another 2 hour time limit rant

[sorri]

I still consider myself new to the game (I've been playing for about a year), and I only really ever get a chance to play in tournaments. I don't think any of my opponents would say that I play slowly, but I do find myself getting hit against the 2 hour time limit (with WH), especially when I play against a horde army. I do have to say that I'm still getting faster every game, all the tourneys I play in have 2 hour limits, and I still got completely through either 5 or 6 of my games within time at BoLSCon.

Personally, I think the shorter time helps to make sure you prep ahead of time, know your rules, start learning rules for other codexes, and really just become a better overall player. I'd say that the 2 hour time limits should be kept.

[mathhammer]

I knew coming into the tournament that the 2hr time limit was going to cause me some issues since a I play a bit slow and I have a fairly large horde army. (72 tyranids).

One thing I did was to keep track of the time of each turn to try to force myself to move faster. While I completed some of my games I didn't finish them all. (Which hurts my army more than my opponents army funnily enough)

I support the 2 hour time limit.
Personally between now and next year I plan on working on decreasing my time usage.

on a side note though in a tournament you may be required to measure every movement which limits how much time you can shave off your turns.

[Duke]

It's not just you guys that need to be considered when you're talking about the time between rounds. Those of us doing the scoring and the pairings need time to get everything settled and put in and generated properly. That should not be rushed.

I started with 2 hour tournaments. I've never had more time than that, and I've never needed it. I learned to play fast. I learned how to work with the time from the onset, so it makes a huge difference as far as what I feel like I'm capable of doing.

I completly agree, I have found that I actually like time limits. There are a few reasons: Like iin official chess games it isn't the best player who wins, but the player who can think the clearest in the fastest time (Which is like real war). If this means some people make 'dumb,' mistakes... Oh well. Also, I can tell my wife exactley what time I will be done... Which means I get to come back next time! yay!

I would say that the only downside to time limits is you don't get to know your opponenet as well, but that can still be achieved in the 'after game'

Duke

[karandras]

I guess I will talk to local organizers and see if we can't try out the 2 hour time limit in the near future. Local tournaments generally have used the 2.5 hour "round" to include terrain placement, deployment, and the game itself. Maybe we move slower in the deep south. I guess if terrain was fixed by the organizer ahead of time, this could help save some time. JWOLF, I will hope to see you at BoLScon next year!

Question: what is an "OP"??? Was this a negative comment aimed at me, or does it simply mean other player or other poster??? I am new to forums so I am not familiar with all of the cyber-slang! LOL!

[Foreigner]

I guess I will talk to local organizers and see if we can't try out the 2 hour time limit in the near future. Local tournaments generally have used the 2.5 hour "round" to include terrain placement, deployment, and the game itself. Maybe we move slower in the deep south. I guess if terrain was fixed by the organizer ahead of time, this could help save some time. JWOLF, I will hope to see you at BoLScon next year!

Question: what is an "OP"??? Was this a negative comment aimed at me, or does it simply mean other player or other poster??? I am new to forums so I am not familiar with all of the cyber-slang! LOL!

OP means original poster. Nothing negative in any way.

At BolsCon terrain was generally in place and did not require moving, as well as the rules for every piece of terrain were covered in the rules packet, so there was no arguing about how to play certain pieces.

The 2-hour time limit therefore involved deployment and game play. Thats it.

Missions were pre-set, terrain defined, so it was basically just a roll off for first turn / table sides then put the models down and go.

[RealGenius]

we still barely completed 3 turns in 2 hours. Granted it was 2500 points and he was slow as syrup, but still.

I recommend playing more games with 2 hour time limits. It just takes practice, like everything else.

Plus if you are including setting up and discussing terrain in the 2.5 hours, then there's really not that much difference between what you are used to and BoLSCon.

As a point of information, locally the first round of Ard Boyz-- almost all the 2500 point games finished in under two hours. I think over 90%, but I don't have the exact numbers.

Playing quickly is a good skill to have. It is easy to play slower if you have time and want a slower pace, but if you are used to a slow pace it is almost impossible to speed up without practice. While I was adjusting to 2 hour games I put a timer on my table in plain view so I could keep myself on track during my turn.

[Bulwark]

One of the things that also let BOLSCon run smoothly at 2 hours was that the rounds generally started on time. Having a 2.5 hour game that startes 15 or 20 minutes late isn;t really saving you any time.

[Jwolf]

A few comments:

2K in 2 Hours will be one of the things you can expect at BoLSCon; if enough players registered for BoLSCon next year respond to a survey given at ~ the 6 weeks out point with 'Yes, I want to play games with long time limits' I may add another track with fewer games and longer time limits. Note that I am not promising to do so; I am just being open to considering it.

30 minutes is a tight timeframe to process and verify results and get the next round up. Reducing the time between rounds is essentally impossible - we had rounds with score sheets still not in 15 minutes after dice down, and almost every round required discussion with one or more pairs of participants to deal with scoring issues. Year two should see at least twice as many participants, which means that we should expect to have similar issues.

[mkerr]

So I would vote yes, 2.5 hours please (I dont need 30 minutes between games honestly, drop it to 15 or 20 minutes besides lunch if you need to save time).

30 minutes is the absolute shortest time we can have betwen rounds. Every delay that we had starting a round (we slipped at least 15-20 minutes each day) was caused by difficulty getting the pairings done in 30 minutes.

I'm sure that we'll do a better job of that next year, but I'm also hoping to have double the players next year...

30 minutes is a tight timeframe to process and verify results and get the next round up. Reducing the time between rounds is essentally impossible - we had rounds with score sheets still not in 15 minutes after dice down, and almost every round required discussion with one or more pairs of participants to deal with scoring issues.

I think a better system of getting results back early is worth discussing, including judges actiively collecting and helping players get their results back (accurately), a bonus point for each player who turns in his results (filled out accurately) before time is called, etc.

Getting all of the results back within 10 minutes of a round ending would be awesome.

-- mkerr

[mathhammer]

, a bonus point for each player who turns in his results (filled out accurately) before time is called,
-- mkerr

hate that idea. I know I had games that went to the wire with one dice roll at the end to decide it. Causing us to end early, you might as well say that the rounds are 1 hour 50 minutes and 10 minutes to have the results in.

and yes I support the 2 hour game limit.