file Time limit variant for finals

21 Nov 2018 07:36 #91941 by thelonius reloaded

I Think we Will try it on saturday friendly tournament before the Italian grand prix

So how did it go?


I mean i Will try it on december Sorry

Italian National Coordinator

Lurking in the underground of Bologna, Italy

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Nov 2018 21:09 #92056 by chedcan
As promise, here's the feedback from Gatineau:

I suggested it on Saturday and finalists were not warm to the idea so we stuck to the "hard" 2h limit. The game reached it's full conclusion with 10-15 minutes to spare so the whole debate was moot.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ankha, Vlad, lionel

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
06 Dec 2018 14:07 - 06 Dec 2018 14:16 #92281 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Time limit variant for finals

]This is an extra incentive for ousting players during the final round. Testing will tell if it changes something or not.


Could you explain your thinking on that? An extra ten minutes is an extra ten minutes for everyone. I'm not sure it incentivizes me to get a VP if it gives everyone ten extra minutes. That may help me, it may hurt me. Early-mid-game - say I get an oust 80 minutes in to 120 (now 130) minutes - I probably can't predict that. In the dying moments - minute 119 of 120, possibly soon to be 130 - I may well be thinking "Yeah, but if I get an oust now, that probably means my predator gets to come at me again..." which might well be bad for me. It may of course mean I get a few extra minutes to oust my grand-prey (now prey) who is also teetering on the brink of being ousted, but that's not a given - it'll obviously depend on the situation.

I'm not saying the change is good or bad, but I'm not seeing the incentive here. It feels like a very mixed blessing that could hurt you just as much as help you.

The extra time has an importance only in the late game (let's say the last 40 minutes) . A simple example:

Let's say I'm first seed and I have a VP. The clock is ticking, there's 15 minutes left (including the extra time from my first VP if we used that rule) and my predator and I are in a bad shape. In fact, my predator is going to get ousted. My best chance of winning is to reach the time limit, so I begin to play more slowly, without stalling. My grand-predator ousts his prey, and we reach time-limit, I win.
With the suggested change, my grand-predator has a chance of killing me too, and if he does, he probably deserves winning the final over me playing slowly to ensure victory.

If the top-seed position had been the other way round (him being first seed, me being a lower seed), then it would probably have forced me to play faster instead, so I can get another VP, since he would win otherwise.

Either way, time is added when something important is happening. If someone is ousted, the whole balance of the table changes and other important things can happen now. Adding extra time allow those things to happen and make the game more interesting and rewarding.

(At some level, I realize it's a bit like a Last Stand effect, except that if you have an extra turn but no time to play it, it's pointless).

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 06 Dec 2018 14:16 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
06 Dec 2018 14:54 #92282 by thelonius reloaded
We did apply it on Saturday but all the 4 oust were in the first 90 minutes...

Italian National Coordinator

Lurking in the underground of Bologna, Italy

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
06 Dec 2018 15:42 #92284 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Time limit variant for finals

We did apply it on Saturday but all the 4 oust were in the first 90 minutes...

That's a good final :D

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
06 Dec 2018 16:41 - 06 Dec 2018 16:42 #92285 by jamesatzephyr

Let's say I'm first seed and I have a VP. The clock is ticking, there's 15 minutes left (including the extra time from my first VP if we used that rule) and my predator and I are in a bad shape. In fact, my predator is going to get ousted. My best chance of winning is to reach the time limit, so I begin to play more slowly, without stalling. My grand-predator ousts his prey, and we reach time-limit, I win.
With the suggested change, my grand-predator has a chance of killing me too, and if he does, he probably deserves winning the final over me playing slowly to ensure victory.


Not seeing an incentive effect here.

If the grand-predator wants to win, he has to oust his prey, whether or not it gets him ten extra minutes or not. Absent some bizarro Life Boon type situation (or similar weird, corner case effects), the only thing that gets him closer to winning is ousting his prey.

Yes, giving ten extra minutes changes the outcome, but it doesn't change the incentive - the prey of the grand-predator must be ousted for the grand-predator to win. The game would also have run differently if the final was just a flat 2.5 hours, and the incentive would have been the same - the grand-predator has to oust the prey to win, because that's how the game works.


Either way, time is added when something important is happening. If someone is ousted, the whole balance of the table changes and other important things can happen now. Adding extra time allow those things to happen and make the game more interesting and rewarding.


When things change, things change, yes. This is trivially, axiomatically true. It doesn't mean that the thing you're changing is incentivizing anything specific - it just makes people account for the change.
Last edit: 06 Dec 2018 16:42 by jamesatzephyr.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.114 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum