Yeah, I tend to play just before the end of turn during the week, as it enables me to see what the opponent has done and stops my opponents getting 2 turns in a row. I then get up and go to work.

At the weekend, though, I don't like waking up at 6:30 in the morning and tend to take a turn before I go to bed so I can have a lay in. Sometimes this does result in two turns in a row, but is that my fault? The alternative is missing a turn.

Just because my opponent always like to play his turn at 20:00 game time, why should I worry if he whinges because some of his units got killed without a chance to retreat.

Once I am moving before him in the turn, he then has the chance to double-turn me, especially during the week when I am at work.

If he kept back a strategic reserve of units that I cannot kill in my double turn, he could have hit back with those.

Neglect your reserve at your peril - it is your insurance against the unexpected, and that includes your opponent taking 2 turns in a row. Too many players throw everything they've got into the battle. If your are moving last each turn, this isn't too bad, but if you're moving first, beware.

hmm that's odd I thought I was replying to thread waronline.net/forums/posts.asp?m=15416

double turn is a double turn. if you want to play a game where your increase your odds of winning by depriving your opponent a chance to even play it is the way to go!

The term double turn is a misnomer. Everyone gets one move with each of their units, per turn - no unit gets two moves in any one turn.

That said, sometimes, one player moves first, sometimes, the other player moves first.

When player A moves before player B one turn, then the following turn player B moves before player A, I call this a "flip-flop" because the move order has reversed. Player B gets to move his units twice in between player A's moves. (ABBA)

If B takes a flip-flop at a crucial moment in a campaign, yes it can give B a temporary tactical advantage. But now that B is moving first, A has the opportunity to reverse the flip flop (call it a flop-flip if you like) and hit with a counter-attack. (BAAB)

But there is nothing in the campaign games to prevent a flip-flop, and I have never played a campaign where flip-fops are disallowd in the game setup.

I have, on the other hand, played with players that moan, or even quit after you get a flip-flop despite the fact that no-one has ever said "no flip-flops" before playing. Get a life! I'm quite happy to play by rules, but only rules specified in advance, not after the fact.

If you don't like flip-flops, then you had best either:
1) Move last each turn or
2) Keep a reserve that you can counter-attack with or
3) Agree with your opponent in advance not to reverse the turn order. (Just don't bother asking me not to move before I go to bed at the weekend, because I don't want to wake up at 06:30 on a Sat/Sun) or
4) Don't bother playing campaigns

Its been discussed many times before... the name is as it is because it is more convenient to say double turned rather than player a attacked player b twice before he got a chance to move himself. flip flop sounds sorta silly but i suppose everyone could twist their vocabulary to suit you...

If your interested in the predawn conclusions and explanations of this go ahead and brows the forum... it has been discussed to death.

As for me I do my best to avoid it all together... as i said above it largely defeats the purpose of playing if someone can get a massive advantage over you through their ability to spend more time on the computer... Using your reserve system the player double turning could just use ranged units to chip away at you until you commit to the fight, then double turn you...

There is no way to deal with it as req has said many times in the past. Double turning is a flaw in the game, take advantage of it if you really want to (it is not a ban-able offense of course) but as I said in many less words in my previous post... in a game where offense is so potent it is totally illogical to say that someone getting two consecutive moves does not hold a tremendous advantage. This advantage effectively makes the game pointless for both players (though I suppose if your goal is simply to win and accrue numbers then you'll be just fine as the double turner), the attacked is destroyed largely in these two turns and force to retreat if he hopes to salvage his army. Sounds like a thrilling game right... you double turn... they retreat... they rebuild and you mess them over again... I wouldn't be waiting in line for a game like that..

Last Edited : Saturday, 6 February 2010 - 23:14

1. if everyone moved last each turn you'd have a traffic jam of people moving at the same time. Some of them fighting each-other at the exact same moment...
2. already refuted the second..
3. Good idea, it has been so looked down upon in this community however that many people take it as a given, especially when playing with those that have been around for a while, that it will not be done. So that might account for why your riling feathers... just don't know any better.
4. There are many reasons for why our active players is down to almost 100 players. But wait you can do your part to make sure even less people play! Get your double turn today!

Not quite sure how you refuted the 2nd. Are you saying a reserve is not a good idea?

WRT point 1, why does every game start at 7am GMT/UTC?
This must increase the load on the server at that time, causing a spike.

Why not start the campaign the moment that enough players join? Or if this turns out to cause a spike of games starting in the US evening, start it at a random time, thus spreading the load evenly?

Yes, Ham, a reserve is a bad idea. If you hadn't noticed already, every time you pushed a few units too far in and kept the rest in 'reserve', I'd range those units without giving you a chance to retaliate.

Just to clarify what happened, for about two weeks I had been moving consistently around 20:00 while Hambone was moving right before the tick. On Thursday Hambone moved right after me rushing in, Friday at 3:35PM to double-turn, then Saturday at 9:30AM and Sunday at 4:08AM to make sure he wasn't "flip-flopped" (based on defend history).

There is absolutely nothing wrong with double-turning if that is your style of play. Many players here would do the same. What is wrong is denying it to yourself and others by sending messages like "by sheer luck I woke up at 4am last night and you had taken your move...." (direct quote)

If it's part of your strategy, great, players will know what to expect from you. If it's not, try to give some kind of warning instead of taking advantage, then messaging "You had a whole hour to take a turn if you really didn't want a flip-flop". Either way, you'd get a lot more respect.

VJ, the times I moved on Sat & Sun are irrelavent - because you didn't actually bother moving on either Friday or Saturday, there is no way you could get a flip-flop, whatever time I moved.

I have never denied taking a flip flop, you are just pissed because you used your catapults in the front line to protect your valuable scouts and squires, after repeatedly falling back just out of (one turn's move) range of my units.

In actual fact, as the title of this thread implies, I simply play when it suits me. During the week, that normaly means just before the end of each turn. At the weekend, I usually play earlier in the day(i.e. before going to bed), so I can have a lie-in. (turn start is 7am for me)

These are the things I object to:

People quitting when all is not lost.
Unwritten Rules that some players seem to expect you to play by, but don't tell you this in advance, they just moan after the fact.
Rednaxeia asked about double turns in this thread:
waronline.net/forums/posts.asp?m=15416
and the consensus seemed to be it was no problem, just part of the game.
If this is not right, let's have some more comment from other players here. Perhaps Rednaxeia closed the thread before enough players had the chance to comment.

Last Edited : Sunday, 7 February 2010 - 18:17

WRT Reserves, I'm going to start a thread (waronline.net/forums/posts.asp?m=15497 )
in Strategy and Tactics about this, because no-one seems to be grasping the concept and I'm quite happy to spread the idea if it improves the overall standard of play.

Last Edited : Sunday, 7 February 2010 - 18:20

@Crimson - if you want to add something, please make a new post so everyone can read it.

@vj I'm sorry if you laboured under the mistaken impression that I wouldn't use two turns to reach your front line, when you engineered it that that was the only way to do so without you getting the first strike. I said nothing to give you that impression, in fact I've written about the techinque before: waronline.net/forums/posts.asp?m=15057 so I'm not sure where you have got the impression from that I'm in denial.

This game is meant to be interesting, and I think the flexibility it gives you about when you play is a very useful feature. The flip-flop technique is also useful feature, especially when you opponent repeatedly tries to dodge battle.

But it is only useful, not a game killer - vj's remaining army could have still given me a very bloody nose, or retreated to a safer position from which it could have gained a flip-flop back during the weekdays when I am at work. Or perhaps, he might have pushed the attack forward before I had the opportunity to build my army up to the same size as yours..

Next time I'm sure you'll put a screen of melee units in the front and leave your best offensive units (ballis and Hvy Cav) in a more useful reserve position. Or gain some agreement on double turns before making assumptions.

Fare thee well in future battles...

Last Edited : Monday, 8 February 2010 - 15:46

I don't see how you got the gist that it is widly accepted to use two turns in a forum tab labled how to avoid that... In fact mog posted that the current turn system was developed to discourage it...

Last Edited : Monday, 8 February 2010 - 18:48

Hambone, obviously you are missing the point and other players (besides Crimson) are too sick of this issue to comment.

Instead of repeating what I and others have said in the past, I'll just leave you to consider a similar scenario. Suppose two players are playing a chess game and one has the option of making two consecutive moves at any point in the game. Who do you suppose would win?

(And please don't make the counter-argument that both players have the option since then this becomes a timing game. Who can make their moves the latest or earliest? Who can spend more time online?)

If you're still not convinced, just announce that you understand the consequences of a double-turn and you still think it's a 'useful feature', and close the thread. The only difference will be in that only a subset of players will be willing to play you (mostly those who also use this 'feature'), while the others won't waste their time or yours.

PS. I'm sorry I assumed you wouldn't double-turn. The assumption was not based on anything you said, but on a) your consistent play time, b) your time here (over a year), and c) your (and my former) clan which used to discourage this type of play.

Im actually confused over the issue itself. As Im not sure what the issue actually is about.
This is my confusion.
I was under the understanding that for campaigns, the games were 1 or 2 turns aday.
You can have your turn at any time during this time period.
You can move yr units in 2 movements at max. 1 turn over.
So how can any 1 have 2 turns.
some people may be fooled by sum1 moving his units early in the turn and moving the 2nd part later in turn. Which I have found to be frustrating due to you not being able to have your nxt turn till the equal time period has passed in next turn.
Is this where the So called Double turning comes from or am I really confused.

Yes, Sir Templar, that is exactly it, a change in the move order leading to one player having 2 turns in a row. This can only happen once - if a player wants to use the technique again they have to first allow the opponent a double turn.

Over the course of a campaign week, this might look like this:
Turn:
1.2.3.4.5.6.7.
ABABBABABABAAB
Player

@vj: I'm not denying that this technique does give an advantage. If you could make a double turn in a battle, where you cannot rebuild your units, then your chess analogy would be apt. However in a campaign the advantage is nowhere near as bad as the advantage such a situation would give in Chess.

What I want to stress is that in this instance, the 2 turns in a row did not mean 2 attacks in a row - vj repeatedly used his turn to move his units just out of range, creating one of those "Mexican stand-offs" where the first units to move into the no-man's land between us would get mown down by a combination of Heavy Cavalry charges and withering ballista fire.

Now, personally, I believe this to be about as bad for the game as the "double turn" problem. It discourages attacking aggressive play and tends to make everyone play conservative, unwilling to make the first move because in an even fight, the first strike effect is likely to tip the balance in the battle. If this was a simulation of World War I's Battle of the Somme, then fine. But it isn't, it's about medieval warfare.

vj's formation (all the seige weapons in the front line) is just not how any sensible commandeer would set up in real life.

I can see why he does it (it creates an 8-12 hex killing ground in front of his army). I kept advancing into the extreme end of it (where it isn't very effective because of the ballista's long range and movement penalties) an vj kept retreatng an hex or 2 to maintain the situation.

Now I ask you, the reader, as a new player that did not know vj's views on double-turns, "What would you do?"

I should mention that with 6 barracks a turn's move behind the front line, that I could just have waited until I had overwhelming force in the battle, but I'm more of a Patton than a Monty, so I went for the surprise attack.

Well this topic is techniqually done since he opened another on the same subject in another part of the forum, this discussion just keeps this one pinging so people get drawn to the other ;_)

just set the rules in advance...
i've been forced to double turn because it was the only time of the day i could be online to take my turn... was i supposed to skip my turn? was i supposed to miss a turn because i'm still waiting for the opponent to move? not everyone has the luxury of spending their life online! thats why i don't bother playing camps...too much bs and silent rules for me...

Yeah, I think free-for-all is the way to go.

Most of the serious players have just started a Dragon Lakes, so I'll wait for a bit, but if you want to play a free-for-all with no whinging, then keep a campaign slot free and I will host it.