Blashy Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 That would be nice. Have a timer that you can set for time per turn. Ex: 5 minute timer, you have 5 minutes to do all your actions, once it reaches 0, turn ends. This could easily be adapted for TCP/IP, hotseat as well as pbem. Of course pbem is always countered with the reload, something we just have to live with, weed out the cheaters that's all. Can you imagine 1 minute turns, hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 I have another idea , whynot have a 'TASER' hooked up to each player verified by web-cam...so that when the time limit exceeds 1 minute...the 'TASER' kicks in and gives you a 2 second jolt!. That'll make the game really interesting!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 Better than making the game slower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 *** Bump *** Lets revisit this feature please for competitive play. It's really critical, at least to me. If you go past your time, maybe you pay in MMPs do to having to repeat orders to Generals? Should be very easy to program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 I agree, a timer feature is really required for competitive play and it can make for a more interesting game against the AI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curry Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Blashy, another good idea. As long as it can be turned on or off its an excellent idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Yes, the timers would need adjustable. It's debately that the Axis would get more time? Or like chess, your time is a block amount for the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted August 3, 2004 Author Share Posted August 3, 2004 Different timer options. A) Like chess, you get a block. Timer per turn, you get ex: 2 minutes for each turn. This makes for fun speed games and who is a quick thinker on the field. C) Timer can be different for Axis & Allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 4, 2004 Share Posted August 4, 2004 Blashy, yes, that is the trick! If the timers could be set by the players, it could become part of the bid or something. Plus, you'd know how long a game would last. I'm not trying to rush people into a sloppy game, just want a clock, that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted August 7, 2004 Share Posted August 7, 2004 This kind of chess clock has been used for over about a century. There are many ways of setting time controls as per the typed of game. If either player oversteps the time control his flag falls and he loses the game. Computer chess programs always have a time option, usually it either appears as opposing digital displays or as this sort of double clock representation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Sir Jersey --- Thanks for the visual. Hubert --- Are you hearing (reading) all this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 As i read in other postings...some countries require different amounts of time to move their respective units. Britain might take a minute or two to move...then Germany may need 5 or 10 minutes. What is needed is a timing situation to reflect the timing requirements for that particular country...which could change as the game progresses. This could be mutually agreed to by the participating players...it would be great to have a clock that could be set for 2 or more timer settings...for 2 or more players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 General Rambo My pleasure. In point based games such as Scrabble, the clock is used a little differently. The person using the lesser amount of time recieves bonus points! This is determined by subracting the faster total from the longer and awarding points for the difference. I think that system would be best for SC2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Hubert? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Great ideas guys... no promises just yet though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Thanks for the response...we'd like it please. Any method or option in this realm would be cool for the competitive leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 Originally posted by jon_j_rambo: Blashy, yes, that is the trick! If the timers could be set by the players, it could become part of the bid or something. Plus, you'd know how long a game would last. I'm not trying to rush people into a sloppy game, just want a clock, that simple. It opens up MUCH interest for the game also. Imagine Blitz Tournaments and handicap Tournaments. I very neat time system is having a combination of the "time per move" and "time per game" and add them up like x+y where x is the starting block and y is the added time per turn. I predict that the standard will be around 20+3 i.e 20 minutes starting time and 2 minutes extra per turn. That would one year takes about 2 hours. I just hope SC2 only play until early 1946 at most instead of 1947 like in SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 The game should go on for as long as it needs to go on until it is concluded. For tournaments...the players can vote on or agree on and end year and date. I don't want this game limited to a 1945 or 46 cut-off!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it's Les Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 After looking at this thread, I have noooooooo idea of the ACTUAL worth of a timer. A turn lasts as long as it lasts. Turn one of any game is critical, screw it up and the rest of the game might be a total waste of time. You won't find out immediastely of course. Then there are critical moments of the game. The first turn the Russians enter, not something you want to cram into an arbitrary time slot. Anyone asking me to play a timed game, might as well not pester me to play a second time after I say no the first time as well. Chess is a pointless analogy here. In chess your moves are incredibly finite, its a game of memorising well researched perfect sequences of moves with a very small number of pieces. That doesn't decribe any wargame worth mention. Even Axis and Allies requires thought. Thus, if you want my view (or even if not ), timer function for SC2, dumb way to delay Hubert getting the game finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted August 21, 2004 Author Share Posted August 21, 2004 Having the option to set timers adds variety to this game. In war you don't have ALL the time in the world and having some games where you get say 5 minutes per turn would let us see who is a quick thinker without making many crucial errors. Timers would benefit the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 Timing should also be based on the number of units that you have. Maybey an equation can be made to auto-calc the time for the different nations based on the number of pieces that they have!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it's Les Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 WW2 lasted from between 1939 and 1945 if using the European context of the term WW2. Leaders made decisions daily in real time and often after lengthy negotiations with other world leaders after having travelled hundreds or thousands of miles to meet. Matters of grand strategy were often worked out with elaborate staffs working for long hours sometimes night and day. Not one single crucial meaningful decision was made during "5 minutes". Thus, a timer is not a useful option, it is a dumb option, as it neither reflects in any fashion what it was like to command the forces of any nation then at war, nor impose any useful means of determining if my decision making processes were on par with the then world leaders. Being able to allocate my resources, decide the options for my many units, judge whom to attack and where as well as when and in what order, is therefore something I want done right, with the same potential for careful thought and reasoned contemplation as might have been given by the actual historical participants. If you want a genuine option, one Hubert can code into the game, something that adds to the experience and actually reflects the actual conditions of a war, then you want the computer to simulate lieing and deception. Every now and then actually tell you a unit is at one strength level, when in fact the truth is it is at another. Lie about a unit's position, such that you thought it was there, but really it wasn't. Currently, I have not played a game that actually models espionage that I know of other than Civilization, where you can insert spies to mess with the oppponent forces. Wouldn't it be cool, if all your hard work was ruined by the computer using an all to human trait, and simply cheating But timer's nope, waste of time, and that is all it will ever be in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted August 21, 2004 Author Share Posted August 21, 2004 Why does it bother you so much if it is going to be optional? Just don't use it. And this game is nowhere near the grand scalre of actuall war, so 5 minutes in front of my PC could be the equivalent of 5 days in RL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
it's Les Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 Why does it bother me so much? Well, let's see, Hubert's time is finite. I would rather his time was spent on making the game a good wargame as much as possible. Soooo, anything that detracts from that goal ie dumb ideas, is a negative. It's not a positive if every nutty idea is crammed into the game such that it is bereft of enough "useful" design considerations which were lost due to many bad ones. This is why in today's world we have so many 3d real time ****ty worthless excuse wargames that have more of the pretty, and to little of the serious in their design. To much time wasted on the pretty means that to many wargames were never worth being bought in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted August 21, 2004 Author Share Posted August 21, 2004 Well it seems to me it is a popular idea considering the size of the thread and that so far you are the only one against it. So to us, it is not a nutty idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts