World chat debate about stalling

So a particular citizen of Cardhuntria (hereafter known as [redacted] since I believe in the presumption of innocence; besides, the devs can read the real chat logs if they want) talked openly about his strategy which involves taking extra time on every turn for no reason other than to frustrate his opponent. In my opinion this is the textbook definition of stalling but I was surprised to see a lot of people defending [redacted]'s actions. So, can we figure out if this is stalling or not? Here's the log (edited to remove unrelated messages and highlight important passages):

[redacted] says: If I know taking time between moves will frustrate my opponent, why would I not do that?
InevitableRed says: overall ******baggery
LieutenantCommanderData says: doing it purposely to annoy your opponent is really douchy
[redacted] says: It's strategy.
LieutenantCommanderData says: if i knew my opponent was doing that on purpose i would report them for stalling. thats not cool
[redacted] says: I do it all the time.
[redacted] says: I find it better to keep my opponent guessing.
LieutenantCommanderData says: idk i think you should get banned then lol
[redacted] says: Sometimes I play super quick. Sometimes verty slow.
LieutenantCommanderData says: hard to prove though
[redacted] says: As long as I stay within the time out range, it's perfectly legal.
LieutenantCommanderData says: other than world chat logs
[redacted] says: But I firmly believe the mental part of this game is important as well.
InevitableRed says: in what situation do you report someone for stalling?
LieutenantCommanderData says: agreed, but youre basically admitting to stalling which is reportable
[redacted] says: That's not stalling.
aceinthehole says: of cause but if you can think quick then why should you be punished when your oppenent takes all there time to move
[redacted] says: Each player has their own times.
[redacted] says: timer.
LieutenantCommanderData says: "purposely taking longer for no reason other than to annoy your opponent" is basically the exact definition of stalling
LieutenantCommanderData says: stalling is reportable because the in-game timer cannot police stalling adequately
LieutenantCommanderData says: just because you end the game with 1+ seconds remaining does not mean you didnt stall
[redacted] says: The definition says 'boring' not 'annoying'.
LieutenantCommanderData says: if that were true then stalling wouldnt be reportable
[redacted] says:
InevitableRed says: In what situation would stalling be reportable in your opinion [redacted]?
[redacted] says: If people time out without informing thier opponent as to why that would need to happen.
[redacted] says: Or disconnect without explanation.
[redacted] says: Stalling the result of the game.
InevitableRed says: I count that as throwing the match
[redacted] says: Yeah, that's true.
[redacted] says: I would use that as well.
[redacted] says: Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever reported someone for stalling.
Jimmyatemycat says: any time you deliberately dont take your turn your stalling
Jimmyatemycat says: the times are there for people who multitask so they cant play this game at work at ****
Jimmyatemycat says: not to ruin peoples day making this game take 10 times longer than it needs to
InevitableRed says: i think if you take a minute or a minute and a half to take your turn would be acceptable, but really, any longer and you're just being a prick
[redacted] says: Waiting because I know it will frustrate my opponent, that's strategy.
Jimmyatemycat says: well if you think stallings a strategy
[redacted] says: Why should I be forced to play at the rate my opponent wants me to play?
Jimmyatemycat says: thats your call
aceinthehole says: to take your full turn time on showroom showdown at the start is not acceptable as all you can do is ove
InevitableRed says: waiting 1.5 would be strategy, 2.49 is just being a total prick
Jimmyatemycat says: but i think thats a pretty sad way to try to win
Jimmyatemycat says: which is why its a reportable offence
InevitableRed says: and reportable in my opinion
[redacted] says: I'm not trying to win with that one move.
Jimmyatemycat says: your trying to win by stalling
[redacted] says: No.
Baldore says: stalling is reportable... thinking about your next move is not
InevitableRed says: it kind of sounds like it
Jimmyatemycat says: you stall so that your opponents dont want to play with you anymore
[redacted] says: I'm trying to win by thinking about my next move, and to frustrate my opponent.
[redacted] says: I don't want them to quit.
Jimmyatemycat says: no
Jimmyatemycat says: you already thought about your next move
Baldore says: yeah, no reason to rush into a bad decision
[redacted] says: I want them to play worse because they are frustrated.
Jimmyatemycat says: your stalling to make the game less enjoyable for your opponent
[redacted] says: How do you know that I have thought out my move.?
Jimmyatemycat says: you said
InevitableRed says: if stalling in itsself is reportable, and you are using stalling to help you win. you are in essence breaking the rules of the game
Jimmyatemycat says: you said you do it just to make the game less fun
Baldore says: playing fast can reveal a lot about your hand
Jimmyatemycat says: for your opponenets
Jimmyatemycat says: which is why
Jimmyatemycat says: its reportable
Baldore says: even if you don't have an option it's silly to pass right away
Baldore says: unless you're bluffing your opponent into thinking you have nothing to do
[redacted] says: Perhaps I get up from the computer every time my timer starts, walk around the room to think about my move, and then come back, review the move, and then make a final decision, and then move?
Baldore says: so 'using time' is part of the game
InevitableRed says: no one does that
Jimmyatemycat says: thats not what you said u do a second ago
Abbus says: stalling is only when you have no alternatives, and STILL keep doing nothing
[redacted] says: Maybe I don't do any of that.
Baldore says: Abbus is correct
InevitableRed says: I don't want to be that guy, but I have to disagree with you on this one [redacted]
Baldore says: a stall is OBVIOUS
[redacted] says: And I would agree with Abbus on that.
Abbus says: playing slowly is not stalling, unfurtunately
InevitableRed says: but if I don't know what is in your hand, how do i know if you have a strategy, or are just screwing around
Abbus says: if I have CARDS, I can think.
InevitableRed says: I don't, so unfortunately I will report anyone who tries that
cycosurgeon says: patience is a virtue
Abbus says: if I only have a revealed card, maybe useless, I MUST PASS
LieutenantCommanderData says: sure, playing slowly isnt necessarily stalling, unless, you know, you openly admit that you are stalling in world chat lol
[redacted] says: I don't understand why my opponent gets to dictate how long my move can take.
InevitableRed says: if you take a little extra time to strategize, that is okay
InevitableRed says: but 2.49 minutes every round, you are getting reported
LieutenantCommanderData says: we are saying take as long as you want if you are using the time to actually think
LieutenantCommanderData says: if you are just spending extra time to frustrate your opponent that is reportable
[redacted] says: And that's what I always do.

 

This is interesting, because I don't get frustrated by inactive opponents; I just go read the forums until I hear something happen. It's the fast opponents that rattle me, because it's like they're silently saying "hurry up hurry up hurryhurryhurry". And more importantly, fast opponents force me to watch my timer, because I'm the one in danger of timing out.

 

I think "letting your clock tick for the express purpose of annoying your opponent" is clearly stalling, but also hard to identify—you don't know whether your opponent is an honestly slow player or a troll. As players it is up to you to decide whether or not to give your opponents the benefit of the doubt in cases like these.

When you have good reason to believe your opponent is stalling—that is, intentionally slowing the game down through inaction—that's what the report button is for.

 

Hey, I'm [redacted]. And I should clarify that I was wrong in stating above that 'I do it all the time'. I should have stated that 'I'll do this when I know my opponent will play worse because of it.'

I don't do it every match. Only if I know/think it will help me win.
I don't sit for 149 seconds on every turn. The only time I would take 149 seconds is when I need 149 seconds to complete my move, which, contrary to popular belief, does occur at times.

In relation to my 'stalling' tactics, what I'll normally do, if (and only if) I know someone cannot stand 'slow play', is take 10-15 extra seconds each turn to review what I want to do. This is normally enough time for someone to start chatting away in game chat that I'm playing slow, that I'm taking too much time.

And at that point, they are not thinking about the game. They have exposed their weakness, and I've taken advantage of it. I see this no differently that my own (publicly known) weakness that I will play much more horribly in matches where there are a bunch of spectators. If you don't think people have asked other people to 'drop in' on my matches at times, you're fooling yourself. Happens multiple times each week.

But you know what? I don't blame anyone for taking advantage of it. You should take advantage of it. Until I learn to play past that weakness, I will always be a victim of it. It not anyone else's responsibility to cater their match to what I want.

That being said, if taking a little extra time each move to try to assure a win is against the rules, I suppose I'll stop. But that somewhat seems like sheltering players instead of teaching them they are not always going to get to determine the style of play when a match involves another person.

 

If you are spending the time thinking about your move, that is different from "letting your clock tick for the express purpose of annoying your opponent"

 

2 birds with 1 stone, I suppose.

 

I've been seeing a lot of 'discussion' about this. So let me just simplify it for everyone.

There's an amount of time programmed into the game given to each player to use as they see fit.
You cannot control how a player uses that time. Nor can the good folks at BM. Nor can a million world chat/forum complaints.

So you can complain about the length of that amount of time if you don't like it.
But you can not complain about what players are doing with their time. (I mean.. you can.. but no one has any control over it.. so what's the point?)

 

Then why is there a report option for stalling?

 

Some sore losers will turn their loss into 15 minutes of "still thinking". That's obvious and report worthy. Frustrating people for fun not so obvious.

But what about a momentary pause as a bluff.... is that considered playing? This is a card game after all.

 

It's for situations like this:

[random git] says: what ma i supposed to do with a hand full of heals
caniponu says: you choose them yourself
[random git] says: and for being a ***** have fun waiting 13 minutes for you win
caniponu says: have fun being reported

 

So it might be worth making a distinction, there's the goal within a game, and the goal of a game.

The goal within a game is to win. And therefore adopting unique strategies (within the rules) to achieve this goal seems entirely defensible.

However, the goal of a game - the goal of gaming in general - is to have fun, and this applies to all parties involved. Therefore whether or not an action is within the rules of the game, if it intentionally goes against the whole point of gaming in itself, it seems like it shouldn't be done. This isn't to say that every game has to end with both parties being happy; there are some players that will always get upset every time they lose, but such things are circumstantial to the actions of the winner, and their opponent's unhappiness was not the intent. However to expressly and intentionally kill the goal of a game for one or more parties involved in order to help acheive a goal within a game seems like a bad idea.

 

I could talk to this subject for a long time... I'll just say that if some upstart tells me to 'hurry up', unless they explain a good reason for me to do so, they're not doing themselves any favours.
Slightly different topic - I try to be polite in all of my games but there is one player who I think is a bit of a dbag and I'm quite happy to taunt because I know it frustrates him.
Another different topic - As a higher ranked player, there are a lot of times that people will lose the game before it has even begun. Often they will see my rank and quit early, or see my characters, assume I'm using a build they don't want to play against and auto-quit. Sometimes I'll over-play my hand, get a kill and leave myself in a bad position and they quit anyway. Or sometimes they're just intimidated and make silly mistakes. It's a weird game.

 

Very interesting topic, i see it more in a top tier context.
About time, Players are people and there are certain ones that evidently have a need to establish their pace, impose their rythm onto the match. That often comes with very straight forward builds that dettach from the very idea that a turn could require time to think. It's of upmost importance to not give in.
Personally i find pressuring far more desruptive for the flow then silence, the far more reportworthy offense. Someone "checking the connection" every 30 seconds for example. They get anxious when they can't deploy their routine and that is a problem on their end. The situation on the board is dynamic, so you dont forfeit your right to think only because you took your time last turn as well, even if the opponent passes, it is a new piece of information. All assuming you got a few options left, of course.
Gulo mentions something about weakening focus, and yeah, the chat would be another thing at ones disposal, though I pity the fool who thinks he can turn that box against me. I like the Goal-distinction from Scarp, its applicable to about everything up to the very game mechanics. Not everything that is build-in is in service of the game, its not fair game simply because its possible. I worry most about another ingame ressource that undergos an conversion "to beat an adversary". Reporting the winner after a loss. Depending on how much you play / win youre bound to accumulate a certain groundnoise of reports and i feel that should at least be weighted with the total number of games played.

 

Are you bound to? I have to think attitude goes a long way in preventing this. I know I don't play as much as some, but there have definitely been periods where I've won a lot; I've never once even reached "warning" status.

 

Yup, never received any notification myself that I'd been reported.

 

Not quite sure how reporting works but I presume it would go to a mod who would see that there's nothing to complain about in a fair win. On the other hand, I have reported @Robauke and it wasn't for winning

 

Let's not air our dirty laundry here folks, even if we think it's in good fun.

I'll just say this about the report system - one player in the history of Card Hunter has been banned unfairly due entirely to spurious reports against them when they were the highest-performing player. The ban was removed the second we became aware of what had happened. This is not an issue for the average Card Hunter player; it is not an issue for the above-average Card Hunter player; it is literally only an issue for the Card Hunter player who is one in a million.

 

Flaxative doesn't think Scarponi is one in a million.

 

That's cause he knows you're one in a billion
#Bromance #FlaxandScarpSittingInATree #JustCardHunterThings
EDIT: #DerailedThread

 

Wait so Lenbear just left? I thought they got banned?