Re: Increasing turn speed
 

I belive all your points are valid.
But the system I proposed is to make sure that the game isn't bogged down.
I like 72 hours deadline, it gives you opportunity tto be away sometimes.
But it also means that if everyone but 1-3 players upload within 48 hours, they will have to wait another ~24 hours for the Last players to upload.
Normally that won't be a problem if it is temporarily, but what to do if those 1-3 players constantly waits until there is 1-2 hours left of the turntime, it gets frustrating.

Setting -50 pts less than the one above means that one player has to be Last at atleast 25 turns in a row and everyone else has to shift around, before anyone can actually become in the dangerzone of getting kicked.
The +3/-3 pts means that no one ever has to be kicked, but when you see that you are closing in on the limit you either have to do faster turns or quit the game. To constantly be Last in a 20 player game takes either "luck" or "skill", it is not something that "happens" becourse of timezones
or short episodes of RL issues or a three weeks vacation from the game (3 weeks missed turns = -14 pts).

I want the possibility to have long turn time when needed but a motivation to avoid it if not needed, 20 player games can be quicker than 6 player games if all players are motivated.

In NGC3 it's not such a big problem as it might look from my post here, but in case I ever start a new game I would like to have a system ahead to avoid any such problems.

In NGC3 I hope all players will stick in there for (years?) the time the game will take, so there is no real rush (So if anyone feels targeted by this thread, disregard it!)
I just find the start game when I build up the empire very enjoyable so I'd rather have a 20 player game where everyone uploads before me! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I guess I could play single player, but whats the fun in that??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Any relative limit set can be -50 or -100 pts, meaning there will propably be 200-300 turns before anyone gets kicked becourse of this "turn upload league" (in a 20 player game), and then that player must have really been much slower in uplaoding than all the rest, and have had ample warning many turns ahead.

So other than setting a short turntime, or onlyallowing known fast players, I don't see what will work.
The friendly reminder or extra "spare time" outside of the turn time might work, but it might not.
The split turn time seems a bit complicated, I'll have to think about that.
The friendly reminders have a short duration.

Again, In NGC3 something as has been described in this thread will not be used, please, noone take offense, I'm glad you are all in the game!!!

[ June 05, 2003, 22:22: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

I think the point system would work better if you define a time period where no one will get minus points if submitting within. Even if Last submitter. Only give minus points if Last submitters are past a certain deadline. Doesn't make sense to award penalties if the game ist running at a speed of 1 turn / hour http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ June 05, 2003, 22:31: Message edited by: Roanon ]

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

Yeah.

Also different players and different games have different requirements.

PvK

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That is only true if the point count is reset completely whenever you get a point score of greater than or equal to zero - if you will recal, my analysis for people turning in turns made no mention of what order a player gets the wins in - a player coming in 5th, 5th, 3rd, then 5th is functionally identical to that same player coming in 3rd, 5th, 5th, 5th or 5th, 5th, 5th, 3rd. Likewise, timezone issues (as Fyron mentioned) can seriously slant someone's order chances. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Timezones are fairly permanent states, and could concievably cause such things. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That many players should allieviate the "always Last" problem considerably, true. However, multiplying the relative threshold only multiplies the number of turns it takes to reach it by that same number. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You might also consider a set amount of grace time that any given player can expend over a given number of turns, reset every arbitrary number of turns - e.g. if you set the grace time to 12 hours per 100 turns, player A can come in three hours late on turn 6, four hours late on turn 50, but then if they come in 6 hours late on turn 99, they have a problem (3 + 4 + 6 = 13). However, if they come in six hours late on turn 101, they have started over on a new slate, and are fine. This could be difficult to implement (lots of book-keeping), but you would never need to wait longer than the specified maximum grace time after the deadline; but if everyone is in (or those that aren't are out of time) you can still run the turn. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

Hey!!! What about MY poo? I swear it don't stink. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif and since it don't stink, it shouldn't be ignored... I mean who could ignore a stick with poo on the end?

[ June 06, 2003, 00:07: Message edited by: Narrew ]

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

Is this really that big a problem? Ruatha, you were saying it was only this game (NCG:3) which seemed a little bit slow. I would guess that >90% of games with 20 people in them go at an average speed of one turn every 48 hours or longer. With 20 people in a game the odds of someone having some real life thing to deal with in any given 48 hour period approach a near certainty.

That said it is a good idea to see if it is only certain persons who consistently submit turns late.

I suggest the following (implemented in other Online games I have played in):

When setting up the game say that the *deadline* will be every 48 hours. Then allow a *grace* period of an additional 12 hours (all numbers are just examples) before processing the turn. Record each time a player misses the *deadline* without prior notice (players who go on vacation and give notice before hand should be exempt as they have made a good faith effort to notify everyone of their absence). Then players are notified ahead of time about what the expected deadlines are and there is a way of measuring who is actually late, as opposed to merely taking the allowed time to play their turn.

Not every player lives on their computer and can reasonably play a turn every 24 hours. People who take what was specifically stated before hand as the time to play their turn should not be punished.

By shifting to a deadline then grace system you also have the advantage of avoiding the (1st three players are consistently the same problem with a system which relies on the order in which players submit their turn). You can simply record everyone who submits their turn within the deadline as getting +1 "consistent" points and missing a deadline will get you -2 points. You can then set up a system where anyone who has submitted more than 10 turns and has a negative score will not be allowed into games you create. Also any player who drops without stating a valid reason to the host should get -100 points (or more).

My two cents. Mostly borrowed from the system implemented in the Online system for playing the board game Diplomacy, which I used to play quite a bit.

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If turns routinely come in with the same player order, three will also have the same problem you mention for option 2:

Five Players, a,b,c,d,e
a +1 per turn
b +1 per turn
c +1 per turn
d -1 per turn
e -2 per turn

After turn 50, player e will have 50 pts less than player d (50 * -2 = -100; 50 * -1 = -50) and player d will have 50 pts less than players a,b,c (as + counts as 0) so both get dropped. After that, the special case of the Last two players happens, and you start to get

a +1 per turn (50 at turn 50)
b -1 per turn (50 at turn 50)
c -2 per turn (50 at turn 50)
d Dropped
e Dropped

After 50 more turns, Player c has lost 100 points, and is now down to -50, with the next player up at 0, and so gets dropped.
(note: if the +1 for being in the first three and the -2 for being the Last stack, then c gets dropped after 100 turns rather than 50)

For that matter, unless the order is decidedly random, eventually, someone is going to get dropped.

Five players again: a, b, c, d, e
a: 50% chance of first, 20% chance second, 10% chance third, 10% chance fourth, 10% chance fifth
b: 10% chance of first, 50% chance of second, 20% chance third, 10% chance fourth, 10% chance fifth
c: 10% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 50% chance of third, 20% chance of fourth, 10% chance of fifth
d: 10% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 10% chance third, 50% chance fourth, 20% chance fifth
e: 20% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 10% chance of third, 10% chance of fourth, 50% chance of fifth

After just 84 turns:
a:84*50% + 84*20% + 84*10% - 84*10% - 2*84*10%
= 42 + 16.8 + 8.4 - 8.4 - 16.8 = 42
b:84*10% + 84*50% + 84*20% - 84*10% - 2*84*10%
= 8.4 + 42 + 16.8 - 8.4 - 16.8 = 42
c:84*10% + 84*10% + 84*50% - 84*20% - 2*84*10%
= 8.4 + 8.4 + 42 - 16.8 - 16.8 = 25.2
d:84*10% + 84*10% + 84*10% - 84*50% - 2*84*20%
= 8.4 + 8.4 + 8.4 - 42 - 33.6 = -50.4
e:84*20% + 84*10% + 84*10% - 84*10% - 2*84*50%
= 16.8 + 8.4 + 8.4 - 8.4 - 84 = -58.8

So, after 84 turns, d gets dropped (-50.4, next highest has 25.2(0)), followed by e one turn later
(d dissapeared, causing the next one up to be c, at ~ 25.2(0) while e is still at ~ -58.8)
You can run these numbers for different probability spreads (note: 84 turns was picked as the threshold for d going away; it was done after using 1000 and a little math to pick up on the fifty below threshold), but ultimately, unless the distributions for the turn order are close to even (even = everyone has 20% chance of taking any given position), you WILL drop someone eventually.

Perhaps instead it could be implemented as a production modifier - Empires of Emporers who give their orders sooner have more time to complete them, and Empires of Emporers who give their orders later have less time to complete them. Then again, that might be much too difficult.

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There are no timezone differences of 72 hours!
If someone in one timezone is alone there and therefore submitts Last, he has the chance of being first in the next turn!
There are a net inflow of zero points unless two or more misses a turn, if there are 5 or less players the system will be abandonded. ( I haven't fully set myself into your calculations, Sorry, will do that later... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

The "free timeperiod" was a good idea, say 48 hours free period and counting negatives only in the Last 24?

Also, the supporters of poo on the stick seems loud, this might be the winning idea!
(As noone seems to be positive to the "turn submission league" I'll drop it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif )

[ June 06, 2003, 04:56: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If turns routinely come in with the same player order, three will also have the same problem you mention for option 2:

Five Players, a,b,c,d,e
a +1 per turn
b +1 per turn
c +1 per turn
d -1 per turn
e -2 per turn

After turn 50, player e will have 50 pts less than player d (50 * -2 = -100; 50 * -1 = -50) and player d will have 50 pts less than players a,b,c (as + counts as 0) so both get dropped. After that, the special case of the Last two players happens, and you start to get

a +1 per turn (50 at turn 50)
b -1 per turn (50 at turn 50)
c -2 per turn (50 at turn 50)
d Dropped
e Dropped

After 50 more turns, Player c has lost 100 points, and is now down to -50, with the next player up at 0, and so gets dropped.
(note: if the +1 for being in the first three and the -2 for being the Last stack, then c gets dropped after 100 turns rather than 50)

For that matter, unless the order is decidedly random, eventually, someone is going to get dropped.

Five players again: a, b, c, d, e
a: 50% chance of first, 20% chance second, 10% chance third, 10% chance fourth, 10% chance fifth
b: 10% chance of first, 50% chance of second, 20% chance third, 10% chance fourth, 10% chance fifth
c: 10% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 50% chance of third, 20% chance of fourth, 10% chance of fifth
d: 10% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 10% chance third, 50% chance fourth, 20% chance fifth
e: 20% chance of first, 10% chance of second, 10% chance of third, 10% chance of fourth, 50% chance of fifth

After just 84 turns:
a:84*50% + 84*20% + 84*10% - 84*10% - 2*84*10%
= 42 + 16.8 + 8.4 - 8.4 - 16.8 = 42
b:84*10% + 84*50% + 84*20% - 84*10% - 2*84*10%
= 8.4 + 42 + 16.8 - 8.4 - 16.8 = 42
c:84*10% + 84*10% + 84*50% - 84*20% - 2*84*10%
= 8.4 + 8.4 + 42 - 16.8 - 16.8 = 25.2
d:84*10% + 84*10% + 84*10% - 84*50% - 2*84*20%
= 8.4 + 8.4 + 8.4 - 42 - 33.6 = -50.4
e:84*20% + 84*10% + 84*10% - 84*10% - 2*84*50%
= 16.8 + 8.4 + 8.4 - 8.4 - 84 = -58.8

So, after 84 turns, d gets dropped (-50.4, next highest has 25.2(0)), followed by e one turn later
(d dissapeared, causing the next one up to be c, at ~ 25.2(0) while e is still at ~ -58.8)
You can run these numbers for different probability spreads (note: 84 turns was picked as the threshold for d going away; it was done after using 1000 and a little math to pick up on the fifty below threshold), but ultimately, unless the distributions for the turn order are close to even (even = everyone has 20% chance of taking any given position), you WILL drop someone eventually.

Perhaps instead it could be implemented as a production modifier - Empires of Emporers who give their orders sooner have more time to complete them, and Empires of Emporers who give their orders later have less time to complete them. Then again, that might be much too difficult.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is based upon the assumption of set chances to submit turns, but there are humans who submit turns and they may alter their turn submission time based upon their current score, that was the general idea with the system!!!
That means that the scores may be equalled out so that everyone lies at zero points for ever!

(-50 pts equals almost 11 weeks of not submitted turns, in case everyone less has submitted and lieas at zero or above).

[ June 06, 2003, 06:37: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: Increasing turn speed
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yea, and large Cometary Poo and the capitalistic repercussions to T.P. stock holders.