In the handful of games I've had the opportunity to Play the most time consuming parts were not the actual gameplay. The pre-game terrain designation and setup take as long as, if not longer than, the 6 turns of the game.

Defining the terrain will most likely speed up once we have played enough games with our FLGS's stock of terrain that we have a general understanding of what each piece is classified as. We have been using the competitive terrain placement rules as well, which slows things down.

The back and forth of deployment is also currently time consuming, as is battle card selection when used. Half of the games I've played so far have been from Operation: Silent Hail so the Objectives, Deployment, and Conditions were pre-set. Again, I think these are things that will speed up with experience.

Without having the Tournament Regs for Legion it is impossible to know how "Turn 0" will affect gameplay and round length. With Runewars, terrain placement is a part of setup just like in X-wing and Armada. However, none of those games use custom terrain as much as Legion, if at all.

If FFG decides that terrain placement is a part of the game they want to include in the competitive ruleset then I think one could, possibly, make use of a chess clock or other timer for terrain placement and unit deployment since Setup is not usually included in the time limit for each round.

Personally, I would prefer to have each table set up with terrain that is pre-defined by the TO, as the scenario for each round will most likely be. This would eliminate any discussion mid-game about what a certain terrain piece does. It should also eliminate any potential for dispute about fairness of the tables and rounds since all players would have the same setup and a piece of terrain that one set of players decided provides heavy cover isn't determined to provide light cover by another set of players.

I don't think that chess clocks would contribute to actual gameplay. Legion is an objective based game. Playing to the objective, knowing that the tie-breaker is points defeated, and even accounting for opponents that are perceived to be playing slow can all be considered part of being a commander, which is what a wargame is really about. How one accounts for all of these factors and deals with them is what differentiates between poor, average, or exceptional commanders.

6 hours ago, Thoras said:

What games do you file under that? Other than chess itself, I can't think of any. No miniature war games i can think of.

I mean, there isn't meant to be any variability or "wiggle room" in legions rules anymore than any other war game either. It's just due to ambiguities in the rules or differing levels of understanding of them. The only variability I can see is in the definition of terrain and the same rules for terrain hold true in warmachine, which is considered one of the tightest rulesets out there. Warmachine also has plenty of agreements with opponents and variable understanding of the rules, despite it being for the most part a tighter ruleset.

I'm not trying to discount your experience at all, but do you think your perception of it adding time to the game length might be more a by-product of the unfamiliarity with using the chess clocks, rather than a result of the chess clocks themselves? I.E. Once the players were used to them, a lot of the "adding time" would have vanished?

Warmachine plays 100 times faster with a chess clock than without for the majority of players. It can also have even more opponent decisions or action requirements during your own turn than legion can, depending on the lists in play.

Just being so used to playing on clock, I find it hard to picture it adding time once your familiar with using the clock in a game.

There is a measure of it, but let me ask -

Would you rather spend time leaning how to use a clock, or just play more Legion/Armada and get quicker at it that way? ?

29 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

There is a measure of it, but let me ask -

Would you rather spend time leaning how to use a clock, or just play more Legion/Armada and get quicker at it that way? ?

The whole reason for people to suggest a clock in a competitive setting is because some people drag the game on to mitigate losses or straight out win on time in a morally dubious way. One of the players in my miniatures club usually does this voluntarily or not and it's infuriating (but then he isn't the best player anyway).

I don't really know how clocks could be applied in this game with all the dice rolled by each side in either player's activations... But I think clocks should be available in tournaments starting from turn 3 if either player calls for it and the table is visibly "late" compared to other tables.

35 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

There is a measure of it, but let me ask -

Would you rather spend time leaning how to use a clock, or just play more Legion/Armada and get quicker at it that way? ?

From my experience with Warmachine? I'd rather people learn to use the clock honestly.

Even with experienced clock players in that game, games without the clock can easily push past 2 hours and start heading towards 3.

I'd rather limit a game to a max 2 hour time span and be sure to get in 2-3 games in a day of playing than get maybe 1 and a half games because they were 3 hour games.

I've yet to play enough of Legion to see how its going to go though. My buddy and i have had one 1.5 hour game so far, which is encouraging

8 minutes ago, Thoras said:

From my experience with Warmachine? I'd rather people learn to use the clock honestly.

Even with experienced clock players in that game, games without the clock can easily push past 2 hours and start heading towards 3.

I'd rather limit a game to a max 2 hour time span and be sure to get in 2-3 games in a day of playing than get maybe 1 and a half games because they were 3 hour games.

I've yet to play enough of Legion to see how its going to go though. My buddy and i have had one 1.5 hour game so far, which is encouraging

The question is not so much wether a clock is useful in reducing times - it is.

The question is wether it is NECCESSARY to warrant making it MANDATORY for tournament events (since there is no point discussing what happens in your casual games, tournaments are the one with the common regulatory framework)

I argue it is not.

i contend that you should endeavour to play your games in the correct timeframes, but it’s your responsibility to make it so.

with practice, you play faster. ‘Nuff said. ?

To further the comment - Warmachine was one of those games, what with the proported fact that they had Lawyers review the rules to make them tight and such / but I admit I have not seen the game for over an edition now, so my knowledge is limited.

Games that allow you to act in your turn with no requirement to rely on your opponents interruptive decision are games for clocks. Pure I-go-U-go.

“Games without saves”.

the more you introduce your opponent into your turn, the less a game is appropriate for clocking.

22 hours ago, Thoras said:

What games do you file under that? Other than chess itself, I can't think of any. No miniature war games i can think of.

I mean, there isn't meant to be any variability or "wiggle room" in legions rules anymore than any other war game either. It's just due to ambiguities in the rules or differing levels of understanding of them. The only variability I can see is in the definition of terrain and the same rules for terrain hold true in warmachine, which is considered one of the tightest rulesets out there. Warmachine also has plenty of agreements with opponents and variable understanding of the rules, despite it being for the most part a tighter ruleset.

I'm not trying to discount your experience at all, but do you think your perception of it adding time to the game length might be more a by-product of the unfamiliarity with using the chess clocks, rather than a result of the chess clocks themselves? I.E. Once the players were used to them, a lot of the "adding time" would have vanished?

Warmachine plays 100 times faster with a chess clock than without for the majority of players. It can also have even more opponent decisions or action requirements during your own turn than legion can, depending on the lists in play.

Just being so used to playing on clock, I find it hard to picture it adding time once your familiar with using the clock in a game.

At least the early iterations of Kings of War were designed to be able to use one, though they set it up as optional.

Why do you need a tournament clock? Armada OP rules state you finish the round you are in if the round goes to time, and then the player with higher MOV wins. I'd expect something similar for Legion. The game is already much quicker than Armada, so going to time shouldn't be an issue.

17 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Why do you need a tournament clock? Armada OP rules state you finish the round you are in if the round goes to time, and then the player with higher MOV wins. I'd expect something similar for Legion. The game is already much quicker than Armada, so going to time shouldn't be an issue.

So why wouldn’t someone have an incentive to run out the clock once in an advantageous position?

Aka the thing done in every sport ever.

56 minutes ago, Derrault said:

So why wouldn’t someone have an incentive to run out the clock once in an advantageous position?

Gaming communities are small, if you are prepared to stall out a game to win it at a tournament you may well find your opportunities to find opponents slowly diminishes.

5 hours ago, Derrault said:

So why wouldn’t someone have an incentive to run out the clock once in an advantageous position?

Aka the thing done in every sport ever.

Yea I get the concept, but I have yet to see it in Legion or Armada.

Honestly, this sounds more like a grievance with 1 person instead of half the community. And if it is a problem, call a TO. I sure as **** don't want a clock system because YOU have had an issue in the past. Be an adult and solve it actively instead of being passive aggressive by forcing your opponent to make a move because of a clock.

14 hours ago, Amanal said:

Gaming communities are small, if you are prepared to stall out a game to win it at a tournament you may well find your opportunities to find opponents slowly diminishes.

The NFL has only 32 teams, but in football (as in most sports) running out the clock when you have the lead is a normal thing.

10 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Yea I get the concept, but I have yet to see it in Legion or Armada.

Honestly, this sounds more like a grievance with 1 person instead of half the community. And if it is a problem, call a TO. I sure as **** don't want a clock system because YOU have had an issue in the past. Be an adult and solve it actively instead of being passive aggressive by forcing your opponent to make a move because of a clock.

If there’s a competitive advantage to one side monopolizing the time limit, it’s going to happen. Burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the problem isn’t going to stop it from happening.

There’s absolutely no way for a TO to fairly police this without establishing some kind of a limit, because absent s baseline it’s just each players word against the other. (Aka one persons thoughtful is another persons abuse of the flaws in the system.)

44 minutes ago, Derrault said:

The NFL has only 32 teams, but in football (as in most sports) running out the clock when you have the lead is a normal thing.

Honestly, that's just a ridiculous analogy. Why do NFL teams exist and play against each other? To make money. If the 49ers began engaging in activity that reduces everyone else's ability to make money , the pool of teams dries up (because other teams don't have the funds to keep up, the owners realize the opportunity cost of investing their money in the team, etc.) and they have no one to play against. Insert whichever sport or team you like.

Why do we play miniatures games against each other? To have fun. If a player engages in an activity that reduces everyone else's ability to have fun , the pool of players around him/her dries up and he/she has no one to play against. People can have varying ideas of "fun". Maybe a given community values this tactic, maybe it doesn't. In either case, a chess clock may be superfluous.

Now, I've been at tournaments where a player would slow-play. It was clearly intentional as it happened in each game and it began happening at nearly identical points in each game (he gained a small advantage, then slowed way down). The TO stepped in and took action. I don't remember exactly what it was, but I think he ended up putting a timer on that player specifically because it was quite egregious. It was a while ago, so don't quote me on that.

Anyway, my bigger point here is that this is an issue that can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis at TO's discretion. We shouldn't ignore it, but we also don't need a blanket rule that, arguably, reduces everyone's level of fun.

@Amanal 's point is a good one. Intentional slow-play is unsustainable behavior and if you (the general "you") make a habit of it, people will just stop playing with you.

2 hours ago, nashjaee said:

Honestly, that's just a ridiculous analogy. Why do NFL teams exist and play against each other? To make money. If the 49ers began engaging in activity that reduces everyone else's ability to make money , the pool of teams dries up (because other teams don't have the funds to keep up, the owners realize the opportunity cost of investing their money in the team, etc.) and they have no one to play against. Insert whichever sport or team you like.

Why do we play miniatures games against each other? To have fun. If a player engages in an activity that reduces everyone else's ability to have fun , the pool of players around him/her dries up and he/she has no one to play against. People can have varying ideas of "fun". Maybe a given community values this tactic, maybe it doesn't. In either case, a chess clock may be superfluous.

Now, I've been at tournaments where a player would slow-play. It was clearly intentional as it happened in each game and it began happening at nearly identical points in each game (he gained a small advantage, then slowed way down). The TO stepped in and took action. I don't remember exactly what it was, but I think he ended up putting a timer on that player specifically because it was quite egregious. It was a while ago, so don't quote me on that.

Anyway, my bigger point here is that this is an issue that can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis at TO's discretion. We shouldn't ignore it, but we also don't need a blanket rule that, arguably, reduces everyone's level of fun.

@Amanal 's point is a good one. Intentional slow-play is unsustainable behavior and if you (the general "you") make a habit of it, people will just stop playing with you.

Again, this is framed against the rubric of a tournament , not casual play.

People are going to want to play in tournaments and they don’t get a choice about who their opponents are.

And no, it really can’t be dealt with because it’s entirely subjective as to if the behavior is merely someone being thoughtful and cautious or a practiced tactic to waste time when a game winning advantage is already at hand. A clock is the only objective method for deterring this. (As you yourself admit).

36 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Again, this is framed against the rubric of a tournament , not casual play.

Understood. Good luck getting pick-up or practice games because people remembered your behavior in the last few tournaments... Is my point.

36 minutes ago, Derrault said:

And no, it really can’t be dealt with because it’s entirely subjective as to if the behavior is merely someone being thoughtful and cautious or a practiced tactic to waste time when a game winning advantage is already at hand. A clock is the only objective method for deterring this. (As you yourself admit).

Yup, I admit it worked in that isolated instance of abuse . And it worked without detracting from others' experience.

To clarify, it worked because only the abuser was affected. At the TO's discretion.

I suspect chess clocks won't be used in Legion for the same reasons they aren't used in X-Wing -- the fix seems like more trouble than just living with the occasional abuse of slowplay.

20 hours ago, Derrault said:

Again, this is framed against the rubric of a tournament , not casual play.

I can play every weekend and every other Mondays with people I am friends with. If I am lucky I would probably go into 2-3 tournaments per year in addition. Why play in such a manner as to only get 2-3 tournaments a year?

Frame it how you like, but a bad reputation will limit you quite severely and not just in Legion.