Add 1.75/1.5/1.25 min turn time and...

Add 105, 90 and 75 sec turn time. 60 is just too short to give orders too all of your units and 120 give you too much time to make allways good moves.
So 105/75/90 sec will be just perfect for the small maps!

edit:
Such an update can be done by the devs in less than 10 minutes and it dont affect the playstyle of the other games.
So there is no real point against such a feature.

and btw.:
Add a option to kick player when you are in the creation screen!

I think they really need to make it so that these settings are flexible.

For example:

• Why can you choose 12 players but not 13?
  
• Why can you choose 5 minutes and 12 minutes but not 10?
  
• Why can you choose 50 week join but not 60?
  

When you get to a higher rank,you will realise that you need much more time to make your move.

Általa írva KYBL, 30.04.2012 at 19:03

When you get to a higher rank,you will realise that you need much more time to make your move.

Exactly.
Which is why I never play games where the turn duration is less than 3 mins.

Általa írva Gking19, 30.04.2012 at 20:27

Általa írva KYBL, 30.04.2012 at 19:03

When you get to a higher rank,you will realise that you need much more time to make your move.

Exactly.
Which is why I never play games where the turn duration is less than 3 mins.

For some ppl it is just hard to think outside of their own box, especially for the so called "pro" one's.

You don't play games under 3min turn time, cause you a higher rank (=pro?). Is this exactly?!
LMAO

I will just correct this sentence for you:
You don't play games under 3min turn time, cause you are a higher rank a perfectionist and/or very slow player.
If you don't got enough time to think about the best possible move you dont have fun playing afterwind or any board games.


Ever heard of games like "Speed Chess"?
Alot of High ELO players(=pros) are playing it. It has nothing to do with the normal chess.
You only have few time to make a decision.
It is fun cause the chance to make small or fatal mistakes are higher. And the Chance that the enemy will see it is lower too.

A 1min game has nothing to do with the normal games you play!
You must be fast and you or your enemy dont got enough time to read all of their opponents next moves.
Of course if you start wasting your time to create infantry frontlines around your captials you will loose. lol
It is a rly fast-paced game you take over cities very fast and you can loose them very fast.
(An Advice for such games: You have to disable alliances or it make no sense)
If you compare this game with some shooters it is more like a Deathmatch (for ex.HLDM) instead of a tatical shooter (CS)


I just played such a game (3000credits; 1min turn; No Alliances, Europe+ map, 5 players) yesterday with
some "high ranks" together and everyone said after it was finished "gg" or "very nice gg".
The game was over after 50min and only two players was left in the last 15 rounds.
Some of the defeated players stayed as spectators for 15min cause it was so exicting and rly fast.
But 1min was in this late game a little to less time for such a duell, so the highest sp won the game.
75sec would have given one of them enough time to mobilize some extra attack forces to take over the enemy captial


If you dont like such games, its okay! You dont have to play them.
But dont call it a "useless update".
75, 90 or 105 sec instead of 60 or 120 is percental a rly high difference and is changing such games alot.
Instead of giving player 100%!!! more time (60 -> 120 sec) you can just give them 25% (60 ->75 sec).
For example: If i can give 20 orders to my troops in just 60 sec i will have 25/30/35 or 40 moves dependening on the turn time.
5 moves more can decide about a victory or loose but it still will be a fast game.
But 40 moves is no longer a fast game compared to the 20 moves!

Such an update can be done by the devs in less than 10 minutes and it dont affect the playstyle of the other games.
It is ridicoulus and arrogant that you really are against such a change!!!!

Általa írva Crom, 01.05.2012 at 05:19

Such an update can be done by the devs in less than 10 minutes and it dont affect the playstyle of the other games.
It is ridicoulus and arrogant that you really are against such a change!!!!

you are right. such a change is no work for the developers and if people wish that, then i also support this.

Általa írva Crom, 01.05.2012 at 05:19

Általa írva Gking19, 30.04.2012 at 20:27

Általa írva KYBL, 30.04.2012 at 19:03

When you get to a higher rank,you will realise that you need much more time to make your move.

Exactly.
Which is why I never play games where the turn duration is less than 3 mins.

For some ppl it is just hard to think outside of their own box, especially for the so called "pro" one's.

You don't play games under 3min turn time, cause you a higher rank (=pro?). Is this exactly?!
LMAO

I will just correct this sentence for you:
You don't play games under 3min turn time, cause you are a higher rank a perfectionist and/or very slow player.
If you don't got enough time to think about the best possible move you dont have fun playing afterwind or any board games.


Ever heard of games like "Speed Chess"?
Alot of High ELO players(=pros) are playing it. It has nothing to do with the normal chess.
You only have few time to make a decision.
It is fun cause the chance to make small or fatal mistakes are higher. And the Chance that the enemy will see it is lower too.

A 1min game has nothing to do with the normal games you play!
You must be fast and you or your enemy dont got enough time to read all of their opponents next moves.
Of course if you start wasting your time to create infantry frontlines around your captials you will loose. lol
It is a rly fast-paced game you take over cities very fast and you can loose them very fast.
(An Advice for such games: You have to disable alliances or it make no sense)
If you compare this game with some shooters it is more like a Deathmatch (for ex.HLDM) instead of a tatical shooter (CS)


I just played such a game (3000credits; 1min turn; No Alliances, Europe+ map, 5 players) yesterday with
some "high ranks" together and everyone said after it was finished "gg" or "very nice gg".
The game was over after 50min and only two players was left in the last 15 rounds.
Some of the defeated players stayed as spectators for 15min cause it was so exicting and rly fast.
But 1min was in this late game a little to less time for such a duell, so the highest sp won the game.
75sec would have given one of them enough time to mobilize some extra attack forces to take over the enemy captial


If you dont like such games, its okay! You dont have to play them.
But dont call it a "useless update".
75, 90 or 105 sec instead of 60 or 120 is percental a rly high difference and is changing such games alot.
Instead of giving player 100%!!! more time (60 -> 120 sec) you can just give them 25% (60 ->75 sec).
For example: If i can give 20 orders to my troops in just 60 sec i will have 25/30/35 or 40 moves dependening on the turn time.
5 moves more can decide about a victory or loose but it still will be a fast game.
But 40 moves is no longer a fast game compared to the 20 moves!

Such an update can be done by the devs in less than 10 minutes and it dont affect the playstyle of the other games.
It is ridicoulus and arrogant that you really are against such a change!!!!

Let's answer this with a list.
1. I don't play under 3 min games because I need the time. Not because I think I'm better, hell, I lose more games than I win. Look at my records and you'll see. I just plain need time if I want to do any good at all.
2. What does chess have to do with this? (Although I love the game. )
3. I say gg after every game that I play through to the end, whether I win or lose, so I don't know where you're going with that.
4. I never said I was "against" it per se. If they were to go through with adding this, I wouldn't go ranting about it. I'm just saying, Amok has better things to do than add different time settings, like adding updates that will get more people to play. I HIGHLY doubt time changes would do that.

Let's please keep it on topic and stay polite in this thread. Example: if your post is "Wait, seriously" then just don't post at all please.

I remember reading in an article that the developers were upset that the most selected turn time was 2 mins, suggesting that they felt this was not enough time to implement true strategic play. Personally I think this is true, to get the best experience out of the game you need to take your time. To me there is nothing more satisfying than following through a well thought out plan and I dont enjoy the 'shootout' style of game. I mean this is why I play Afterwind, for the Strategy not the SP or Wins. However they also said that the average person doesn't have 2 hours + to dedicate to each and every game. If it becomes the norm for 1 min turns to become the most selected time then I think the game will be totally against what the developers set out to create. Saying that if the majority do enjoy 'Shootout' style games then so be it, only if the majority support this then it should be put into the game.

Általa írva Guest14502, 01.05.2012 at 10:47

Let's please keep it on topic and stay polite in this thread. Example: if your post is "Wait, seriously" then just don't post at all please.

Sorry. :u
I just think that this idea would be a waste of Amok's time.

Általa írva b0nker2, 01.05.2012 at 11:37

I remember reading in an article that the developers were upset that the most selected turn time was 2 mins, suggesting that they felt this was not enough time to implement true strategic play. Personally I think this is true, to get the best experience out of the game you need to take your time. To me there is nothing more satisfying than following through a well thought out plan and I dont enjoy the 'shootout' style of game. I mean this is why I play Afterwind, for the Strategy not the SP or Wins. However they also said that the average person doesn't have 2 hours + to dedicate to each and every game. If it becomes the norm for 1 min turns to become the most selected time then I think the game will be totally against what the developers set out to create. Saying that if the majority do enjoy 'Shootout' style games then so be it, only if the majority support this then it should be put into the game.

Exactly. This game wasn't meant for fast-paced action. It's meant for you to think out your turns.

Általa írva Gking19, 01.05.2012 at 19:28

Általa írva Guest14502, 01.05.2012 at 10:47

Let's please keep it on topic and stay polite in this thread. Example: if your post is "Wait, seriously" then just don't post at all please.

Sorry. :u
I just think that this idea would be a waste of Amok's time.

A total waste of time, yeah sure... adding 3 more lines to the script code!
and btw:
Are you sure you arent against this feature? I know you said something different, but you seem to be wasting alot of your free time in this topic just to give allways contras against this feature.
So i dont believe that you arent against it.

Általa írva Gking19, 01.05.2012 at 19:29

Általa írva b0nker2, 01.05.2012 at 11:37

I remember reading in an article that the developers were upset that the most selected turn time was 2 mins, suggesting that they felt this was not enough time to implement true strategic play. Personally I think this is true, to get the best experience out of the game you need to take your time. To me there is nothing more satisfying than following through a well thought out plan and I dont enjoy the 'shootout' style of game. I mean this is why I play Afterwind, for the Strategy not the SP or Wins. However they also said that the average person doesn't have 2 hours + to dedicate to each and every game. If it becomes the norm for 1 min turns to become the most selected time then I think the game will be totally against what the developers set out to create. Saying that if the majority do enjoy 'Shootout' style games then so be it, only if the majority support this then it should be put into the game.

Exactly. This game wasn't meant for fast-paced action. It's meant for you to think out your turns.

This make absolute no sense! I want to have more time than 1 min roundtime! And 1 min is already a game feature. So adding more time options above it (and dont below it) is nothing that should "upset" the dev. It give you more time to think!
About the tatic in normal and fast pased games:
In a fast pased game you need more technique and tatics than in the normal ones cause not the player with the biggest income is winning the game. You only can mobilize a limited number of units and you have to do a good use of them. if you waste 40% of your attack force or time you will loose. so you have to know where are the weakpoints of the enemy and which guys you should attack first. The timefactor is just adding another tatic option: "What will the enemy attack next with his limited moves? Me or a other enemy? If he is attacking a other one i can fully concentrate on attacking him, if he is attack me i should spend some of my time in recruting defense uints."
And i dont see where the big tatic is hidden in a slow game cause capturing as fast as possible so many neutral countries as you can and creating thick infantry frontlines is not a complex tatic. It is a routine!

Btw:
Not the devs are playing this game the player are playing it. That is something that every sucessfull gamecreator have to realise.

Idézet:

A total waste of time, yeah sure... adding 3 more lines to the script code!
and btw:
Are you sure you arent against this feature? I know you said something different, but you seem to be wasting alot of your free time in this topic just to give allways contras against this feature.
So i dont believe that you arent against it.

Obviously you don't know anything about coding if you think that this'd take only 3 lines.

Idézet:

This make absolute no sense! I want to have more time than 1 min roundtime! And 1 min is already a game feature. So adding more time options above it (and dont below it) is nothing that should "upset" the dev. It give you more time to think!

-.-
I'll say this one last time. If you want more time from a 1 minute game, play a 2 minute game.

Idézet:

Not the devs are playing this game the player are playing it. That is something that every sucessfull gamecreator have to realise.

Ok. But should they really add an update it seems only 3 out of 91000 people want?

Általa írva Gking19, 02.05.2012 at 08:30

Idézet:

A total waste of time, yeah sure... adding 3 more lines to the script code!
and btw:
Are you sure you arent against this feature? I know you said something different, but you seem to be wasting alot of your free time in this topic just to give allways contras against this feature.
So i dont believe that you arent against it.

Obviously you don't know anything about coding if you think that this'd take only 3 lines.

Idézet:

This make absolute no sense! I want to have more time than 1 min roundtime! And 1 min is already a game feature. So adding more time options above it (and dont below it) is nothing that should "upset" the dev. It give you more time to think!

-.-
I'll say this one last time. If you want more time from a 1 minute game, play a 2 minute game.

Idézet:

Not the devs are playing this game the player are playing it. That is something that every sucessfull gamecreator have to realise.

Ok. But should they really add an update it seems only 3 out of 91000 people want?

1. I know something about coding and the 3 lines was just an example to explain that you wont need much time for adding this feature! And even if i dont know something about coding... Whats the matter?! Does this proof that it is a waste of time?! i dont think so! So your comment about my coding skill didnt proof anything. It is dispensable like your first post in this topic.

2. 2min is too much time, did you ever read any of my post?! This argument is only to 90% dispensable cause on bigger maps 2min could turn the game in fast pased game too but i want to play this on every map.

3. 3 out of 91000 player?! And you are criticising me for saying 3 script lines??! did you counted all the active afterwind players and asked them if they want this feature or not?! Actually 2 are supporting this idea, 1 is against it (you) and the rest of the posters (4) are more or less neutral.
so its 2/7 (feature+) vs 1/7 (feature-). If you calculate this up at your 91000 it is 26k/91k vs 13k/91k sooo... another dispensable comment from you again.

4. And I'll say this one a last time too. Dont act like your are judging this impartial. it is obvious that you are against this feature (Only god knows why).

btw:
Happy Birthday

Általa írva Crom, 02.05.2012 at 12:02

Általa írva Gking19, 02.05.2012 at 08:30

Idézet:

A total waste of time, yeah sure... adding 3 more lines to the script code!
and btw:
Are you sure you arent against this feature? I know you said something different, but you seem to be wasting alot of your free time in this topic just to give allways contras against this feature.
So i dont believe that you arent against it.

Obviously you don't know anything about coding if you think that this'd take only 3 lines.

Idézet:

This make absolute no sense! I want to have more time than 1 min roundtime! And 1 min is already a game feature. So adding more time options above it (and dont below it) is nothing that should "upset" the dev. It give you more time to think!

-.-
I'll say this one last time. If you want more time from a 1 minute game, play a 2 minute game.

Idézet:

Not the devs are playing this game the player are playing it. That is something that every sucessfull gamecreator have to realise.

Ok. But should they really add an update it seems only 3 out of 91000 people want?

1. I know something about coding and the 3 lines was just an example to explain that you wont need much time for adding this feature! And even if i dont know something about coding... Whats the matter?! Does this proof that it is a waste of time?! i dont think so! So your comment about my coding skill didnt proof anything. It is dispensable like your first post in this topic.

2. 2min is too much time, did you ever read any of my post?! This argument is only to 90% dispensable cause on bigger maps 2min could turn the game in fast pased game too but i want to play this on every map.

3. 3 out of 91000 player?! And you are criticising me for saying 3 script lines??! did you counted all the active afterwind players and asked them if they want this feature or not?! Actually 2 are supporting this idea, 1 is against it (you) and the rest of the posters (4) are more or less neutral.
so its 2/7 (feature+) vs 1/7 (feature-). If you calculate this up at your 91000 it is 26k/91k vs 13k/91k sooo... another dispensable comment from you again.

4. And I'll say this one a last time too. Dont act like your are judging this impartial. it is obvious that you are against this feature (Only god knows why).

btw:
Happy Birthday

Thank you!

1. Ok, I admit that was a pointless statement.
2. What?
3. I'm going off of who posted on this thread, and who looks like they support it.
4. I'm against it because I don't see it as a needed or useful update.

A comment from the devs would be nice

You do realize there's only one programmer, not 10, to go around looking at suggestions right?

Általa írva Gking19, 09.05.2012 at 19:09

You do realize there's only one programmer, not 10, to go around looking at suggestions right?

Actually theres 2 not 1

Well Amok is the main programmer, Ivan does the designing, but yeah technically they're both programmers.

Általa írva Deray YG, 09.05.2012 at 22:05

Általa írva Gking19, 09.05.2012 at 19:09

You do realize there's only one programmer, not 10, to go around looking at suggestions right?

Actually theres 2 not 1

Amok = Game Programmer
Ivan = Website Coder (Pretty sure he can work on the game a lil, Amok can work on the site a lil).

If we had 10 devs there would be an update every week and everyone would play forever.

If I knew more about programming with silverlight I'd honestly go and volunteer to program.

When I end up managing empires larger than a continent, I need a lot of time to wall up my recently captured cities and attack the next batch of cities. That's why I often do 4 min turns when I create large map games. Even in small maps, walling is strongly recommended, thus at least 2 min turns are needed for Europe/Europe+ games. Any amount of time under 2 min just won't cut it. This is not chess (make 1 move per turn). No, this is Afterwind, where it can vary from 0 to 100+ moves per turn.

I think what the creator is getting at is that there's more strategy involved when there's less time, so you really have to think where do I put my units. But still, I'd say if you want that just do a 1 minute game.