.
It's possible that an entire extra round of the tournament would be required to fix the overflow but that is 100% more preferable to me than having a likely winner unfairly eliminated.
Restart or force a multiplayer game to continue. Restarting incentivizes a losing player to skip, but this is fine; superior players should still win. Forcing a conclusion in the skipped player's absence is workable in some games, may not be in others; perhaps this should be a tournament setting. This permits brackets and match-making to remain unchanged.
Equally importantly, implement a site-wide tournament ban for players who time-out of a tournament. Whether permanent or limited, there is no way to deter this behavior right now. A player can realize they're losing an elimination tournament, stop playing and ruin someone else's run, and turn around and sign up to do the same thing again the next day. Even having a reputation gate isn't really a solution as rep is not clearly associated with actual gameplay behavior.
People who ruin tournaments shouldn't be allowed to continue to do so.
boardgamearena.com/3/challengers?table=569795369
Lamento o vosso procedimento.
Há jogadores que combinam entre si, tentarem eliminar o jogador (que já foi o meu caso várias vezes.
Agradecia que verificassem este assunto, pois já perdi muitos pontoe por esta situação.
Obrigado
So take Heat: Pedal to the Metal, a Championship tournament with a high player count is basically completely unviable when the max round length is 30 days as to play 4 races in 30 days requires all players to be fast/same time zone. If there were options for 45 days, 60 days etc. I'm sure many would use them as many would rather the rounds actually complete than end in chaos.
Alternatively, one could implement that at least a third or half of the other players (that haven't gone over time) need to agree on the decision. That way you could still kick players that never even started playing etc
Engade a este informe
- Outro DI de mesa / ID de movemento
- Premer F5 resolveu o problema?
- Apareceu o problema varias veces? Tódalas veces? Aleatoriamente?
- Se tes un pantallazo deste erro (boa práctica), podes usar Imgur.com para subilo e copiar/pegar a ligazón aquí.