I think it’s too long.
How do you find the game timer?
- Far too long.
- Slightly too long.
- Good.
- Slightly too short.
- Far too short.
What timer features would you like?
- Time bank
- Shorter early turns (or longer later turns)
- Turn-time affected by game state (number of cards, creatures, etc)
- None of the above
I wonder if a fancy complex mechanism might work - something like:
- Initial 30s per turn.
- 10s per turn added to time bank (timer changes color when using time bank).
- 2s per old card in your hand.
- 5s per new card in your hand (draws and card-creation extend this).
- 5s per friendly creature/structure on the board (creature placement doesn’t extend this).
- 2s per opponent creature/structure on the board.
- Every missing point of god life under 5 gives 3s.
- Maximum of 70s before time bank.
- Maximum of 105s when using time bank.
- Pay 1 faeria to get extra 30s max 3x per game and 1x per turn (extends maximum).
4 Likes
Well, time is just another type of resource in this game, as it is in many other games. Of course, at the very first turn of the game, you can just wastefully press the “end turn” button. But you can use your time to plan for later turns, analyze opponent’s mulligan (or first turn, if you’re playing second), potential threats and answers for them, too. There’s nothing wrong with people who decide to use their resources instead of wasting them.
1 Like
I don’t think it’s too long because one minute is sometimes too short for me but I can understand some players may feel that way.
I was thinking just use tournament time control, 9 or 10 minutes per side, with +15 or 20 seconds per turn when normal time runs out, like blitz in chess. Maybe maximum one minute per move.
I like some ideas in your fancy time control, but feels the last few points a bit too difficult to understand or play with.
But there’s no info there that you can’t reasonably be prepared for. If you’re playing a random person then you should be ready to react to their draw. If you know your opponent you should still be prepared to act whatever their draw is. How much planning do you really need to do?
(And IMHO card swaps shouldn’t be visible - it just makes RNG worse because not only did you get a bad draw but your opponent knows it. I will admit I don’t actually know how to tell - I’m deliberately avoiding checking).
There aren’t really any unique threats on the first turn (unless the opponent’s done something really weird). So prior practice should be all you need.
After the first turn or two I can understand there can be need for prolonged thinking.
[quote=“PlasmaRager, post:2, topic:6764”]
Well, time is just another type of resource in this game
[/quote]If you can bank it you can make the game go faster and add some extra strategy to the game.
[quote=“xploring, post:3, topic:6764”]I like some ideas in your fancy time control, but feels the last few points a bit too difficult to understand or play with[/quote]Yeah, I wasn’t sure if it was too complex. I was thinking that you don’t really need to understand it though, as long as you’re told how much time you have left.
The big downside is just that it’s so boring waiting, and you could get through more games if they were quicker.
Perhaps if people could indicate their timer preference, and if both players want a fast game they get one.
Is one of those Maximum supposed to be minimum? I couldn’t get my head around what you mean. 
That last one can be quite a difficult decision at times. 
Ultimately, the question is do you want a faster game or one with less mistakes… I guess the better players can manage with less time but I don’t want my game ruined by misplays in time pressure, even though I misplay regularly now too. 
Would be great if we can have two different time controls but the player base probably doesn’t allow for that at the moment.
Sorry, it wasn’t very clear.
So all your game-state time bonuses (cards, creatures etc) cannot give you more than 70s of “free” time. Beyond that you’re burning banked time. But no matter how much banked time you have your turn cannot exceed 105s.
[quote=“xploring, post:5, topic:6764”]
Ultimately, the question is do you want a faster game or one with less mistakes
[/quote]I guess I want faster - more mistakes would be nice 
Pretty sure I’ll be in the minority on that, though.
[quote=“xploring, post:5, topic:6764”]
Would be great if we can have two different time controls but the player base probably doesn’t allow for that at the moment
[/quote]I wasn’t thinking of changing the matchmaking pool / mechanism. Only once a match is made are the preferences checked, and it’s only a fast game if both players select it. So the player base shouldn’t matter.
1 Like
Thanks for these questions! The time limit seems good to me, as I very seldom feel short of time. And I voted “none of the above”, as the developers have limited time, and there are features that are higher priority than the time bank (such as a greater selection of default emotes, or more advanced sorting options in the collection/crafting tab)
As I’ve already mentioned in “Mulligan improvement” thread, different archetypes of decks require different behavior during mulligan stage of the game. Of course, once the game is started, you can’t change deck or your own mulligan decisions, but you can play your cards and use power wheel differently.
If you are familiar with Hearthstone, just imagine how differently you would play against zoolock and renolock, and how easy it is to guess which one you’re facing if you actually pay attention to how many cards you oopponent has discarded. Of course, in Hearthstone you already have a huge chunk of data about your opponent’s nature even before mulligan stage - I’m talking about the class. But if you’re playing second in Faeria, usually even at the first turn you know at least one color your opponent is playing (situations when you can see more are pretty hypothetical and include Earthcraft). And in relatively stall meta it’s not that hard to guess what decklists your opponent is most likely to run for that color.
If. Probably I wasn’t very clear (English isn’t my native language, after all), but I was referring to the current state of the game. And in the current state you can’t save time like you save faeria. I’ve voted for “time bank” option, though. It would be good to have some simple system like Fischer clock from chess. “You get X seconds at the beginning of the game, and recieve additional Y seconds at the beginning of the each turn (where Y can be a function of a board state, if you really need that additional complexity). If the time runs up, your turn ends. If you finish your turn before all the time is spent, all unspent time can be used later in the game”. In this case you can actually save time from relatively easy turns (which can happen both in the beginning and at the end of the game) for tougher ones. I don’t think hard cap for maximum length of the turn is really necessary in this case, though.
I suppose player base is still pretty small to divide it further and make queueing time longer. But probably some “blitz” format can be introduced when there will be more players interested in it.
[quote=“PlasmaRager, post:8, topic:6764”]
As I’ve already mentioned in “Mulligan improvement” thread, different archetypes of decks require different behavior during mulligan stage of the game
[/quote]I kinda get there is something to think about. But it’s very simple compared to the rest of the game. You have (relative to other turns) very little information to process and very few choices to make, even if they are big ones like “do I start aggressive”. I’ll say there is quite a bit of personal preference to this debate, though (and I’m losing 
). I just like rapid adrenaline board games - I always liked playing 5s chess and similar things.
This is mainly just to avoid deliberate anonymous abuse and leave/disconnect annoyance. If you’re really pissed at the turn of events near the end of a long game and you’re a bad then you might just walk away leaving the other player waiting for 5 minutes.
[quote=“PlasmaRager, post:8, topic:6764”]
I suppose player base is still pretty small to divide it further and make queueing time longer
[/quote]Not sure if you got my explanation. My idea would have zero effect on queuing and wouldn’t divide the base - it’s still just one big player pool - not sure if you were referring to that, though.
Happy to see this post @Xaxazak Seeing community members take the initiative and creating discussion within the forums is one of the things I hope to continue to see more of.
Pretty sure I’ll be in the minority on that, though.
). I just like rapid adrenaline board games - I always liked playing 5s chess and similar things.
