Get a card even if you don't click "end turn"

[registered_user]

This may have come up, searching this place is a bear.

I've discovered that if you take some territories but don't end your turn, you don't get a card. That's all well and good to punish people who let their turn run out intentionally, but it's not so hot when you get disconnected (for whatever reason) mid-turn.

Is there a game-play reason why a player isn't awarded a card if they time-out, or is it a technical issue? If it's the latter, can it be changed so that the player is awarded a card if they took at least one territory during their turn?

[AndyDufresne]

This has been suggested before, and was Rejected. If people don't have an "incentive" to click end turn, a number of people will just drag the game on since they know they will receive a card nonetheless. By only giving out cards if you click end turn, it keeps the games moving a little faster. It isn't such a hard thing to do, just take your time, and make sure you end your turns.


--Andy

[registered_user]

Respectfully, if I want to draw out a game, I just wait to take my turn. I get a whole day as it is, I don't see that one hour is a significant difference.

Clicking "end turn" isn't difficult in and of itself, that's true. But if the site has a hiccough, if my router decides to overheat, if my little sister pours lipstick in my keyboard, or if I'm connected to some crappy WiFi network in a hotel lobby that fizzles out when the concierge blinks, then I lose a card which I technically earned.

The way it is now, if I'm in a crappy situation, I might specifically *not* click end turn so that I don't collect cards and to decrease the incentive for other players to kill me.

So while I get that the policy is in place to prevent people from behaving like jerks, I think it affects game play negatively and provides people a different way to behave like a jerk.

That's my 2¢ anyway.

P.S. It might be a good idea to add it to the list of rejected suggestions in that announcement thread... I did check there first.

[Herakilla]

Respectfully, if I want to draw out a game, I just wait to take my turn. I get a whole day as it is, I don't see that one hour is a significant difference.

Clicking "end turn" isn't difficult in and of itself, that's true. But if the site has a hiccough, if my router decides to overheat, if my little sister pours lipstick in my keyboard, or if I'm connected to some crappy WiFi network in a hotel lobby that fizzles out when the concierge blinks, then I lose a card which I technically earned.

The way it is now, if I'm in a crappy situation, I might specifically *not* click end turn so that I don't collect cards and to decrease the incentive for other players to kill me.

So while I get that the policy is in place to prevent people from behaving like jerks, I think it affects game play negatively and provides people a different way to behave like a jerk.

That's my 2¢ anyway.

P.S. It might be a good idea to add it to the list of rejected suggestions in that announcement thread... I did check there first.

you raise a good point about circumstances you cant control, but you have to remember that lack (while he is omnipotent) doesnt have control over those things

[BaldAdonis]

This may have come up, searching this place is a bear.

I've discovered that if you take some territories but don't end your turn, you don't get a card. That's all well and good to punish people who let their turn run out intentionally, but it's not so hot when you get disconnected (for whatever reason) mid-turn.

Here's an example where I would want to attack and not get a card: I have 4 cards in an escalating game. Others have four cards, and the player directly after me has a poorly protected bonus. If I don't break it, he'll kill me. So I need to attack, but if I get a card, everyone else will wait to cash and get more troops than me. If I stay at 4, they'll all collect and get 5 cards before I do, and hence be forced to cash before I am, so I'll get the most. Happens once in a while that I don't want a card at 4, but usually I don't have to attack. If I do, I'm glad this is in effect.

[insomniacdude]

This may have come up, searching this place is a bear.

I've discovered that if you take some territories but don't end your turn, you don't get a card. That's all well and good to punish people who let their turn run out intentionally, but it's not so hot when you get disconnected (for whatever reason) mid-turn.

Here's an example where I would want to attack and not get a card: I have 4 cards in an escalating game. Others have four cards, and the player directly after me has a poorly protected bonus. If I don't break it, he'll kill me. So I need to attack, but if I get a card, everyone else will wait to cash and get more troops than me. If I stay at 4, they'll all collect and get 5 cards before I do, and hence be forced to cash before I am, so I'll get the most. Happens once in a while that I don't want a card at 4, but usually I don't have to attack. If I do, I'm glad this is in effect.

I never thought about it, but that's a damn fine point.

Here's another scenario:

A player is down to 1 or even zero cards. He is weak and tries to minimize himself as a target for elimination in spite of his weakness. Having a low number of cards helps that minimization. However, he can still save his ass by breaking a bonus without any penalty of increasing his value of elimination.

The same is true for Flat Rate games. It isn't anywhere near as influential as escalating, but still important.