Conquer Club

Hey all,

I am currently in a freestyle game and was the last to act, eliminating all but one of the opponents. The other active player then waited about 23 hours to take his turn and since I was last to go, I couldn't do anything in that period. Lucky for me I happened to be online before my time limit on the round ran out. Can it be changed so that the player waiting for the other's inability to act doesn't get penalized with a shortened clock?

Thanks,
Brian

I think a good solution would be for the player who went last in the previous round to get their 24 hours starting from the moment another player starts their turn, because that's the first moment you can play.

At the minute it is open to abuse since as you said the other player can wait for 23:59 and then you only have 1 minute in which you are allowed to play!

Bob Janova wrote:I think a good solution would be for the player who went last in the previous round to get their 24 hours starting from the moment another player starts their turn, because that's the first moment you can play.

At the minute it is open to abuse since as you said the other player can wait for 23:59 and then you only have 1 minute in which you are allowed to play!

thats kind of what sequential is

misterman10 wrote:thats kind of what sequential is

Not when there are 5 other people in the game. In any game with 3 or more players, the max time limit per round would still be 48 hours. That's still less time than the 72 -> 144 hours a true sequential game

Most all freestyle games turn into a sequential game when it comes down to 1v1 anyway. At least a change like this would prevent people from abusing the system.

misterman10 wrote:thats kind of what sequential is

Not quite; the second player's timer and 'open' status start at the beginning of the first player's turn, not the end. But as Treefiddy says, 2 player freestyle approximates to sequential anyway in anything but a RT situation. I feel that only giving the opponent 5 minutes to play is an abuse – you can force your opponent to miss his turn even if he doesn't want to!

I thought you still got your hour if someone did this?

Coleman wrote:I thought you still got your hour if someone did this?

I'm not sure. I've never had someone use this tactic against me, but I get worried that someone will everytime it comes down to a 1v1 situation in a Freestyle game and I get the upper hand.

If it's meant to be setup this way so people can gain a "tactical" advantage, then someone should just come out and say it.

I believe this change would encourage people to take their turns sooner (as they wouldn't gain this so called "tactical" advantage) and thus, create faster gameplay in the long run. Faster gameplay is why I like Freestyle, but I also hate the thought of feeling cheated out of turns. It hasn't happened to me yet, and I already hate it.

Coleman wrote:I thought you still got your hour if someone did this?

The hour that you have to complete your turn is not the issue, you still have that. The issue is the 24 hour clock that a player has to take their turn. In a heads up freestyle game, whether it is began as such or everyone else has been eliminated, the last player to go has to wait for the other to begin their turn. But no matter when that player takes their turn, the last player to go in the previous round only has 24 hours since they completed their turn. This part is open to abuse and if an opponent desired, could make the other miss their turn.

The game is still freestyle if a change is made because both players will still be able to go at the same time. The order may even be allowed to switch if one player takes longer in a turn that the other.

Coleman wrote:I thought you still got your hour if someone did this?

NO
its nit
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=986
Its a very old post, but it tells you that you have on hour to complete your turn of untill the 24 hour limit is up. Whichever comes first.

So basicly, freestyle leaving you with 24 second on the clock screws you for sure

treefiddy wrote:If it's meant to be setup this way so people can gain a "tactical" advantage, then someone should just come out and say it.

Yes. It’s been like this since an amendment of the game settings took place in July 2006.

See,
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3057

Back in the days there were two types of freestyle settings to choose from (apart from sequential): (i) double turns and (ii) no double turns.

With the double turns option the game engine allowed the player who went last in a round to start the next round (regardless of when this person wrapped up the round). This option was thrown out and we’re left with a plain “freestyle” option.

However, in the announcement lackattack touched upon the de facto double turn issue, recognizing this possibility. So yes, the game engine is consciously set up this way. But it only can become a tactical advantage if the other player/players let it happen, i.e. not being there when the clock is up, which is advisable to be when choosing to play freestyle.

Lack did point out the flaw, but not that it was implemented for a reason.

In my mind, when he got rid of the second Freestyle option, he kept the lesser of two evils (in a sense). Double turns suck, and forcing people to wait 24 hours so you can attempt to get a double turn sucks.

treefiddy wrote:Lack did point out the flaw, but not that it was implemented for a reason.

In my mind, when he got rid of the second Freestyle option, he kept the lesser of two evils (in a sense). Double turns suck, and forcing people to wait 24 hours so you can attempt to get a double turn sucks.

Depends on the interpretation. Lack is both the creator and, if you wish to call it so, the legsilator. He decides how the game engine will work (nothing is carved in stone here) and sets the rules (currently rule no. 1 and no. 2).

He obviously knows about the fact that the game engine allows for de facto double turns to be made. And, that knowledge can definitely be stated to have been there since July 2006 (but for sure, he has known about it for a longer period of time). Being the creator/legislator he has not acted on this (which he easily could have done) for an extensive period of time. Thus we can conclude (or at least argue) that this is a perfectly good tactical move that is not frowned upon by the creator/legislator. It's simply a part of the freestyle game.

Consequently, players who has a problem with this, leaving negative feedback for it are just a bunch of ignorant whiners.

But that's just my two cents.