Pardon my ignorance - Greg gets to choose not to stop looping?

Azerack

Sorry, I had a look through the searches on "Loop prevention" and I missed where Greg (the AI for those joining us, recently) gets to decide to not stop the loop.

I thought the loop prevention system was for the PLAYER?

Basically, having an exile card waiting, I allowed the Naru loop, this one time, and watched the loop counter count down and then.. it kept going.. 

Again, pardon my ignorance if this is a known thing, but what in Gideon's sacrificial glory is going on here? 

Unknown

This content has been removed.

BigSwifty

Same thing happened to me twice yesterday, although Greg only allowed it to continue once. It was Naru and Quasi; the counter ended, then started all over again, and the second time the timer ran out it went to my turn. 

Mburn7

See the original announcement:

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/79051/loop-control-system-7-17-19/p1

It says its intentional that Greg can choose to continue his own loops, but will "rarely choose to do so many times in a row"

I think we have different definitions of "rarely" (note:  I think Greg should be able to loop a bit, since otherwise it is almost impossible to lose a match.  But I get the anger because it takes soooooo long)

Volrak

We were told when the latest iteration of the system was released that the AI sometimes continues loops (https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/79051/loop-control-system-7-17-19/p1).  I haven't seen an official explanation of why it was done that way.

Azerack

Mburn7 said:

See the original announcement:

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/79051/loop-control-system-7-17-19/p1

Thanks, @m@Mburn7 , looks like it got lost amidst the other posts.

I still boggle, then, why the AI would have a choice to stop the loop AT ALL, though.

It's like they want us to suffer when someone finds an infinite loop for themselves?

Oh well.. I added my thoughts to the bug listing for it (https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/79202/loop-prevention#latest )

At least it's only happened in the TG, so far, so I can just quit out, but why they think they have to let the AI have a choice in stopping a loop reminds me of old D&D games where the DM had to make up rules to keep the NPC antagonist alive even though the group had them dead (most times literally) to rights. :P

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Rhasget

starfall said:

I've seen a number of examples of the AI choosing to continue the loop the first time the LPS kicks in and then end it the second time.

Perhaps it always does that?

No, it's split between second and third time the timer ends when I have seen it.
There have been different kinds of loops then though. When it's a two-card combo (Quasi/Naru for example) it's the second time iirc.
But when it's a multi card loop (green gemchanging combos mostly) it takes longer.

JeromeZ

Too bad the loop timer only ends the "turn" for the AI. The loop timer should trigger a "play passes," that shuts down all subsequent swaps away well as combat. (It would also apply to players' loops, which would help some of us with deck design/play flaws)

Mburn7

JeromeZ said:

Too bad the loop timer only ends the "turn" for the AI. The loop timer should trigger a "play passes," that shuts down all subsequent swaps away well as combat. (It would also apply to players' loops, which would help some of us with deck design/play flaws)

That's definitely an interesting idea, although it might be a bit too punishing for players to really get on board with it.

Stopping the extra swaps would be nice sometimes, since its really boring to have 8 extra swaps but not being allowed to play anything with them without a lucky 5 match.  Stopping combat as well would mean loop decks basically cease to exist in their current form.  Which may not be a bad thing, actually.