Double Turns and Freestyle Turn Holding

[bartb88]

I think that in teams it should be player 1 & 3
and players 2 & 4

Yeah that with sequential would fix the problem.

[zorba_ca]

Hmmmm... sounds familiar.
Oh yeah! I suggested this a month ago (and a poor poll turnout, but those who came out did not like it).

Here is the link.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... highlight=\

I'm still in favour of it.

[Appledumplin]

oh yes, i had taken issue with this several weeks ago after a couple of games with you waffles. i still feel like the 'holding or just waiting to take a double turn per team' is an unfair practice. i have heard several ideas since that would remedy this problem. I believe my favorite is the team split in sequential; team 1, 1 & 3 position team 2, 2& 4 and so on, but just playing sequential would also solve the problem, which we did and you still schooled us pretty well! Have you changed positions on this doubleturn thing since then waffles? If memory serves me correct, you, at that time, where in favor of it, or at least practiced it in freestyle games.

[hotgun]

I think that in teams it should be player 1 & 3
and players 2 & 4

NO because then you could not do games with your friend on your team... unless you were prefect timing

[kingwaffles]

Yes it is true that i did and sometimes still do exactly what I'm preaching against,but I have decided that like holding it offers an unfair advantage to one team and I'm stopping.

[oman]

FYI your question: choices makes no sense at all. I understood anyways

[thegrimsleeper]

prefect timing

Is this what happens when an alien from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a stopwatch?

...

...

...

...

[Charbroil]

Now, I realize it's a perfectly legitimate strategy to hold for a little while...say 15-30 minutes, especially if you're parrying an enemy while they're also fortifying in a fortifications unlimited game...but YOU CAN'T FORTIFY FOR HOURS! There's only so much parrying you can do, and most holders aren't even parrying, they're just wasting people's time, so could we please have a fortifications timer of 30 min. - 1 hours, I mean I realize that there's no rule against holding, but this is a game and games are meant to be fun and playing against a holder is definitely not fun...so please, let's get a timer. Thank you.

[adamshearer]

I have 2 suggestions. Firstly I would like to see a smaller time limit set to people who prolong fortification in games allowing double turns so they can get the first turn in the next round. Not everyone is this cheap, but there are pleanty who are! Secondly, when you create a game I think you should be able to make a certain type of time game, ie) 24 hr turns, 12 hr turns, 6 hr turns, 3 hr turns and even 1hr turns and so when people want to play a game its one more thing they can look for, single/double/tripple, map, type of play, and time..

[thegrimsleeper]

Well, we have a name for that sort of behavior here. it's called holding, and it's generally frowned upon. Only thing you can do to avoid it is to play No Double Turns Freestyle, or Sequential, and playing the latter of the two can take weeks. Which brings us to your idea of creating shorter turn limits...

Which is such a good idea, it's been brought up countless times in about 40 different threads before this one.
Which, of course brings us back to square one, pleading with lack to Give us our freaking speed games already!!!

[qeee1]

Whatever about speed games... I think there should be a limit on "holding", it's been discussed thoroughly in the "holding" thread in complaints section (too lazy to post link), and few are in favour, most of those who are say they'll continue to use it as long as it's permitted but don't disagree with a ban. Anyway yeah... please implement Lack if you have any spare time.

[Jota]

Anyway yeah... please implement Lack if you have any spare time.

Now that's a great idea. If someone could implement lackattack in software, then the real lack could take a vacation and let the artificial version do all his coding work for him. Anyone feel up to the task?

[qeee1]

Damn, foiled by my own bad grammar. Nice idea all the same.

[EdG]

Please remove this feature. If a person does not play for 24 hours they should not be rewarded. Some are using this as a strategy, which would not happen in real life.

[wicked]

I'd like to suggest that players within the same team cannot take double turns (in a non-double turn game of course). As it is now, teammates can hold until everyone else has gone to create a double-turn for themselves. Now, if I'd have wanted to play in a double-turn game, then I would've selected that option. It takes no skill to wait out your opponent and get in a double turn, which is why I avoid those games. Having a freestyle, non-double turn games tricks people into thinking double turns aren't allowed, when in actuality they are.

end of rant

[qeee1]

... agrees. I've noticed that too... but I've always felt I could turn it to my advantage so I never complained. You're right though, in a non double turns game there should be no team double turns.

[rocksolid]

I'm afraid I've unwittingly been the source of poor Wicked's ire...it seems to me that if a team wants to prevent a team game from having this happen, they can always wait to play last in each round. Problem solved? Though it is true that making this a game option would make it unnecessary.

[lackattack]

Fixing this is on my to-do list

[wicked]

thanks

[SMITH197]

i think in the situation wick was in (4 person game, 2 teams) its very difficult for a situation like that to be avoided. That begin said, i feel that the whole "Freestyle" game play system is flawed, and creates more problems than its worth.

Also, wicked, just wanted to let you know, that from my point of view, i logged on and the game had started, and both of you were playing. (i assumed that your team mate and you had agreed upon it to occur that way). I made my move and went off to do something else. I came back and rocksolid happened to be online, making his moves. From my point of view (please keep in my that this is only my opinion) making my move was perfectly fine. I'm sry wicked. By no means did we intend to come across as unfair players or cheaters....

[KoolBak]

Poor, poor wicked...shall we give a group hug?? (flame expected..)

[Pristella]

On the other hand, preventing that would again slow the games. I have often done that "double team turn" thing, but usually unintentionally, and it's happened to me, too. No problem, really, in my opinion.

[wicked]

Smithy, it's how the game is set up, not how it turned out. it's ok, it's being taken care of.

[craig84]

I think itd be fair if In doubles games or triples that say theres 3 ppl left 2 on the same team and 1 faceing them, the 2 on a team has taken the last turn so thier next turn is locked until the 1 person plays. i purpose that after half the round time that the teamate that didnt take the last turn can start his turn.
this seems fair to me and you wouldnt have to wait for the person if he or she decides to take longer..

[Joe McCarthy]

Could we put a note by these games, something like "This game is only for jerk-offs that dont really want to play a game of Risk but rather just want to see if they can time there turns when their opponents arent around so they can get in a nice double turn because thats the only way they could ever get some points, they will never win a real game so there has to be something for them and this is it."? Would be helpful, because I keep accidentally joining these things and get held on and double-turned to death and Id rather not play with people that even like freestyle/double turns, as they are all jerk-offs. K, tks big guy.