Be careful not to accidentally join games like these. Not fun at all. Not even playable.

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/230309

Skipped my 1st turn before as page loading from the moment you click join to the time and the time board loads to allow you place units already consumed 10 seconds. When I realized my turn already got skipped, I had to reload the board.

Skipped my 2nd turn when I had to load the "My Games" page and reload the board from there in order to play out my 2nd turn. Before I could place troops, got Booted.

Disclaimer: Totally my fault since I accidentally clicked join before I realized turn was in seconds, as in 10-sec max.

Correction: Not even playable by me (suax). I implore all readers to attempt it themselves before buying in to somebody else's bias/sore loser attitude.

Not angry, it's more like I find it pathetic (for a lack of a better term).

Like I cringe at the idea that you'd actually create a game like that. It's simply un-playable (for me). And in my humble opinion, its not something someone respectable/honorable would do repeatedly even after your first few games resulted in opponents getting booted for lack of time to do any action other than place troops. Surely you realize that was not fun for them at all, not because they lost but because of the manner of how they lost. Or at least that is how I felt. And I imagine that is how they felt as well.

Anyway, you are beyond my understanding, so I will not argue with you anymore coz it seems to me sympathy and compassion are not your strong points anyway. And a person without these traits simply will not understand the point I am trying to make above.

The act of calling me pathetic on public forum and then going on to say I do not understand compassion and sympathy are not the actions of somebody that is not angry. Let's not kid each other, this is a competitive site. I am a competitive person. Can you imagine being sympathetic and compassionate during your games? "Oh, I'll just let him have Australia for a couple turns." That is a sure way to lose. 

For all the readers of this thread, understand that Suax is angry that he joined a game and subsequently got booted and lost ranking points. This is what he is angry at. In attempts to "get even" or try and get "administrative action" against me, he posted in the public forum. I would ask Mr. Suax do you post in the forum every time you lose a game, or make a mistake and join a game you didn't mean to? 

Lol. Since you insist, then I guess you must be right and all the readers should simply take everything you say as the truth. Besides, what does anger/happiness have anything to do with your/my arguments? You are simply changing the topic and turning the discussion into something its not. Right after the game, I messaged you "wow, that was an evil trick, man." Does that sound angry to you? It couldn't get more casual than that.

First, obviously you're competitive, for only someone who is purely after points would create such a game.

Second, whoever said anything about letting an opponent win by giving him Australia. We didn't even get to that. I got booted in 20 seconds before I could even play the game. I wasn't even able to place any troops to any country. Of course you know this is what I mean by being compassionate and sympathetic, to allow competition to actually take place (and not to intentinally let somebody win). But as mentioned above, you are just trying to divert the issue into something that its not for the sake of winning the argument.

Lastly, whoever said I'm trying to get any administrative action whatsoever? As I've mentioned in the game chat, I know from the very beginning what you're doing is legal. You are completely free to continue creating such games without remorse in hopes of grabbing free wins and points from unsuspecting players (not to say that everyone who joined were unaware, some must have been aware). But I also have the right to post in this forum as a warning to others to be careful not to accidentally join such games with ridiculous settings. It's not a command or an order to not join. I'm simply sharing to them my experience. They could see for themselves how easy it is to get booted. In fact, 100% of the games created with that setting will surely end up with someone getting booted shortly.

Now, Mr RoyalCrown, you can continue putting words in my mouth and posting about what you think is my current emotional state.

> 100% of the games created with that setting will surely end up with someone getting booted shortly.

I would be interested to see how many games with 10 second clocks result in a boot within the first 4 rounds.

suax wrote:

Not angry...   ...so I will not argue with you anymore...

I think you're subsequent post has proven my point.

these couple threads aren't even worth the popcorn i popped...

weathertop wrote:

these couple threads aren't even worth the popcorn i popped...

+1

Ozyman wrote:

> 100% of the games created with that setting will surely end up with someone getting booted shortly.

I would be interested to see how many games with 10 second clocks result in a boot within the first 4 rounds.

I did a survey of about 50 of these games, but I threw away the results.  I think it was around 15-25% boots for the ones I looked at.

Thanks SquintGnome.  That is probably significantly higher than normal, but not so high that I would suggest banning that type of game.

Ozyman wrote:

Thanks SquintGnome.  That is probably significantly higher than normal, but not so high that I would suggest banning that type of game.

Correction, I was looking at games with 30 second timers, not 10 seconds timers.  Sorry.

What's the point of a 10 sec game?

It absolutely adds no strategie, as the only advantage you can have is a good internet connection.

Luieuil wrote:

What's the point of a 10 sec game?

It absolutely adds no strategie, as the only advantage you can have is a good internet connection.

+1

SquintGnome wrote:

Ozyman wrote:

Thanks SquintGnome.  That is probably significantly higher than normal, but not so high that I would suggest banning that type of game.

Correction, I was looking at games with 30 second timers, not 10 seconds timers.  Sorry.

1 out of 5 games end with a boot?  That sounds horrible. So some people are getting 20% more wins just because other people lag out?  I'd love 20% more wins, but that's a cheap way to get them...

itsnotatumor wrote:

1 out of 5 games end with a boot?  That sounds horrible. So some people are getting 20% more wins just because other people lag out?  I'd love 20% more wins, but that's a cheap way to get them...

That 20% may not be the same people.  The boots may be spread around a bit more evenly than you think.  I.e., it's probably not entirely about the lag.

I figure in a quick game like that, since wargear has no real penalty for getting booted, players probably just stop playing when it is obvious they are going to lose.

That was why I originally stipulated, booted in the first four turns.  I figure very rarely will someone give up that quickly, but if they are having trouble getting their turns in due to connection speed, four turns should be enough for them to get booted.

I'd be very interested in seeing some actual #s from Tom.  If a significant # of games are being won because the opponent's connection isn't fast enough, maybe we need a more obvious pop-up warning, or to raise the minimum time or something.

It's still loss of points/rank and a win for the other player. If players are intentionally picking short times knowing they will auto win a certain % that's some cheap shit.

If it's going to be a 10 second timer the game should be mandatory "no automatic boot".  I think it should be the default for 30 second games as well. 

itsnotatumor wrote:

If it's going to be a 10 second timer the game should be mandatory "no automatic boot".  I think it should be the default for 30 second games as well. 

 

I would be on board for this.