Forfeit Game Rule

[Marquo]

I need some help while on the horns of a dilemma. I am playing a GC of M'41, yet my opponent has gone absent for almost 2 weeks. I only have so much playing time, and really like to get engaged in the games I am playing. I am thinking of starting another game, but if my opponent suddenly reappears, will have too much on my plate. Okay, here is the deal: I think that waiting 3 weeks without any notice from one's opponent before being allowed to declare the game over and being allowed to move on is too long. I propose that 1 week grace is enough; a 3 week wait is just too long for the average PzC addict. :hissy:

What sayeth the group?

Marquo

[Landser34]

I agree with you if somebody doesn't get back to you in two weeks without a word i think it should be quicker like you said i would vote with you on the one week rule there is no reason somebody cannot contact you in a week I'm playing a couple of games right now they go anywhere from 2 weeks to almost 3 before i hear from them i almost forget I'm playing them then they show up and i usually have about 10 games going on at anyone time

[Ricky B]

Agreed also, end it and move on if that fits your needs. Call it a victory too, if you want. I don't usually claim a victory unless a lot of time has already gone into the game - something like this at turn 5 or something I wouldn't do so, but if you put 20 or 30 turns into the Moscow campaign, report a victory, I think.

Rick

[von Nev]

I remember that somewhere there were new rules on reporting a victory from a forfeit. I believe you have to contact the ladder custodian with the date of the last communication and then the clock starts.

Marty

[Marquo]

The rules state that you must document 3 weeks of disappearance. This sucks rat crap. I mean, you can be deep into a CG, at the price of hours per move, late nights, cranky spouse, etc. while one's opponent simply disappears for 20 days and then nonchalantly responds. This is not tolerable; it can cause a 421 turn CG to never end. As a matter of fact, it makes it virtually impossible to ever lose. One could deliberately "slow down" to 20 days per move, which would cause the game to never end or cause one's opponent to become psychocidal.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:

[Sgt Fury]

[Mr Grumpy]

Unless your opponent has informed you in advance of a break in play, one week is long enough to wait IMO, just in case of ISP problems i would post on the forum as well.

If the game is reported and then your opponent comes back with a good reason for his absence, then the result should be deleted and you carry on.

I would always mail my opponent that i am going to do this and keep copies of my mails.

In Marque's case i would try to come to an agreement to end the game with this opponent, he is not worth the game time.

[Dave68124]

Shouldn't the size of the scenario you are playing come into effect here. Hell, I am playing a F40 CG and it takes a good 2+ hours to get through a single turn. Throw work, family and real life on top of it and the usual turn around time is about 2 weeks between Al and me.

Seems to me (and as previously mentioned), these are after all GAMES, and if you set out on a 421 turn monster, you should probably expect a few delays during the 2+ years you are playing it.

If you cannot take care of expectations in a couple of emails, then move on and stop with the petty gripes. There are plenty of opponents out there.

[TET2]

Marquo,

I tend to side with Fury on this one. As it now stands 3 wks is the current rule which you are obliged to honor, although I can sympathize with your frustration. On the other hand I believe that 1 wk is simply too short an interval as 'life' can easily disrupt ones gaming availability.

As a common courtesy one would think it possible that you could notify your opponent if you will not be able to respond to a game in progress due to some event that causes you to miss your gaming time.

A compromise could well be 2 wks if the rule was to be modified...no?

Tobias

[Marquo]

Several points:

1. We all know that these are just games, yet we all have much different real life situautions. Some people have much time to play, and others (me) have to budget very sparingly.

2. Whatever else, we agree to abide by the rules of the club so we can pursue our mutual interest together.

3. I have absolutely no issue or qualm with my opponent; he has not violated any club rule.

4. I am railing against the rule itself which I think allows for protracted unexplained absences which can detract from the flow of the game.

5. I check the availability rating of my opponents before accepting a match; I think it is up to all of us to keep our profile/demographics current - that is why they are there.

6. I really think that 2 weeks is acceptable - I only suggested 1 so we could consider a compromise on 2 weeks, instead of three.

Marquo