??????
You are not logged in.
Lately all of my opponents have been terribly slow. I'm not sure if it's slowness on the part of the player or if it's technological in nature. Most of the time I spend playing nowadays I am just waiting for my opponent to make decisions. If it's technological slowness, please fix it. If it's player slowness, please penalize players who take too long on their turns. It shouldn't take more than a few seconds to make any decision in this game.
Offline
Oh, one more thing. If a player is all-in, then the reveal phase should be skipped. As soon as the final rows/columns are chosen, it should just go straight to displaying the final result.
Offline
Oh, one more thing. If a player is all-in, then the reveal phase should be skipped. As soon as the final rows/columns are chosen, it should just go straight to displaying the final result.
That would speed things up a smidge and skip an unecessary step. +1
For your original post, you probably just have slow opponents. If there were problems communicating with the server you would see the red [!] at the top of the game.
Also you get 1min before youre gonged, then 10 seconds. Thats really not that long if you think about. Remember patience is a virtue!
Last edited by context fabric (2015-02-27 18:31:16)
Offline
Apreche wrote:Oh, one more thing. If a player is all-in, then the reveal phase should be skipped. As soon as the final rows/columns are chosen, it should just go straight to displaying the final result.
That would speed things up a smidge and skip an unecessary step. +1
For your original post, you probably just have slow opponents. If there were problems communicating with the server you would see the red [!] at the top of the game.
Also you get 1min before youre gonged, then 10 seconds. Thats really not that long if you think about. Remember patience is a virtue!
Yeah, not only does it force you to reveal, it forces you to keep clicking on BET 0 for the rest of the game. A lot of time can be saved by cutting that out as well.
If indeed my opponents are slow, that's just annoying. I have this same problem with board games also. I take my turn quickly, and it's frustrating to play against people who do not. Perhaps after one player sends their input, the other player could be forced to input within 5-10 seconds or face a penalty? One minute is an absurdly long amount of time to make one small decision.
Offline
One minute is an absurdly long amount of time to make one small decision.
Trust me, it's not. When you have $200 riding on that one small decision, you're going to want every second. I suppose the game could let you set up games with configurable time limits, but it would complicate the UI considerably.
And 5s to make a move after your opponent? Jeeez. Either you're a genius or perhaps your opponent is thinking about this more deeply than you? A thinking game requires thinking time. To get some perspective, check out this 1933 Go game:
The game of the century refers to a famous game of go between Honinbo Shusai (white) and Go Seigen (black)...
Each player was given twenty-four hours of thinking time....
Shusai called adjournments some 13 times, all at the start of his turn to move, thus prolonging the match to a period of three months (16 October 1933 – 19 January 1934). For instance, on the eighth day of the match, Shusai played first and Go Seigen replied within two minutes. Shusai then thought for three and a half hours but only to adjourn the game. During these adjournments, Shusai would retreat home to study the game with his students.
Canto Delirium: a Twitter bot for CM. Also check out my strategy guide!
Offline
In Go, you can place your stone anywhere on the board. The board is 19x19. There are hundreds of possibilities to consider. Multiply that by the possibilities of just one more turn into the future, and it's in the thousands. It's understandable that it takes a long time to decide anything in Go. That's just one of the reasons I don't enjoy play Go, even though I highly respect it as a game.
In Minuet there are far fewer possible options to consider. There are only 30 possible positions on turn 1. 12 possible positions on turn 2. 2 possible positions on turn 3. Then 3 possible choices of what to reveal. Even the first turn shouldn't take very long.
Primarily I just want to be able to play the game faster. Less waiting means more games and more playing. Nobody likes waiting. I do understand that if someone has real money riding on a decision they would want to take their time with it. I'm not going to beat around the bush. I want to deny my opponents the luxury of that time.
As challenging as it may be to make the right decision, it's more challenging to make the right decision quickly and under pressure. After I make my choice, I want my opponent to have a big old countdown clock lighting a fire under their pants.
Players who play well should win over those who do not play well, regardless of speed. But players who play well and also play quickly should win over those who play just as well, but take much longer to make decisions. No?
Offline
Well I could easily have been one of these players you're annoyed about Apreche. I was worried I might annoy someone so sorry. It usually takes me that long to figure out what's going on, though. Unfortunately the game also encourages players to go close to the time limit at a couple of points even if their decision is easy: 1. When they have an easy decision but don't want the other player to know that it's easy. 2. With the simultaneous betting if you take up to the time limit to make your bet then if you have to wait you know your opponent didn't bet as much as you did at the first opportunity. I don't think there's a right answer for whether short or long time limits are better though, the game would just be different, and I'd also enjoy faster games. 1 minute per decision is much longer than you typically get per decision in online poker, say, which is what the game this gets compared to, (it's actually much longer than you typically even get per decision in online go). For this reason I'm sure this time limit is part of the experience Jason is trying to get with the game. That time limit means players can think more deeply about there moves and increases the investment (and so tension) in each board. It also makes it feel more like a strategy game and probably does less to encourage problem gambling.
In other strategy games like chess, go or poker the player creating the game usually gets to decide between a few options for time limits on thinking. I'd be for adding this option, though for tournaments/promotions you would probably need a fixed time limit depending on the structure.
Offline
Well I could easily have been one of these players you're annoyed about Apreche. I was worried I might annoy someone so sorry. It usually takes me that long to figure out what's going on, though. Unfortunately the game also encourages players to go close to the time limit at a couple of points even if their decision is easy: 1. When they have an easy decision but don't want the other player to know that it's easy. 2. With the simultaneous betting if you take up to the time limit to make your bet then if you have to wait you know your opponent didn't bet as much as you did at the first opportunity. I don't think there's a right answer for whether short or long time limits are better though, the game would just be different, and I'd also enjoy faster games. 1 minute per decision is much longer than you typically get per decision in online poker, say, which is what the game this gets compared to, (it's actually much longer than you typically even get per decision in online go). For this reason I'm sure this time limit is part of the experience Jason is trying to get with the game. That time limit means players can think more deeply about there moves and increases the investment (and so tension) in each board. It also makes it feel more like a strategy game and probably does less to encourage problem gambling.
In other strategy games like chess, go or poker the player creating the game usually gets to decide between a few options for time limits on thinking. I'd be for adding this option, though for tournaments/promotions you would probably need a fixed time limit depending on the structure.
Yeah, I forgot about that. I tend to assume that if someone best a large amount right away that they are not bluffing. But if they wait a bunch before bidding, it's more likely that they had to consider it more and it was a harder decision.
Offline
Also +1 to removing reveal stage and betting stages once a player is allin
Offline
I get that you prefer playing fast, but many of us don't. I think your best bet is to find someone like minded (through here or the CM chat room) and play against them under the conditions of a gentleman's agreement to take shorter turns.
Personally, I'd hate to have to make a move 5s within my opponent. Besides the fact that I am slow thinker, every game would have the potential to turn into a coin toss: your opponent just all-ins and immediately selects moves at random and you are forced to make a guess without time to evaluate. No thanks.
I also think you're underestimating the complexity of this game. There may not be the possibility space that Go has, but Cordial Minuet has a layer Go lacks: hidden information and trying to read your opponent. Sure, I only have 12 choices on the second turn. But I also have to consider 60 permutations of my opponent's row at the end of that turn (1st turn red row and 2nd turn red/green rows). I have to consider what my opponent is thinking, what they're thinking I'm thinking, what they're thinking that I'm thinking that they're thinking, and so on. I don't see how you can be considering all this in 5 seconds.
Canto Delirium: a Twitter bot for CM. Also check out my strategy guide!
Offline
I get that you prefer playing fast, but many of us don't. I think your best bet is to find someone like minded (through here or the CM chat room) and play against them under the conditions of a gentleman's agreement to take shorter turns.
Personally, I'd hate to have to make a move 5s within my opponent. Besides the fact that I am slow thinker, every game would have the potential to turn into a coin toss: your opponent just all-ins and immediately selects moves at random and you are forced to make a guess without time to evaluate. No thanks.
I also think you're underestimating the complexity of this game. There may not be the possibility space that Go has, but Cordial Minuet has a layer Go lacks: hidden information and trying to read your opponent. Sure, I only have 12 choices on the second turn. But I also have to consider 60 permutations of my opponent's row at the end of that turn (1st turn red row and 2nd turn red/green rows). I have to consider what my opponent is thinking, what they're thinking I'm thinking, what they're thinking that I'm thinking that they're thinking, and so on. I don't see how you can be considering all this in 5 seconds.
Yes, that random rush strategy is a problem. There would need to be some sort of minimum time to prevent that.
As for the other part. I'll just say this. If you are trying to think what your opponent is thinking, that explains why your are taking so long. I make my decisions completely based upon the numbers. Psychoanalysis of the opponent is unnecessary and suboptimal. Doubly so since you can't even see the opponent, and they could even be a bot.
Offline
I make my decisions completely based upon the numbers. Psychoanalysis of the opponent is unnecessary and suboptimal.
LOL. Are we playing the same game? There is no strictly optimal strategy. If you're using a predictable strategy and pretending like your opponent can't catch on, you're absolutely in for a surprise.
Now I really want to play you :)
Canto Delirium: a Twitter bot for CM. Also check out my strategy guide!
Offline
Another issue with the 5s after your opponent idea, is it reveals to your opponent exactly when you made your decision so it would encourage some players to wait so as not to reveal that information.
I don't think Jere is talking about psychoanalysis so much here, Apreche. To take a simple example, a lot of players like to choose the minimum maximum number to give to their opponent. I know this so I'm inclined to pick the collumn with the highest number in that row. If I think my opponent knows all of this (and a bot could easily know all of this) then I might expect them to give me a low number in that collumn, so I should change my collumn choice, but if I don't think they have figure this out I've got no reason to change. Spotting patterns in your opponents play and avoiding patterns in your own play that your opponent might spot is definitely part of the game. (Gasme theoretically optimal play doesn't require thinking about your actual opponent, but it still requires thinking about a theoretical opponent who knows exactly what strategy your using all the time, so doesn't ecatly make the decision simpler most of the time).
Offline
Leaving those extra steps in there when people are all-in has just been laziness on my part. It keeps the game structure the same no matter what, so the server code is simpler with fewer special cases.
Gotta do it, though.
In terms of time, I think most online poker gives you 30 seconds per choice. I used to have it set to that, but a lot of players complained that it was too fast.
Remember, in Poker, the only choice you're making is the bet, and there are no choices to make AFTER the bet, either, besides more bets.
Here, you're making a real choice (column picking). Even on the betting choices, many of them depend on future picking choices that you still haven't made yet. So evaluating those possibilities in a deep way requires more time then simply looking at 5 or 6 cards in poker.
Jere has pointed out that after pick 2, during the post-pick-2 bet, you can actually discover that you could force a win on pick3. You can't just glance at the board and know that. It takes some mousing around and studying the graph.
If you are NOT studying the graph post-pick-2, you are going to miss those forced-win certainties and play worse as a result. I'm not saying that everyone should do this, but many advanced players do, and it takes time.
How fast is it to look at the board in poker before the river and know you've won? Like, let's say you have an A-high flush before the river. Well, even then, the draw could give someone a full house. So really, only 4-of-a-kind and straight flush before the river let's you know you've won. Simple to recognize instantly, and it almost never happens.
Offline
Turn time is one of the few ways to get a psychological read on your opponent (or try to manipulate the read they have on you). The game would feel really different with tweaks to that aspect. Shorter turns would favour confident, bullying strategies over thoughtful patient strategies, and I know I appreciate that this can be a thinking game.
Offline
I'd actually noticed the same. I didn't see the red ! box, but I suspected that either we were having server problems, or my opponent was taking his/her sweet time.
I agree with Apreche that the game loses its tension when there are long moments after you've made a decision and you're just waiting for your opponent. I try to use that time to continue studying the board, but as I don't want to second guess myself too much, I usually just end up trying to "will" my opponent to choose the row I want. I suppose there's some suspense there, but yeah, at those moments I wish the game was a little "snappier."
With that said, I think the time limit is good where it is now. There have been times I really started going overboard with the analysis, and the chime reminded me that I need to make a decision NOW. However, there is enough time to really think things through, which rewards strategy over pure randomness. Saying that, I would also remind us of the importance of ensuring this is a STRATEGY game, not a game, shall we say, "subject to chance." Introducing a game element (such as a very short timer, or a timer tied to the opponent's decision) may mean that game is more chance-based, which would not be good...
Offline
I do agree that aspects such as thoughtfulness and strategy should be encouraged over tactics like bullying. Someone who makes better decisions should always win over someone who decides poorly. However, I still feel that speed should be a greater factor than it is today.
The closest example I can think of in another game is the hurry up offense in NFL football. They have rules in place such that you can't go so fast as to unfairly deceive the other team. Opponents always have an opportunity to see your formation and arrange their defense accordingly. Despite this, you can still speed things up such that you gain a significant advantage over an opponent that is too slow.
Playing quickly shouldn't confer enough of an advantage to make up for bad decision making, but making good choices quickly should win out over taking a full minute to make equally good decisions.
Offline
I tend to think that 1 minute is too long and that 30 seconds is better.
However, new players are really put off by 30 seconds, I think.
This is something that can be adjusted as much as we want later, server-side.
Offline
Maybe if players are consistently stalling out the clock during a game, it could be implemented that they would have their time reduced for a few rounds, until they are no longer stalling the game?
Offline
Or there could be a time bank, like a timed chess game. Maybe you have 2 minutes total per round that you can use however you please.
But I'd like to keep it simple and eventually settle on one fixed time limit per decision.
Offline
One suggestion I have about this, especially if you want to reduce the standard average time per decision, is to give some extra time (relative to the other rounds) for the first decision, to give players some time to get a feel for the board. (Also a non-obtrusive countdown timer that you can see from the start, in the betting rounds I some times get in trouble with the 10 second timer because I have to press a lot of buttons to get the right bet size amount, and end up picking a different bet to what I wanted to avoid risk of leaving).
Offline
Yeah, there could be a variable amount of time per step, just like you suggest. Picking which square to reveal, for example, should probably never take a full minute.
I don't think I'd want a number moving on the screen the whole time, because it would be visually distracting. Maybe it should start showing up sooner than the last 10 seconds, though... maybe last 15 seconds.
Offline
Or there could be a time bank, like a timed chess game. Maybe you have 2 minutes total per round that you can use however you please.
+1 for this idea
Offline
I would say I am a slow player. I like to study a bit the board in the first round and I often end up with the bell sound.
Still I'd be glad if the game becomes a bit faster.
My vote for a time limit would go for:
1st pick: 60s
2nd pick: 50s
3rd pick: 40s
reveal: 30s
About the bets their "difficulty" actually increases over turns, but I think that a constant time (like 40s) would work fine.
Offline
I am perfectly fine with the current time settings. Sometimes I have to take my time to think about the board situation and I also don't mind opponents who do this and might play a little more cautious.
I want to play against his "assumed" best picks, instead of a random time panic pick.
Offline