Allow arena games to finish even if going overtime

WindowsEnthusiast

Arena games that do not finish before the end of the arena should be allowed to continue. Games like this one are a prime example of why. This is the precedent followed in (gridiron) football: a play that is in progress at the expiration of a half is allowed to go to its conclusion. Another reason is that players are essentially wasting their time on such games whose results won't matter at all, as the abort option is not present. It isn't always obvious if they can finish one more game before the end so merely advising players to not start games late in the arena is not workable.

NickjWebster

Agreed! Very frustrating when your opponent is lost and chooses to wait out the Arena clock instead of finishing.

Martin_Stahl
WindowsEnthusiast wrote:

Arena games that do not finish before the end of the arena should be allowed to continue. Games like this one are a prime example of why. This is the precedent followed in (gridiron) football: a play that is in progress at the expiration of a half is allowed to go to its conclusion. Another reason is that players are essentially wasting their time on such games whose results won't matter at all, as the abort option is not present. It isn't always obvious if they can finish one more game before the end so merely advising players to not start games late in the arena is not workable.

 

So, everyone would have to wait for results until all games to complete where a placement is still possible? Depending on the time control that could have people waiting a while, especially for games that start close to the event end.

WindowsEnthusiast
Martin_Stahl wrote:
WindowsEnthusiast wrote:

Arena games that do not finish before the end of the arena should be allowed to continue. Games like this one are a prime example of why. This is the precedent followed in (gridiron) football: a play that is in progress at the expiration of a half is allowed to go to its conclusion. Another reason is that players are essentially wasting their time on such games whose results won't matter at all, as the abort option is not present. It isn't always obvious if they can finish one more game before the end so merely advising players to not start games late in the arena is not workable.

 

So, everyone would have to wait for results until all games to complete where a placement is still possible? Depending on the time control that could have people waiting a while, especially for games that start close to the event end.

Yes. Ordinarily, this time is much less than the arena length (or else the arena basically degenerates into a randomly-paired tournament) so it shouldn't be that long. Exceptions can be made for 24-hour or other insanely long arenas.

Martin_Stahl

Well, a 3 minute blitz arena could be 6 minutes longer. In the greater scheme of things that isn't very long but most people probably won't want to wait in the event to find out the results. 

 

Though, maybe I'm wrong surprise.png

jdcannon

We argued about this a lot when we designed arenas. I argued to let people finish them. But now that I've played in a few 100 arenas I now think it makes sense to cut them off. 

 

One advantage I like about it is if there is very little time left, I can play super risky to try to get a win without fear of losing because the game will probably abort anyway. 

WindowsEnthusiast
jdcannon wrote:

We argued about this a lot when we designed arenas. I argued to let people finish them. But now that I've played in a few 100 arenas I now think it makes sense to cut them off. 

 

One advantage I like about it is if there is very little time left, I can play super risky to try to get a win without fear of losing because the game will probably abort anyway. 

In effect, it makes the arena shorter by making the last portion of the arena basically useless for point gaining; if you want to be risky, that's what unrated games are for I thought.

Also, I think this should only be implemented for relatively short time controls, 3 minutes or less I'd say, or the wait indeed becomes too long. Moderators would also have to check for those who habitually time out on those games because it could be seen as stalling everyone else's results.

jdcannon

Let's assume you finish your last game just as the arena ends and someone else started their game 10 seconds before the end. let's also assume its a 10|0 arena. You might potentially have to sit there and wait 20 minutes to see the final results. Nobody wants to do that. 

WindowsEnthusiast
jdcannon wrote:

Let's assume you finish your last game just as the arena ends and someone else started their game 10 seconds before the end. let's also assume its a 10|0 arena. You might potentially have to sit there and wait 20 minutes to see the final results. Nobody wants to do that. 

which is why I suggest this only for short time controls like bullet.

jdh1

I definitely understand both sides of this argument, but I think there is room for compromise too. I think the best agreement would be to finish all arena games, but games completed after the end of the time limit do not count for scoring. That way, players can still finish their games, but others don't have to wait for the games to finish.