Hey CardHunter Dev Team, I was curious what the purpose of the Timeout Feature is. At first, I thought it was purely to allow people to progress from an AFK opponent, but I had a long game where I lost due to timeout. I tend to take long turns as I try to calculate spacing for my units and my opponents. The way it is currently implemented, it would appear that it is also rewarding players who play fast and punishing players who play slow. Is this intentional? Also, I didn't know until the timer was counting down from 5 seconds that I was running out of time. Some warning at 5 minutes or so Would have been...helpful Thanks for your time and an amazing game, Fare
It was put in place to prevent battles dragging on forever. As you never run out of cards, this is a possibility in PvP.
Also, I would argue that twenty minutes (per player) is not "playing fast." You might be used to calm calculation in single-player, but in multiplayer your opponent is there waiting for you: speeding up a little is polite, and really is "playing normal" for this case. Consider: there are six victory points. 40 minutes total to play, at most, 11 rounds seems unusual for a social game.
@Skip_Intro: your comment reminded me of how chess has clocks. So I looked a little into it. @Sir Knight: A couple of points I wouldn't consider "Ranked play" a "social game" in Card Hunter. I can see it being very competitive and could be compared to chess (like my previous comment) on some level. Depending on playstyles, I can definitely see how 2 players could have an especially long match if they are both jockeying for position. With movement, line of sight, different ranges for moves a lot of consideration needs to be made. I also don't see how playing faster or slower is considered polite or being rude. Playing slower, like in my case, is just detrimental to winning a match (which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It is simply a rule). -Fare
Well, I'm not sure if comparing the playing times to chess is that useful since the games aren't that similar anyway. In chess you know all the moves both sides can make at all times and you can mentally calculate the game several turns in advance. In Card Hunter you don't know what cards you'll be drawing the next turn, nor the cards the opponent has drawn this turn, so the amount of precalculation needed (and possible) is a lot more limited. And since it's very rare that you can kill a character with one hit, each particular move doesn't have quite the same level of importance as in chess... Besides, if I played chess and took only 15 seconds to consider each move, I'd be guaranteed to lose. In Card Hunter I'd probably have similar results whether I'd take 15 seconds or 2 minutes for each move.
It seems like a matter of perspectives here, or backgrounds, or somesuch. To the first point: oh yes, very competitive! I just didn't have a good phrase at hand when I was typing, so I said "social game" to emphasize how we're talking about people and their psychology. But to both points: it sounds like you are more comfortable and familiar with chess-style play than . . . whatever style of game I was trying to reference. When you say "I don't see how playing slower is rude," that makes perfect sense in chess: while you take several minutes to move, your opponent calmly thinks many many (many MANY) moves ahead. However, in other situations, you're not supposed to take minutes per turn: you're making someone wait. Just think about whatever social situation you know where "making someone wait" is rude, and realize that folks feel that way about many games, too. Which isn't to say that "you don't think many moves ahead in Card Hunter"--I don't dissuade strategic thinking at all! But the time taken up is different. Here's another angle: The developers have struggled mightily to speed up this game. Some old quotes, including these from when they had nothing more than the single-player Greenfang demo available: And then we get to multiplayer. Quotes from when the "chess clock" was first introduced: Thus, yes, they're open to adjusting the time if need be. But notice how some players are interested in a stunning 15-second limit. I don't even know if that was "per turn": it might have been "total." This is how some people think. Should they think that way? Well, obviously, it's different for different games. If we players had the choice to set the clock limit ourselves (or eliminate it entirely), I assure you I'd be glad to play with you on those terms. Just so long as you understand other people feel differently.
Wow, I didn't realize there was such a desire to keep the games short. There's one line there that I really clung to: Farbs said: ↑ 20 minutes per player, so up to 40 minutes total. We've been playing with 10 minutes per player, which is fun but probably too short for new players. We'll keep futzing with it, especially through beta. New players. Not only new players, but any time you are dealing with a new card/strategy. I used to play CCGs competitively and when you very familiar with the game, you don't even have to read cards anymore. When you hear the name or see the pretty picture you know exactly what it does and how it impacts the game. However, if you see a card you have never used before, not only do you have to read and understand the card, but you need to try and figure out how it will impact the game. This also happens in a situation where you see a strategy you have never seen before; it becomes much harder to anticipate the next move. I am sure as I become more familiar with the game, my play will become faster as I will not only be more familiar with each of the cards, but I will get a better feel of what the player is going to do and I wont require as much time to anticipate their moves. There is another point, however. I feel that there are a few ui elements of the game that are hard for me to see. I have a color blindness (deuteranopia) and when the elements have a color scheme that is very similar, they blend. But this is another forum topic So now that we have established that we want the game to be faster and that I am too slow, I'm curious if anyone else would like to see any other reminders. Unless I didn't catch it, but I didn't notice that I was anywhere close to the end of time until it started ticking down around 10 seconds. I, myself, would like to have a audible and visual indication that time has elapsed. A flashing of the clock and a chime at intervals of 5 would go a long way I think. As long as it's not too distracting....Or maybe I should just remember to watch the clock -Fare
Yes, I can see a measurable "slowdown" when I'm against a new person in multiplayer and he or she sees an unfamiliar card. The designers encourage this, in fact, with the "click to continue" pop-up with card details (when you've never seen it played before). For this sort of concern, Blue Manchu's challenge is to give players adequate learning time to absorb the complex details of the game, and then set time limits based on . . . well, a "bell curve," really. Covering what MOST situations are likely to demand. After enough learning from single-player, and learning versus AI in the first multiplayer rounds, they only need to accommodate a small amount of "new card slowdown" for general matches. And the vision scientist in me assures you that deuteranopia is a color "deficiency," not a color "blindness"! Few people are completely colorblind. And the fact that there are multiple possible variations in color vision makes UI design pretty tricky: this is why some art programs have filters to show artists how their work might look for different eyes. I can't recall if Blue Manchu has discussed this before, but I'm sure they could use your feedback. For the clock, well, I forget about it myself. I thought there was some sort of warning when you hit 5 minutes left. If that's not true, then I wonder how many times I've come precariously close to losing. I'm sure all of us would be well-served by reminders.
