Timeouts in Finals: Do they happen too often?

It's a question of what tournament are for. If you believe that the focus is on player skill (like in MTG big tournament), it's perfectly fine. If you believe that the tournament are a way to meet up and play, then it's not.

What I think tournaments are doesn't matter. Tournaments are by their very nature a way to pit players against one another in a competitive environment. You can have your "meet up and play" at friday night, like everyone else.

And even then, if I play a tournament for my enjoyment and/or meet players (which is certainly part of reason I'm attending whichever I can) I expect to have a good times. If someone is taking 5 minutes for his master phase, then I'm not having a good time because he's playing obnoxiously slow.

I'm just ackowledging a fact: many people tend to play slow,

Yes, this is a fact and I'm fairly sure that was more or less my first response in this thread. People just play slow in general. Slower than they should.

certain cards (such as AT) are just a call to play even slower
Period

That is not a fact. That is your opinion.

It is my opinion (as well as experience) that if you know what you're doing, Ashur Tablets don't take up a disproportionate amount of time. When you're just throwing Ashur Tablets in a deck because all the cool kids do so while you don't really have a reason, or a clue as to why, how or when use then, then yes they take up a disproportionate amount of time. But then again, ANYTHING those players do take up stupid amounts of time.

KevinM wrote:

You mean high SEED. Everyone in the final below #1 needs to continue to play offensively until either they have 2vp or are #1 seed themselves.

Yes, #1 becomes a "defensive" and not offensive player in the finals, but since everyone knows who #1 is, that player should have 3-4 predators, unless the rest of the players at the table are complete amateurs.

While not as certain as for the top seed, anyone can win with 1.5VP as long as only lower seeds have scored any and managed to stayed alive. In a 1.5-0.5-0.5-0.5-0 split, the 1.5 always wins, no matter what his seed is.

What you say suggests another system: if the game times out without a GW (so not in the case of a 2-2 draw), then the winner is the highest seed still alive, irrespective of VPs scored. That would work much closer to what you describe. It would probably favor offensive play, but wouldn't it warp the table dynamics too much?

And that certain cards (such as AT) just make that slow general play even slower is another fact, not opinion - deying such a thing is denying evidence

What evidence are you referring to? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but your personal experience or opinion is not evidence by any means.

Does the third Ashur Tablet take a longer time to resolve than the third Villein? Well, sure, it will likely do so.

Will it resolve sufficiently slow to be bordering on stalling and slowing down the pace of the game? Most certainly not. Unless, of course, you are playing with bads and/or allow players to take 5 minutes for their master phases.

Which is not the problem of Ashur Tablets, but the problem of the player playing them and judges not stepping up to speed up the game.

The real problem:

120 minutes / 5 players = 24 minutes per player

Games that go longer than 12 turns give each player less than 2 minutes per turn.

We should not be encouraging faster play, but more correct play.