Increasing turn speed

[General Woundwort]

Originally posted by Ruatha:
In any future game I might host I'll add a penalty to the "turn submission league" I think.
The rules are as follows:
The first three players to send in the turns get +1 points, the Last but one gets -1 and the Last player gets -2 points (Not submitted turn = -2 pts).

I must say I'm not too keen on this idea. I don't like the possibility of someone getting kicked even if he Posts within the game's set time limit. I would much prefer a public-access record of how consistent a person is in posting within the timelimits.

[dogscoff]

Perhaps offer in-game rewards and penalties. You could mod a benign uber-race into the game with untouchably powerful tech and resource production. Get a friendly human to take on this non-competing empire and instruct them to award small gifts and/or punishments according to upload histories=-)

[teal]

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.

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Ruatha:
In any future game I might host I'll add a penalty to the "turn submission league" I think.
The rules are as follows:
The first three players to send in the turns get +1 points, the Last but one gets -1 and the Last player gets -2 points (Not submitted turn = -2 pts).

Then if some player/s gets to much negative score they will be kicked, this can be done in three ways:


1. I initially say that I might kick any player that gets to much negative points. (I don't like this alternative as I think the rules should be celar and avilible prior to anyone joining the game).

2. Anyone reaching a fixed limit, say -100 pts get's kicked. (If there are three players who constantly makes the first three submissions each turn then everyone else will be kicked eventually, not good).

3. A relative limit. Anyone who has 50 pts less than the one who is one step above on the pts list is kicked, positive score counts as zero.
(This is my favorite)
ex:
1..17 Others...
18. Olle +8 pts
19. Kalle -47 pts
20. Johan -97 pts.
Means Johan will be kicked as he has -50 pts less than kalle, but Kalle won't be kicked as he has -47 points less than zero (Olle has a positive score, that counts as zero).

Any reflections, ideas, suggestions??

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.

[Roanon]

Wow this is beginning to get deeply mathematical. Long calculations cut short, this confirms Woundwort's bad feelings about someone being penalized even if submitting within the time frame.

Dividing the time into "deadline" and "grace period" is more complicated but excactly what would be needed, I guess. In NGC3, I liked the idea of having 72 hours time for a turn if needed - there are times when I just can't play for 2 or 3 days in a row. On the other hand, most of the time I am able to submit within 24 hours - and eager to get new results soon then.

So, something like 48 hours deadline with additional 12 hours only used in kind of "emergency" was more what I wanted and expected, but of course thats not what is in the game description... Plus, with 20 players, the need to use the "extra" 12 hours arises more often than not, even if all are trying to make their turns asap.

I think we will just have to live with 60-70 hours average deadline, or let the turn submission league develop and then attack those on the bottom first

[ June 05, 2003, 14:38: Message edited by: Roanon ]

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Roanon:
Wow this is beginning to get deeply mathematical.

Nah - that was just light math with a few generalizations loosely based on the law of large numbers for a limited case of five players. If I wanted to get deeply mathmatical, I would be using symbol manipulation, which would have the added benefit of giving an exact formula for who is most likely to get dropped first and how many turns it will likely take given their probability distribution relative to everyone else's - but that would be way too much work just for this; a simple example will do just fine, and is much easier.

[ June 05, 2003, 15:02: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

[Ruatha]

Just to clarify, in NGC3 there will never be anyone kicked for being late in submitting turns. What was stated at the start of the game stays that way.

The problem I see is that whne the turns for some reason (i e real life issues) get's slow for a while, a lot of people (me including) downgrade the game in priority.

I play several PBW games, when I get several turnfiles sent to me at once, I play the ones that I prioritize highest first.
my general priority runs something like this:
1. Is the turn due soon, if so take this first.
2. Is this a fast turnaround game, if so do this quick.
3. Do the rest (This can be tomorrow if there is much RL(tm)) do do.