Proposal Scheduling for a time range

[UT]

While we strongly encourage / prefer set time scheduling, we do allow for scheduling for a range (between 7 and 10 pm Saturday night, for example). However, there is confusion about what happens with potential act calls near the end of the range that is worth clarifying.

Currently, regardless of when a team-wide ping goes out, teams still have the full grace period (30 minutes) from the end of the range to provide a substitute. This is counterintuative to me, as basically it means if you can play from 7 to 10, you should actually give your time range as 7 to 9:30 to ensure the game starts by 10:00.

I am proposing that for scheduled ranges of at least an hour, teams must provide a sub or have the game started by the end of the given range, or 30 minutes from the team-wide ping, whichever is later. The rational is for a set time, a grace period is needed, but a range the players are agreeing to should already include however much grace they are able to afford and not be expected to stay on after they have stated they are unavailable.

The team-wide ping can happen anywhere within the range, but if it happens within the last 30 minutes, teams will still have the full 30 minutes from the ping to get a sub lined up.

 

[RADU]

i agree with the proposal at heart, but is it really fine that if I schedule for 8-9pm then they can ping at 8:30 and get act at 9? it feels a little slippery. at the end of the day both players agree to it, usually because the availability is sketchy on either or both sides, so flexibility is the name of the game. if you dont want the game to start at 10:30 you schedule for max range 9:30, just as you would when scheduling for a game normally.
what matters is that the scheduling rule is just clear and well known to everybody, so id personally avoid making extra exceptions. i dont want new players to come in and start playing papers, please; these rules are specific and hard to find enough as they are.

 

[Finchinator]

I dislike ranges like I do back-up times — just picking an individual time is the easiest scheduling by far. With this said, a range already presents any flexibility needed for both parties to reasonably get online and play each other. Adding an extra 30 minutes on top of it is, simply put, OD. We do not need that.

As the OP proposes, tag 30m before the range ends and have the end of the range be the activity marker.

Just to spell it out for example’s sake: If we schedule from 7-9pm and we tag at 8:30pm because you didn’t show up, I should absolutely be allowed to get activity and go at 9pm, not wait until the range is over for the 30m to start and be on until 9:30pm. It sounds ridiculous making people wait even longer than an entire range and that’s because it is ridiculous, so let’s fix it.

 

[FlamPoke]

Agree that ranges are bad but a necessary evil sometimes.

Just to clarify, the scheduling grace window was changed to 30m from scheduled or 20m from tag, whichever is later; does this mean a range of 7-9pm can qualify for act if there is a 8:40pm team-wide ping? Don't love the idea of showing up at 8:40pm in this case and being relegated to 30m by default but also don't love the optics of showing up at 8:40pm and taking act at 9pm either.

 

[yone]

Agreed with UT's proposal, no matter what are the arguments against, the current state of forum is chaotic and the activity calls soldiers have done considerable damages to ppl s motivation

i.e : https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/ou-stour-tour-round-1.3764335/post-10546479

 

[ABR]

i agree with the proposal at heart, but is it really fine that if I schedule for 8-9pm then they can ping at 8:30 and get act at 9? it feels a little slippery. at the end of the day both players agree to it, usually because the availability is sketchy on either or both sides, so flexibility is the name of the game. if you dont want the game to start at 10:30 you schedule for max range 9:30, just as you would when scheduling for a game normally.
what matters is that the scheduling rule is just clear and well known to everybody, so id personally avoid making extra exceptions. i dont want new players to come in and start playing papers, please; these rules are specific and hard to find enough as they are.

Echoing this pretty hard. You can always deny a range altogether or have the later end of it be 30 minutes earlier than you actually want, to cover for the time it takes to call act.

On a similar note, I think the current cost of "people wait too long when scheduling for ranges" is smaller than the future cost of "people lose to activity because of a nuanced, low-visibility new rule."