Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Why would you become TFG just because there is a clock on the table? Why would a clock turn good people into bad faith players? I'm seeing a lot of people saying that they will do everything they can to get rid of clocks. Why? I understand if you feel that clocks aren't necessary but to actively subvert a rule is beyond my understanding.

I'll use them in good faith. However, you can bet I'll be slapping that timer the split-second I have to wait for my opponent's actions for anything at all, every save, every tape measurement, every time he asks a question about my list, ev-er-y-thing.

As long as you are doing it at the correct times according to the clock rules you are actually playing it right. Looks like the clock would already be hurrying you up..... so working as intended?

Asmodios wrote:
As long as you are doing it at the correct times according to the clock rules you are actually playing it right. Looks like the clock would already be hurrying you up..... so working as intended?

I tend not to get hit by time limits anyways, at least at the last few tournaments. We'll see with the new list, it has a few more models to move. I would definitely make the use of the clock an exercise in pedantry though, for sure.

 Marmatag wrote:
I don't feel i'm owed more time. Both players are owed equal opportunity. That's all.

I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time.

I can unnecessarily force you to use your time. This will be fairly easy.

This encourages bad faith play between otherwise good people. Currently I make an effort to play as fast as humanly possible, and already skip a fair bit of rolling, or allow my opponent to skip theirs.

And if you guys think time is spent in the movement phase, you're crazy. Even with 150+ models this is an incredibly short phase for me.

I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time
>I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time
I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time
>I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time
I just don't feel a clock will adequately represent who is using more time

yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

Per the ITC rules:
Any major rule dispute results in a paused time scenario. The time is to remain paused until a formal judge is called to the table and resolves the dispute.

There are no specific rules for 40K. There are the ITC optional rules for using a clock. Those rules do not say how to handle minor disputes. I would say that if your opponent keeps starting disputes call a TO. Otherwise be an adult about it and play like you normally would.

I really don't see the need for people to look for a way to cause trouble. If you're worried about it then call the TO. If you run into one of these people then it's not the clock that's the problem.

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

The person's whose time is is, unless the other person calls the judge first, in that case as they called the judge the time should be shipped to them.

When a judge arrives he pauses the clock.

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

read the ITC rules.... people have already pointed out this is not an issue. Not to mention you could easily add a rule for any hypothetical you come up with. Meanwhile, with no clock and no rules, it is impossible to say exactly where slow play starts and end and what is reasonable and what is not.

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

Reemule wrote:
The person's whose time is is, unless the other person calls the judge first, in that case as they called the judge the time should be shipped to them.

When a judge arrives he pauses the clock.

That's circular logic. "If there's a LOS dispute the person whose time it is is the person whose time it is." How exactly do you determine whose time it is for purposes of determining whose clock should run for LOS checks? You can't do it by whose turn it is because whose clock is running and whose turn it is are two entirely separate things, and your clock often runs on your opponent's turn. Are you honestly arguing for a situation where I can demand a LOS check in the middle of you rolling your saves (with your clock running) to run additional time off your clock?

And no, a judge is not the answer. If a judge can come in and rule "this is slow play" then they can make that same ruling without the clock. Clocks only add anything if they allow you to remove the judge.

PS: if you think having to spend clock time to call a judge is a good idea, well, welcome to spending all of your clock time calling for judges when I make outrageous rules claims and force you to burn clock time disproving them (or just let me get away with having guardsmen that hit on a 2+).

 Peregrine wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The person's whose time is is, unless the other person calls the judge first, in that case as they called the judge the time should be shipped to them.

When a judge arrives he pauses the clock.

That's circular logic. "If there's a LOS dispute the person whose time it is is the person whose time it is." How exactly do you determine whose time it is for purposes of determining whose clock should run for LOS checks? You can't do it by whose turn it is because whose clock is running and whose turn it is are two entirely separate things, and your clock often runs on your opponent's turn. Are you honestly arguing for a situation where I can demand a LOS check in the middle of you rolling your saves (with your clock running) to run additional time off your clock?

He is saying that whoever challenges the LoS is the person who's time is run while waiting for the judge (assuming you don't play the ITC way which is to pause the time all together while the judge makes his decision).

 Marmatag wrote:
Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

Exactly. And you can be sure that I'm going to make you count those dice very carefully, and question your count at every step of the process.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
He is saying that whoever challenges the LoS is the person who's time is run while waiting for the judge

Ok, great. My unit has LOS through this solid wall. Would you like to let my units shoot through walls, or would you like to burn clock time to argue about LOS? Keep in mind that I'm going to argue very stubbornly, and should be able to waste at least a few minutes of your clock time on each LOS check.

(assuming you don't play the ITC way which is to pause the time all together while the judge makes his decision).

Awesome. So if I need more time to think about a decision I can just create a minor rules dispute and call a judge, giving me plenty of time to think it over while I wait for the judge to finish whatever they're doing and come give a ruling. Too bad the clock is now pointless, as having non-trivial amounts of time where neither clock is running means that setting a total of X minutes on the two clocks no longer ensures that your round will finish in X minutes. At that point why bother with the clocks?

 Peregrine wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The person's whose time is is, unless the other person calls the judge first, in that case as they called the judge the time should be shipped to them.

When a judge arrives he pauses the clock.

That's circular logic. "If there's a LOS dispute the person whose time it is is the person whose time it is." How exactly do you determine whose time it is for purposes of determining whose clock should run for LOS checks? You can't do it by whose turn it is because whose clock is running and whose turn it is are two entirely separate things, and your clock often runs on your opponent's turn. Are you honestly arguing for a situation where I can demand a LOS check in the middle of you rolling your saves (with your clock running) to run additional time off your clock?

And no, a judge is not the answer. If a judge can come in and rule "this is slow play" then they can make that same ruling without the clock. Clocks only add anything if they allow you to remove the judge.

PS: if you think having to spend clock time to call a judge is a good idea, well, welcome to spending all of your clock time calling for judges when I make outrageous rules claims and force you to burn clock time disproving them (or just let me get away with having guardsmen that hit on a 2+).

Once again read the ITC rules. If there is a dispute you stop the clock completely and call over a TO if this happens repeatedly "it becomes obvious someone is clearly arguing something over and over just to get the clock to stop" they will send a TO over to your table to keep an eye on or punish someone appropriately.

Once again nobody is saying that its impossible to mess with a clock system but it makes it incredibly hard to abuse and give TO an exact time log and rule sheat to go off of.

Once again please answer my question of if you don't have a clock.

1. How much time does each player get
2. when exactly does someone begin slow playing vs simply being diligent
3. What qualifies an army to get more time
4. What percentage more models do you need to receive more time
5. do codexes with more rules get more time
the list is literally never-ending because every answer to every question is subjective and changes based on somebody's personal feelings about the fairness of time allotted. The clock solves this by saying "each player gets exactly half the time and here are a list of rules".

Fair enough, I'm not arguing with you. Just clarifying the post you were questioning. Ultimately I'm smart to enough to avoiding a discussion where one side has no interested in having its ideas challenged.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

So your argument is that you are breaking the rules by asking someone to follow the official rules? I can never say "hey I'm shooting a lot of stuff at your guardsmen please remove them even though I haven't rolled"

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
I just feel this a knee jerk reaction by FLG to the fiasco that was the LVO 40k finals this year.

There were more games than just the finals that had issues. I saw more than a few during my games (though thankfully didn't experience it myself).

But those two were really really bad. And do you think a clock would have really made a difference in those games you saw? If they would ban that would clean up everything really fast.

Asmodios wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

So your argument is that you are breaking the rules by asking someone to follow the official rules? I can never say "hey I'm shooting a lot of stuff at your guardsmen please remove them even though I haven't rolled"

When you declare your shots in this manner, only That Guy wouldn't pull the model. Clocks encourage That Guy behavior in this specific scenario. I pull models all the time in tournaments, and people do the same for me.

And you'll notice i never said breaking the rules. Stop arguing in bad faith.

Asmodios wrote:
Once again read the ITC rules. If there is a dispute you stop the clock completely and call over a TO if this happens repeatedly "it becomes obvious someone is clearly arguing something over and over just to get the clock to stop" they will send a TO over to your table to keep an eye on or punish someone appropriately.

IOW, "when our system breaks we'll just issue the arbitrary judge ruling we could have issued without the extra hassle of the clock system".

The clock solves this by saying "each player gets exactly half the time and here are a list of rules".

It doesn't solve anything at all, because you're addressing a point I'm not making. I am in full agreement with the idea that, if your TO is stupid enough to have a 3000 point tournament with 30 minute rounds, each player should have 15 minutes of that time. My objection to clocks is that they are functionally broken in 40k. If the clock system is "working" it is only because neither player is trying to be TFG, and the clock system is redundant. But when TFG appears the clock system adds nothing. You still have to make arbitrary judge rulings based on subjective ideas about what is "too much", and if you can make the required rulings to keep TFG from abusing the clock system you can just make those rulings without the clocks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:
So your argument is that you are breaking the rules by asking someone to follow the official rules? I can never say "hey I'm shooting a lot of stuff at your guardsmen please remove them even though I haven't rolled"

That single guardsman has "win the lottery" level odds of surviving in that situation. There is zero purpose in actually rolling the dice, other than wasting clock time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
Fair enough, I'm not arguing with you. Just clarifying the post you were questioning. Ultimately I'm smart to enough to avoiding a discussion where one side has no interested in having its ideas challenged.

Do not confuse "not interested in having their ideas challenged" with "not impressed with the poor quality of the attempted challenges".

 Marmatag wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
yup you got me there how could a clock possibly show who is using more time

We've already explained this, over and over again. A clock doesn't show who is using more time because "who is using time" is a poorly defined concept in 40k. For example, which player's clock should be running if there's a dispute over whether or not a unit has LOS?

Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

So your argument is that you are breaking the rules by asking someone to follow the official rules? I can never say "hey I'm shooting a lot of stuff at your guardsmen please remove them even though I haven't rolled"

When you declare your shots in this manner, only That Guy wouldn't pull the model. Clocks encourage That Guy behavior in this specific scenario. I pull models all the time in tournaments, and people do the same for me.

Not at all if im playing a tournament i want to roll every dice and not because im TFG but because i want to play to the actual outcome. Ive played enough years to watch statistically improbable things happen. A couple weeks ago i made something like 8 straight 5 up saves on a guardsman and he ended up giving me the one 1 victory point i won by so yes im going to ask you to roll out your wounds on me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Once again read the ITC rules. If there is a dispute you stop the clock completely and call over a TO if this happens repeatedly "it becomes obvious someone is clearly arguing something over and over just to get the clock to stop" they will send a TO over to your table to keep an eye on or punish someone appropriately.

IOW, "when our system breaks we'll just issue the arbitrary judge ruling we could have issued without the extra hassle of the clock system".

The clock solves this by saying "each player gets exactly half the time and here are a list of rules".

It doesn't solve anything at all, because you're addressing a point I'm not making. I am in full agreement with the idea that, if your TO is stupid enough to have a 3000 point tournament with 30 minute rounds, each player should have 15 minutes of that time. My objection to clocks is that they are functionally broken in 40k. If the clock system is "working" it is only because neither player is trying to be TFG, and the clock system is redundant. But when TFG appears the clock system adds nothing. You still have to make arbitrary judge rulings based on subjective ideas about what is "too much", and if you can make the required rulings to keep TFG from abusing the clock system you can just make those rulings without the clocks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:
So your argument is that you are breaking the rules by asking someone to follow the official rules? I can never say "hey I'm shooting a lot of stuff at your guardsmen please remove them even though I haven't rolled"

That single guardsman has "win the lottery" level odds of surviving in that situation. There is zero purpose in actually rolling the dice, other than wasting clock time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
Fair enough, I'm not arguing with you. Just clarifying the post you were questioning. Ultimately I'm smart to enough to avoiding a discussion where one side has no interested in having its ideas challenged.

Do not confuse "not interested in having their ideas challenged" with "not impressed with the poor quality of the attempted challenges".

1. Yes the only time a TO is supposed to be called is when something cannot be solved within the normal rule book or a rule needs to be inforced by someone with a position of power. That is their role now and will continue to be their role
2.Yes, the clock system does solve the issue because now there is a set of rules you can hold up show a TO and he either broke them or didn't. He also now is using half the time or he is not. The clock gives the player a tool to show a TO when TFG trys to game the system while also removing one of the easiest ways of gaming it now which is to simply waste time.

50 Termagant devourer shots versus 1 living Guardsmen.

Each shot as a ~20% chance to kill him.

The odds of him surviving 50 shots are roughly 1/50,000.

The scenario you illustrated is about 2000 times more likely. The fact that you think they're comparable? Come on.

And this is why clocks wouldn't work. The majority of time spent in games is spent on dice rolling, not movement. Thank you for proving why clocks wouldn't work, and would encourage TFG behavior. I will make you waste 5 minutes on attempting to kill that Guardsmen when it is already a foregone conclusion.

For reference a comparable number of saves is ~27. Taking 27 saves on your 5+ guardsmen and getting all 5s and 6s is comparably likely.

(4/6)^x = 1/50000 => x = - ln(50000)/ln(4/6); x=26.68

Asmodios wrote:
Not at all if im playing a tournament i want to roll every dice and not because im TFG but because i want to play to the actual outcome. Ive played enough years to watch statistically improbable things happen. A couple weeks ago i made something like 8 straight 5 up saves on a guardsman and he ended up giving me the one 1 victory point i won by so yes im going to ask you to roll out your wounds on me.

You have a 0.01% chance of a guardsmen surviving 50 lasgun shots from other guardsmen, and that's the best-case scenario. Against 50 space marine bolter shots it's less than .0001%, so small a number that the probability calculator I'm using considers it too small to calculate. IOW, the chances of that guardsman surviving the space marine attack are less than your chances of being murdered by a gun this year (assuming the US flag by your name is accurate). There is zero purpose to rolling those dice besides wasting time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:
1. Yes the only time a TO is supposed to be called is when something cannot be solved within the normal rule book or a rule needs to be inforced by someone with a position of power. That is their role now and will continue to be their role

Oh, ok, so as long as it's a problem we can't solve with the normal rulebook we don't call a judge?

2.Yes, the clock system does solve the issue because now there is a set of rules you can hold up show a TO and he either broke them or didn't. He also now is using half the time or he is not. The clock gives the player a tool to show a TO when TFG trys to game the system while also removing one of the easiest ways of gaming it now which is to simply waste time.

Except it doesn't do that at all. Clock defenders keep giving answers of "the judge makes a subjective ruling based on their opinion of the situation" to various clock problems I mention. If the TO has to make a subjective ruling about what is "too much" then you don't have a set of rules that give an objective answer, you have a pretense of objectivity that lets you convince yourself that the ruling in your favor was something more than the TO's personal opinion.

 Marmatag wrote:
50 Termagant devourer shots versus 1 living Guardsmen.

Each shot as a ~20% chance to kill him.

The odds of him surviving 50 shots are roughly 1/50,000.

The scenario you illustrated is about 2000 times more likely. The fact that you think they're comparable? Come on.

And this is why clocks wouldn't work. The majority of time spent in games is spent on dice rolling, not movement. Thank you for proving why clocks wouldn't work, and would encourage TFG behavior.

Once again you cannot fault a player for wanting to roll dice in a dice game. If you watch the ITC stream they also encourage you to use the GW official dice app if you need to save time. But i have never said to someone "hey statistically your x unit should die please remove them from the table before i roll". If they want to remove their own model that is fine but i fully expect to roll every shot im taking every game and its on me to make sure i have the time to do that. You expecting people to simply take off what models you tell them to is laughable and is some of the worst TFG behavior I've ever heard of

Dice apps? Just play a computer game. There's a formal e-sports arena for this kind of thing already.

40k is a game that functions on good faith gameplay. Auditing everything your opponent does is beyond difficult if they're acting in bad faith.

And WTF seriously, you're telling me if i force you to roll 30 saves on your 1 guardsmen, you're going to take the time to roll all 30? Give me a BREAK

 Peregrine wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Not at all if im playing a tournament i want to roll every dice and not because im TFG but because i want to play to the actual outcome. Ive played enough years to watch statistically improbable things happen. A couple weeks ago i made something like 8 straight 5 up saves on a guardsman and he ended up giving me the one 1 victory point i won by so yes im going to ask you to roll out your wounds on me.

You have a 0.01% chance of a guardsmen surviving 50 lasgun shots from other guardsmen, and that's the best-case scenario. Against 50 space marine bolter shots it's less than .0001%, so small a number that the probability calculator I'm using considers it too small to calculate. IOW, the chances of that guardsman surviving the space marine attack are less than your chances of being murdered by a gun this year (assuming the US flag by your name is accurate). There is zero purpose to rolling those dice besides wasting time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asmodios wrote:
1. Yes the only time a TO is supposed to be called is when something cannot be solved within the normal rule book or a rule needs to be inforced by someone with a position of power. That is their role now and will continue to be their role

Oh, ok, so as long as it's a problem we can't solve with the normal rulebook we don't call a judge?

2.Yes, the clock system does solve the issue because now there is a set of rules you can hold up show a TO and he either broke them or didn't. He also now is using half the time or he is not. The clock gives the player a tool to show a TO when TFG trys to game the system while also removing one of the easiest ways of gaming it now which is to simply waste time.

Except it doesn't do that at all. Clock defenders keep giving answers of "the judge makes a subjective ruling based on their opinion of the situation" to various clock problems I mention. If the TO has to make a subjective ruling about what is "too much" then you don't have a set of rules that give an objective answer, you have a pretense of objectivity that lets you convince yourself that the ruling in your favor was something more than the TO's personal opinion.

the TO is never making a subjective call about the time? the clock shows the exact time. You call over the judge if the person is not following the correct rules for the time. Calling a TO is allowed and within the rules. If the TO (only subjective thing that goes into this and does not involve the actual amount of time played) feels you are calling a TO too often then he will watch the game to make sure you simply aren't saying "hur dur my unit can see you through that wall (your example)" just to stop the clock and go past the allotted amount of time in the rules. See with the clock the issue of TFG is being taken care of during the game so the player being abused has a course of action. The previous system had no course of action except filling out a complaint form after you already lost the game and your chance at winning the tournament.

I think most players would like the cheater to get caught cheating in the act instead of making it to the next roud of the tournament because of their actions

 Marmatag wrote:
Dice apps? Just play a computer game. There's a formal e-sports arena for this kind of thing already.

40k is a game that functions on good faith gameplay. Auditing everything your opponent does is beyond difficult if they're acting in bad faith.

I much prefer dice, but if my 30 devilgaunts rerolling 1s are firing on a 5 man Scout squad for some God-forsaken reason, I wouldn't mind using a dice app to save everyone a lot of time.

 Marmatag wrote:
Dice apps? Just play a computer game. There's a formal e-sports arena for this kind of thing already.

40k is a game that functions on good faith gameplay. Auditing everything your opponent does is beyond difficult if they're acting in bad faith.

And WTF seriously, you're telling me if i force you to roll 30 saves on your 1 guardsmen, you're going to take the time to roll all 30? Give me a BREAK

Yeah i would just roll groups of 5 till i fail should take about 2 seconds.

And hold on your now complaining about someone using a dice app to save time but have no issues telling your opponents what models they should remove before rolling? Its like ever post you find a new way to be TFG you are the exact person in a tournament that's the reason we need things like chess clocks. looking for every opportunity to f over your opponent and are the reason we need a strict set of rules and cant go on good faith alone

 meleti wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Dice apps? Just play a computer game. There's a formal e-sports arena for this kind of thing already.

40k is a game that functions on good faith gameplay. Auditing everything your opponent does is beyond difficult if they're acting in bad faith.

I much prefer dice, but if my 30 devilgaunts rerolling 1s are firing on a 5 man Scout squad for some God-forsaken reason, I wouldn't mind using a dice app to save everyone a lot of time.

Or just ask your opponent if he wants you to roll. Most people are reasonable and would say "no, that's okay, i'll just pull them." I've played with a lot of competitive players over a lot of tournaments just this year. The good players will just pull the models, because time is more valuable than rolling meaningless dice. Which is why chess clocks won't work. They give you a way to force someone to spend time when it is meaningless to do so.

 Marmatag wrote:

 meleti wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Dice apps? Just play a computer game. There's a formal e-sports arena for this kind of thing already.

40k is a game that functions on good faith gameplay. Auditing everything your opponent does is beyond difficult if they're acting in bad faith.

I much prefer dice, but if my 30 devilgaunts rerolling 1s are firing on a 5 man Scout squad for some God-forsaken reason, I wouldn't mind using a dice app to save everyone a lot of time.

Or just ask your opponent if he wants you to roll. Most people are reasonable and would say "no, that's okay, i'll just pull them." I've played with a lot of competitive players over a lot of tournaments just this year. The good players will just pull the models, because time is more valuable than rolling meaningless dice. Which is why chess clocks won't work. They give you a way to force someone to spend time when it is meaningless to do so.

Yeah pulling them is also an option, but I'd feel weird doing that in a competitive game with a timer because you're definitely supposed to roll to hit/wound/save so you're actually giving someone an unfair advantage there, time-wise. Whereas if dice apps are permissible, that's a fast method that doesn't actually provide an unfair advantage (again, assuming the TOs allow them). Just something to think about.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Or, if you shoot 50 shots into 1 remaining guardsmen. Yes he will die. But you are within your rights to make someone follow the proper sequencing and roll his hits, and then roll his wounds, and only then roll saves. You can waste time by playing strictly within the rules.

Exactly. And you can be sure that I'm going to make you count those dice very carefully, and question your count at every step of the process.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
He is saying that whoever challenges the LoS is the person who's time is run while waiting for the judge

Ok, great. My unit has LOS through this solid wall. Would you like to let my units shoot through walls, or would you like to burn clock time to argue about LOS? Keep in mind that I'm going to argue very stubbornly, and should be able to waste at least a few minutes of your clock time on each LOS check.

(assuming you don't play the ITC way which is to pause the time all together while the judge makes his decision).

Awesome. So if I need more time to think about a decision I can just create a minor rules dispute and call a judge, giving me plenty of time to think it over while I wait for the judge to finish whatever they're doing and come give a ruling. Too bad the clock is now pointless, as having non-trivial amounts of time where neither clock is running means that setting a total of X minutes on the two clocks no longer ensures that your round will finish in X minutes. At that point why bother with the clocks?

So, your hatred for clocks makes you become TFG in such an obvious way that the judge is going to slap you silly with the rulebook before DQ'ing you and throwing you out of the event.

I'm sure no one will miss you.

 meleti wrote:

I'd feel weird doing that in a competitive game with a timer because you're definitely supposed to roll to hit/wound/save so you're actually giving someone an unfair advantage there, time-wise.

This is just one reason why I don't want chess clocks. Friendly play becomes a bad decision.

The irony is things like this speed the game up, so we get through *more* turns.

Asmodios wrote:
The previous system had no course of action except filling out a complaint form after you already lost the game and your chance at winning the tournament.

And here's where your whole argument falls apart. In a tournament with a reasonable pairing of point limit and round time the level of slow play required to end the game significantly early is going to be very obvious to everyone involved, and if your opponent starts doing it you call a judge over immediately. Either your opponent starts playing at a reasonable pace and you finish the game, or they are penalized for slow play. That's how MTG handles slow play, you don't wait until after the tournament to resolve it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ordana wrote:
So, your hatred for clocks makes you become TFG in such an obvious way that the judge is going to slap you silly with the rulebook before DQ'ing you and throwing you out of the event.

I'm sure no one will miss you.

Nice rule #1 violation there. You do understand that these are statements made from the hypothetical TFG's point of view, using the general 'I' and 'you', right? That they aren't actions I personally intend to do (mostly because I will probably never attend an event with chess clocks)?

And yes, TFG would get DQed in that situation. But they could already be DQed for being TFG without the clock system.