good_game_granny#31615
My feedback
2 results found
-
215 votesgood_game_granny#31615
supported this idea
·
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment good_game_granny#31615
supported this idea
·
This is a copy of the reply I got from wizards today which was bumped here. Instead of creating a similar thread regarding the new Player Reporting Protocol, I am adding my comments to this one.
I’m glad to see that reports will initially receive human review. I have a question about the new “Inactivity: Idling in a match or intentionally slow play” category. Since “intentionally” concerns a player’s purpose rather than merely elapsed time, what observable criteria or metrics will reviewers use to distinguish intentional stalling from legitimate use of the allotted decision timer?
For example, players may use available decision time not only for calculating lines of play, but for reading unfamiliar cards, recovering concentration, accessibility-related needs, or briefly regulating frustration so they can return to the match and make a deliberate decision. Are these considered legitimate uses of the timer when the player remains engaged with the game?
More generally, what evidence would support an inference of user-side intent rather than simply establishing that a player took a long time?