Game turns

I seem to recall a post from Richard a few months back informing us the turns we're going to be turned around quicker. Am I right in thinking the turn time is still the same? Cannot notice it any quicker.

quicker by one week is what I am finding with Games 8 & 10 (though the last turns were impacted with Richard being on holiday).

Turn 8 return date was Tuesday 27th September - Received next turn, today, 13th October.
12 working days.

Since email submission I have always submitted my turn the day before the due date. If received earlier by Richard do we know that we will get it back any faster?

Quicker may not be the word. Few days earlier at the moment, for g9.

See my post on the game 8 thread. waiting on a turn that will be than 40 days... if it arrives monday.

Seems turn processing is still very slow. We've had a few faster ones, but most have been in the 33 day range. Don't know why. Maybe it's that the games are big and healthy and are taking more time to manage.

Maybe something going on with Richard.

Wish he'd give his players more regular updates on what's going on with AGEMA in general.

As a player I find this pace frustrating.

I must admit, like Deacon, I am finding the current pace of games extremely frustrating. We do seem to be running the game turns in real life, or slower, and when so many activities in-game can take a year (building sewers, building a fortress, building a large war junk) it does take the fun out of the game.

If this is a 'temporary' thing and turns will speed up soon then that's ok but it does seem to have been a long time since turns were running at the right speed. I am getting bored and am considering dropping games

It may well be that part of the problem also lies partly with us the players, correct me if I am wrong but there are currently 4 LAOK games running, Scrabble, Swashbuckler & a Sci Fi Game? If we all look at our LAOK turns then they are probably at least 10-30+ pages long, if not more, plus I suspect many of us put in at least 5+ Orders a turn maybe more, some with an open ended turn fee, so Richard feels an obligation to get as many turn orders done as possible.

I have also noticed over the years that the general complexity of the game has increased, once again to the general acclaim of the players. Now there are at least half a dozen supplements which I doubt Richard knows off by heart, so there is possibly a bit of page turning on his part for every turn as well.

Richard is no doubt attempting to give us all value for money as he has always done.Maybe if we all just put in one side of A4 of orders then it would help him to get over the backlog that has undoubtedly built up. Or limit cap the turn fee for a few turns at say 15 pounds for extra orders.( I admit as I write this that some players will say that they spend less than this anyway & others will say that the large position they play is untenable on such a reduced fee)

Suspect if we ever do get down to a 2 week turn around again, people would start complaining that they don't have enough time to do turns, or that not enough orders are being processed so there is probably a grey area in between that is the comfort zone for turn returns.

Like Jason & Deacon I to find the wait an inconvenience, but maybe we can all try & do a bit to help ourselves to help Richard & move the whole thing forward in a direction that benefits us all.

"If we all look at our LAOK turns then they are probably at least 10-30+ pages long, if not more"

Could I ask for a bit of explanation on this, please?

Do you mean you send in 10+ pages of orders each turn

Or,

You receive, each turn, 10+ pages of information regarding your playing position?



Its one thing that has always challenged me when sending in turn orders. How many is too many? I know some (other companies') games give a specific number of orders that can be made each turn, but those games are more formulaic in their order construction and game mechanics so allowing for such. Whereas its the freedom to be creative that makes Agema games what they are.

Another one is how many newspaper articles is too many per turn? Obviously they take time to format and edit into the newspapers, but the game is all the more richer for long newspaper reports each turn and I'd loathe to only receive thin edition newspapers.

Its all a bit Catch22.

###

I have to admit that the slow turnaround has (and is) shaped my decisions of late.

I love playing Rozwi, so want to keep that up for as long as possible. Swashbuckler is a bit of a two-year experiment, which I'm not that serious about. I couldn't get my head around Scramble, so dropped the game. I would really like to play an Indian (Gujerat probably) position in TGOK - I was going to in game 8, but opted to try Swashbuckler instead. I'm also interested in the Knights of Malta, and a smaller German state for a bit of 'Imagi-Nation' building. Obviously I can't do everything on that list, as I'd sicken myself for the game, but I'd certainly like to try my hand at a smaller Indian state before the end [next year will mark my 20th year since starting playing Agema games - could do with a celebratory something or other].

Sorry Roy,

I meant 10+for the reply FROM Agema, Some maybe less, but I think the longer you play the longer the list of units, cities, personalities & mission gets, add in the letters part & you have a sizeable list to go through. When we give our orders Richard probably ahs to scroll through the reams of the turn sheet to find the point he has to make an alteration to.

As to my own turn, I try to keep the diplomatic/ special orders bit to a side of A4, basically this saves me the frustration of having a logjam of back orders. Same with military & unit raising orders.

I am a sinner when it comes to the letter writing, I will try & reply to all the letters I have received & try to make contact with those who have not written, so there is obviously a small stack of letters with every turn.

Somewhere recently (in one of the many threads discussing game turn-round) someone suggested maybe moving to seasons rather than months - so that four turns would see us through a game-year. That might be simple enough to implement without any other rule changes (so drilling would still take six game months, but only two real-world months). Off the (very thin) top of my head I can't see much against the idea - geographical movement being so slow anyway. What do other folk think?

The Real Louis wrote:Somewhere recently (in one of the many threads discussing game turn-round) someone suggested maybe moving to seasons rather than months - so that four turns would see us through a game-year.  That might be simple enough to implement without any other rule changes (so drilling would still take six game months, but only two real-world months).  Off the (very thin) top of my head I can't see much against the idea - geographical movement being so slow anyway.  What do other folk think?

Honestly i like the monthly turnaround, it allows more roleplay.

Imagine interrogating a spy. It could easily take a whole year if you are meant to provide 2 questions. Season are good for wargaming, which i feel is actually less than 25% of what tGoK is.

If i have to imagine a issue tied to game delay (i consider that all turns are delivered by players in time and in the correct formats) probably we have too much game runnings in respect of agema global turn elaboration capacities. Maybe, but it is just a guessing, it could be possible to "srink" 4 games into 3. I think that in a global simulation like tGoK every possible actor of the period has to be simulated on a monthly bases, just to determine how the economies are impacted, ect ect. You can literaly dive into price products per area etc. So if i have a total of 100 positions that are needed to be simulated in order to keep the tracks, and you can sell only 25 of them (let us say the major playing positions) it's one thing. But if you can sell only 12 of them and need to have a one more game open to reach the number of global active positions, then you increase the elaboration time and the delay in output.

I would suggest to provide for the games a list of available positions, wich their benefits, strenghts and weakness, or even a different quotation of the turn, in order to optimize the number of games. This would lead to increased number of players per game rather than more games, and a reduction/optimization of the total processed informations.

I prefer for each turn to represent a calendar month.

I have played a pbem where the turns represented the seasons, and it worked well in that game as it didn't go into as much specific detail in regard position details, nor role playing, as TGOK does. But playing TGOK with the turns representing anything other than one of the twelve months wouldn't interest me, if I'm being honest.

At the same time, to be forthright and honest, I don't see the answer being the starting of another TGOK game.

Ah well, that idea was shot down like a lead-balloon (and I can see why) - but it was the only obvious way I could see to have an impact on the game-world/real-world time match that seems to be a general area of discontent. Various other suggestions about players sending in shorter or fewer orders, or well in advance of the deadline, in order to improve the situation are more speculative. Has anyone ever asked Richard what (if anything) players can do to speed turn-round?

It was raised before, but Richard didn't address it.

If the plan is to return to faster processing time, that plan doesn't seem to be working, so not sure if that's even still in the cards.