Galcon 2 now available on the iOS App Store, Google Play, and Steam! 74 players online!
:: Community ::

Forums :: [OLD] iPhone :: Support :: @$$hat timer needed

You must sign in to post.

Page 1 / 4 1   2   3   4 

@$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 7:21am

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

The standoff timer was quite a good idea, though it does need some tweaking (it should require an additional planet to change hands each time it is invoked , one then two then three., etc)


...needed even more is the @$$hat timer.   

The @$$hat timer would be invoked once a player has 500% of the combined total of the other players ships.   It would be a hidden timer which - once invoked - would give 60 seconds to complete the game before auto-surrendering the player with the 500% of ships, leaving the other players to hash it out.

The point of this would be to castrate the @$$hats who parade and waste time of other players in 4 player rooms.  Yes, it does not punish the players who refuse to surrender - nor should it - even though they are also d00shbags they also have the chance to win if the @$$hat gets  disconnected.  

@$$hats have started taking over this game.  Today I found three rooms being bogarted by @$$hats.   That is 12-16 players being jerked around in your game for gawd only knows how long.  (and usually the @$$hat quits right after) 

Please - make the @$$hat timer a priority.  It would go a long way in fixing one of the few, but major, broken features of this game.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 7:55am

Cabin Boy zmar01

Joined: Jun 6, 2009
Posts: 655

what if someone was floating ships around for 60 seconds grabbing a few planets.

Or say 3 players all with even troops all with say 2000 ships each.

2 players exchange their ships until they are only fighting with production, which is about 50 ships each, its obvious that the 3rd player is going to win, but instead he lets the other 2 players fight it out, only to find that he suddenly loses.

The person with 500% of the ships should win
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 8:08am

Cabin Boy stract

Joined: Aug 31, 2008
Posts: 168

I have no problem with the guy who waits the longest being punished. I'm not sure I understand the proposal, but anything that forces the game forward would be appreciated.  I do like the idea that each standoff timer should require 1 more planet than the last time.

I've recently spectated a few 3 player games lately that simply came down to waiting for one player to drop out before the combat began. That's just silly.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 8:30am

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

It is quite simple really; there is NO second place; so waiting 60 seconds for two players to duke it out for no reason is stupid - not to mention that by that point it is almost always resolve in much less than 60 seconds.  MUCH less.  
You forget that 500% is alot and it is of the combined total of ALL players - plus 60 seconds in this game is a long time :  long enough to more than quadruple your ships.:  if you are that worried make it 1000% more and 90 seconds - it would still effectively castrate the @$$hats without any effect whatsoever on 99.99% of 'legitimate' games.  

The person with 500% SHOULD lose because they are the one guilty of delay of game.  They are the @$$hat and @$$hats should NEVER get rewarded for being @$$hats.  Not to mention - if an @$$hat knows he will eventuall win it will only encourage MORE @$$hat behavior more often - but if they know they could lose it will discourage that behavior.
post updated on Aug 14, 2010 @ 10:48am
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 11:33am

Cabin Boy deuce

Joined: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 683

+1 Asshat Timer
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 11:48am

Cabin Boy socratic

Joined: Feb 10, 2010
Posts: 1944
Location: =3

thats stupid. that bassically takes the fun out of everything. Even the boring Standoff timer is dumb a way....

Theres been too much stuff thats changing the way galcon used to be... dont like fast games....cause it only turns them into two 1v1 and then another 1v1 for he winners
post updated on Aug 14, 2010 @ 11:49am
Re: Asshat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 1:39pm

Cabin Boy roxie

Joined: Apr 3, 2010
Posts: 2363
Location: New Jersey, USA

i agree with socratic
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 1:57pm

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

I see, it is stupid.  So you superior intellect is best exercised staring at pretty colored disks on you iphone for hours on end.  I'd certainly hate to see that battle of wits arrested.  Maybe you'd prefer two other apps out there called "grass growing" and "paint drying" ; With your profound grasp of srategery I'm sure they are right up your alley.  Base on your advanced rank here I think it is safe to say you have mastered staring at disks and it is time for you to move on and make room for us simpletons here who prefer actually playing the game.    

Don't like my tone?  Take a more constructive one yourself genius.  I am certain that you both fit well into the category of @$$hat and are exactly the sort of players that this timer is meant to discourage.  You want to build ships and parade them around? - play against the ai till your palms turn hairy.  Meanwhile stay the F out of my games.
post updated on Aug 14, 2010 @ 2:02pm
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 2:09pm

Cabin Boy txgangsta

Joined: Mar 12, 2007
Posts: 4001
Location: Texas

The drama llama strikes yet again!
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 2:47pm

Cabin Boy marky1991

Joined: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 7646
Location: Douglasville, GA

"...Maybe you'd prefer two other apps out there called "grass growing" and "paint drying"[.] [Due to] your profound grasp of [strategy][,] I'm sure they['d be] right up your alley..."

Actually, paint drying is quite fascinating, as is grass growing. I actually tried to make a program that made plants grow, but it was too complicated. I had to abandon that project. (For now)

Paint drying sounds really interesting, but I wouldn't even know where to start with that problem.I've never thought to study that. Thanks for the suggestion!

Watching water move and studying its motion is also extremely interesting.

"Don't like my tone?"

I don't care for it much either. There's no need for you to be rude on the forums. It's much more comfortable here when everyone is polite.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 2:56pm

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

Sorry - dont mean to devolve to their level , but I take exception when I am trying to offer constructive ideas with sound rational and some dimwit offers up a poorly qualified "that's stupid".   I would much prefer to see this discussion progress in a more civil and intelligent manner than what they brought to the table with those banal posts.  I know most people here have more evolved opinions and the ability to communicate them with reason.   I don't expect everyone will always agree with me, but I have little patience for immature posturing. 
Don't like my 'rude' tone (actually it is just painfully frank) Fine - then deal with the rude language to which I was responding.
post updated on Aug 14, 2010 @ 3:04pm
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 7:15pm

Cabin Boy stract

Joined: Aug 31, 2008
Posts: 168

Haha, I totally agree ipityu. Galcon is supposed to be fast. Although I would like to hear from Socratic what is the appeal of a 10 minute staring competition.

It's even more frustrating that people now seem to be actively trying to promote moving last. Every time I try anything to speed up a three game, both other players attack me until I'm gone, then they fight it out. I guess it's an ok tactic, but it promotes the worst habits in this game.  

I'm going to go ahead and say that campers are far worse than suiciders. At least the games end quickly when I'm suicided.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 14, 2010 @ 11:58pm

Cabin Boy lumley

Joined: May 18, 2010
Posts: 11

I agree, these days trying to get a game moving by making a move against someone is inviting the other two to wipe you out. Seems the only way those players can win a game is by taking obviously weak other players out and hoping for the best.  Then someone starts suiciding you in subsequent games because you ****ed em off that you didn't play the "let's all build up and wait" game. If this game had voice chat you might actually hear them crying and whining that you didn't wait long enough to attack.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 8:12am

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

Back to the original topic - three way stalemate is nothing more than kingmaker.  It is best to just NEVER join a three way. If your four player game devolves to a three way stalemate it is because at least two players are too poor at Galcon strategy to know how to actually win based on their own merit - and often all three.   I could make a whole thread about how to avoid stalemates.  The standoff timer is a nice tool, but the vast majority of people who it engages on are just not proficient enough at this game to know what to do - hence my brief suggestion to tweak it.  (maybe even require each player to have one turnover, and/or require the turnover be a different planet, not the same one- or even a random combination and number each time)

MORE important is the @$$hat timer - three way stalemates are one thing; they are caused by ignorance and inexperience.  The @$$hat timer however stops the game delays that are only the result of rudeness and inconsideration.  That is unacceptable and should be addressed ASAP. The timer I suggested would disinsent all those jackasses wh refuse to kill the last planet in a game. Sure - the guy who refuses to surrender is also irritating - but he has nothing to lose and could even get a win if the @$$hat gets disconnected.  The @$$hT however has no motive other than irritating other players.  
If the timer causes him to lose he will abandon that habit. If the timer gave him a win he would just continue the behavior each time until the timer handed him the win - it would likely INCREASE @$$hat behavior rather than eliminate it - so the 500% player must lose for it to work. 
I really hope they do something soon because there are so many @$$hats who do this the game is starting to become unplayable.   I must have seen over twelve games with this just in my time playing yesterday. That has to be stopped.
post updated on Aug 15, 2010 @ 8:36am
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 8:36am

Cabin Boy stract

Joined: Aug 31, 2008
Posts: 168

Yeah, there needs to be something.  I'm still not sure what your proposal is though... a secret timer that automatically surrenders the largest player?

I'm also going to derail the thread with some other ideas I just though of.

Maybe a multiplayer maximum of 500 or 1000 ships per player.  This way stalemates would only be a race to the max.

Or how about this: a maximum time (30-60s) per game.  If that limit is reached - everyone loses or the player with the most ships is auto-surrendered

Or maybe a mercy rule.  If any player has more than 60% of all total ships, the game ends.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 8:42am

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

I'm not sure what part you are stuck on, I'll try to recap;  
Once a player has five times the ships of the other players combined he has the ability to mop up and win very quickly.  This timer would start once he has five times their ships. If that player has not won in sixty seconds (which is more than ample time with that much advantage) then they are obviously delaying the game - so the timer would make them end the game - by auto-surrendering them (muhahaha!)  The timer could be visible - maybe call it the "delay of game timer" instead of @$$hat timer (for the more sensitive ego's out there).  That may be more 'fair' but it will just mean that often the @$$hat will run out the timer.  Best if invisible.  Maybe a notice it is started but without a visible countdown...

I frankly feel an invisible timer would be better since it ads a level of uncertainty - which then could insent player to move earlier than the timer starts.  I feel the same way about the standoff timer also.  It should not be visible.  It should only be announced after it ends the game; that way players will not have the certainty of the timer so they will have to keep things moving without waiting on it in an endless cycle.

Your suggestions all make the game a competition against time instead of other players. I like the 'delay of game' timer because it does not change anythin about the game strategy - it just smacks the rude @$$hats.
post updated on Aug 15, 2010 @ 10:29am
Re: Asshat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 7:06pm

Cabin Boy roxie

Joined: Apr 3, 2010
Posts: 2363
Location: New Jersey, USA

you know, you could just say asshat we all know what your getting at
edit: missed a space
edit2: fixed title
post updated on Aug 15, 2010 @ 7:07pm
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 7:39pm

Cabin Boy ipcress

Joined: Feb 7, 2009
Posts: 1900
Location: Get off my lawn!

FFA doesn't work.  Period.
The fact you need "asshat timers" in order to FORCE people to play the game proves this.

No asshat timers in 2v2.

Figure it out.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 8:51pm

Cabin Boy ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 385
Location: Florida

If you can see through you high and mighty spectacles you'd see that there are plenty of asshat moves in 2v2 as well - it is simply a different game with a different set of tactics, flaws and asshats.
Re: @$$hat timer needed :: Aug 15, 2010 @ 9:07pm

Cabin Boy fresh.baked

Clan: Singularity
Joined: Nov 23, 2009
Posts: 156

Meh, overall 2v2 is much better game. I wish that the majority played 2v2 not FFA.

Page 1 / 4 1   2   3   4 

You must sign in to post.