Why are load times included in bg fight duration?

Phantomfire500

Or a better question I guess, why do Europeans on Samsung phones have to play with a 7 second penalty? What's wrong with using the actual fight duration?

Pikolu

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

Player_Slasher

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

Pikolu

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

Player_Slasher

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

Righto so I'm not familiar with some of the terms you used so correct me if I'm wrong, but basically you're saying someone could restart the game a bunch of times and thus make the match go on infinitely for both players? But what if we just put restarts out of the equation? So when your game crashes, or when you 'simulate a crash', it counts as an instant loss for you? A downside may be that you no longer get 'second chances' for screwed up fights, but I think it's more fair if everyone just has 1 chance and can't undo their mistakes by simply restarting.

And then we can simply grab the fight duration stat from the Victory Screen and use that for the calculations. Saving us Samsung folks from losing due to loading time. And I'm completely oblivious to tech stuff so idk if it works this way lol

Pikolu

Player_Slasher said:

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

Righto so I'm not familiar with some of the terms you used so correct me if I'm wrong, but basically you're saying someone could restart the game a bunch of times and thus make the match go on infinitely for both players? But what if we just put restarts out of the equation? So when your game crashes, or when you 'simulate a crash', it counts as an instant loss for you? A downside may be that you no longer get 'second chances' for screwed up fights, but I think it's more fair if everyone just has 1 chance and can't undo their mistakes by simply restarting.

And then we can simply grab the fight duration stat from the Victory Screen and use that for the calculations. Saving us Samsung folks from losing due to loading time. And I'm completely oblivious to tech stuff so idk if it works this way lol

You are correct with the infinite matchmaking.

The issue with a crash being an instant loss is when the game actually crashes (like when terrax just exists, Chavez sp1, knull sp1) there many things that can cause a crash to happen which is frustrating enough, but it would suck to lose a round just because knull used his sp1 and your game crashed. People are already upset enough by the disconnect bug causing an instant lose.

Phantomfire500

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

So have the clock itself be server sided (like it is now) but use the client's fight duration. 120 seconds max, it's just that you don't lose the loading time from your fight duration points.

Are you really going to say that you exploiting the game to redo your fight is a) fair and b) a feature that *shouldn't* be taken out? If you play the online game mode with a spotty connection, that's on you. Besides, if Terrax and Knull were going to crash you, it was probably a lost fight anyway.

odishika123

It's a 30 second penalty here...
If I am unlucky I start the fight with less than a minute

Pikolu

Phantomfire500 said:

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

So have the clock itself be server sided (like it is now) but use the client's fight duration. 120 seconds max, it's just that you don't lose the loading time from your fight duration points.

Are you really going to say that you exploiting the game to redo your fight is a) fair and b) a feature that *shouldn't* be taken out? If you play the online game mode with a spotty connection, that's on you. Besides, if Terrax and Knull were going to crash you, it was probably a lost fight anyway.

Connection has nothing to do with crashes. VFX heavy animations have the potential to crash many people's devices. It isn't 100% of the time it will crash.

Also having the server based clock with its 120 seconds but still using fight duration doesn't fix the restart exploit. If someone knows they can complete the fight in 30 seconds, then that is 2-3 restarts available to them while still getting full time bonus points.

Phantomfire500

Pikolu said:

Phantomfire500 said:

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

So have the clock itself be server sided (like it is now) but use the client's fight duration. 120 seconds max, it's just that you don't lose the loading time from your fight duration points.

Are you really going to say that you exploiting the game to redo your fight is a) fair and b) a feature that *shouldn't* be taken out? If you play the online game mode with a spotty connection, that's on you. Besides, if Terrax and Knull were going to crash you, it was probably a lost fight anyway.

Connection has nothing to do with crashes. VFX heavy animations have the potential to crash many people's devices. It isn't 100% of the time it will crash.

Also having the server based clock with its 120 seconds but still using fight duration doesn't fix the restart exploit. If someone knows they can complete the fight in 30 seconds, then that is 2-3 restarts available to them while still getting full time bonus points.

I'm saying count a crash as a round loss. If VFX heavy champs were going to crash you, you were probably going to lose anyway unless you're at a really low tier in BGS

Player_Slasher

Phantomfire500 said:

Pikolu said:

Phantomfire500 said:

Pikolu said:

Player_Slasher said:

Came here to ask the same thing. I'm on an older Samsung and consistently get 9-15 seconds added to my timer while the majority of my opponents get like 3-6 seconds max. It doesn't really affect most matches but can also be frustrating when you lose solely due to the added load times.

Pikolu said:

It would be exploitable and have to use the timer based off the client and not the server. As of right now, if the game crashes you can get back in with just the penalty of lost time, but if it was client-oriented timed, then crashes would have to equal an instant loss and it would be quite annoying to instant lose because your game decides to die because of terrax simply walking up to you.

If it didn't equal an instant loss then there would have to be some form of server based termination of the match which would cause uproar for people because the match ended when they had 5 seconds left.

The reason why you would need a server termination is due to the client just constantly "crashing" (closing) the game and getting back in thus restarting the match. People could have a script running to permanently lock people into BGs matches forcing them to quit.

Due to the issues that come from having a client-oriented timing system, kabam has instead opted for the far easier solution of having the server be in charge of the clock instead.

I don't think I've ever crashed in BGs since the initial beta. Is this common for other devices? My thoughts are that if I had to restart the game during a BG match, chances are I'm screwed anyways so I honestly wouldn't mind an instant loss lol.

If I do very bad the first 10 seconds of the match, I will close the game to simulate a crash because the health I would finish was worth the time loss. It is pretty fair at the moment because you lose 30 seconds for a free restart if you do very bad the first few seconds. Client-oriented connection would be easily exploitable and would cause more pain than what it is worth.

Could you imagine people who would have a smurf device that would purposefully throttle the device so loading the match takes forever and wastes the time of the other person?

Due to the issues and complexity of having the client be in control of the clock is why I think it is better even though you lose some time.

So have the clock itself be server sided (like it is now) but use the client's fight duration. 120 seconds max, it's just that you don't lose the loading time from your fight duration points.

Are you really going to say that you exploiting the game to redo your fight is a) fair and b) a feature that *shouldn't* be taken out? If you play the online game mode with a spotty connection, that's on you. Besides, if Terrax and Knull were going to crash you, it was probably a lost fight anyway.

Connection has nothing to do with crashes. VFX heavy animations have the potential to crash many people's devices. It isn't 100% of the time it will crash.

Also having the server based clock with its 120 seconds but still using fight duration doesn't fix the restart exploit. If someone knows they can complete the fight in 30 seconds, then that is 2-3 restarts available to them while still getting full time bonus points.

I'm saying count a crash as a round loss. If VFX heavy champs were going to crash you, you were probably going to lose anyway unless you're at a really low tier in BGS

I second that, giving everyone just 1 chance to do the fight seems more fair than being able to restart & redo anyways. Besides I'm on a pretty old Samsung with consistently slow load times and it still hasn't crashed once since the initial beta. So I don't see crashing as a big factor at all unless it's way more common on other devices.