Quote Originally Posted by taconaut View Post
I think I'm in the minority on this board, but I feel like in situations like the one you described, I err on the side of more time rather than less. I know I personally ought to play faster, but I also feel that if:

- this is the decisive turn of the match
- there is a non-zero amount of time on the clock
- each of you has a win, so the opponent can't stall his way to a win
- whether or not you win or lose is mostly on the table, presuming optimal play (in this case, you were able to identify the correct attack, so as long as your hand didn't have any surprises, he should've been able to as well)

then it's fine to take some more time. If he takes a long time, and makes the correct attack, he wins, right - he took the time to carefully consider his options and played optimally, which is all we can really ask of our opponents. If he makes the wrong attack, he spent some time, and it didn't matter, because he was unable to take the correct line, allowing you to win, also good. If it really is a decisive turn, even if you go to time, you get some extra turns to decide it, and the match will still still end decisively.

Sometimes it feels like many of the posters here want their matches, including ones that go 2-1, to end in half an hour or less. For me, it seems like as long as the match ended before time is called, what does it matter the pace? If all the games end however Magic games are supposed to end, no one gets any points for being the quickest to pass the turn.
I think the big issue is what a reasonable amount of time per decision is given a constantly changing number of factors. It's just going to be different for everyone. Maybe the solution to this is have a set amount of time that a turn can last, but that is just going to cause more headaches.


Quote Originally Posted by thecrav View Post
This is something that, without changing the existing slow play rule, we can and need to fix. Many counter-heavy players already kinda do something about it, too. It's not uncommon to see a blue player stick out their hand and say, "thinking" to acknowledge that something has been put on the stack while not yet saying that the spell or ability will resolve.

When I'm not playing against those more considerate players, how long should I wait? At Eternal Weekend, playing Tin Fins, a player Show and Told in my Grisselbrand. I untapped, drew, played a Dark Ritual, and sat for what felt like 15 seconds. With no response, I announced that there was BBB in my pool and moved the Ritual to the graveyard. I played another spell. This time I counted to myself. After five seconds, I again announced the result of the spell and moved the card to my graveyard. After repeating this a few times, I started playing as if my opponent had announced that they were yielding to anything. How long should I have waited on the first spell? What about the second? Or the fifteenth?

Chalice of the Void brings a similar issue. I've played against a lot of prison players who aren't used to responding to things. When I play into a Chalice and they don't immediately announce their trigger, how long should I wait for them to either announce it or say that my spell is going to resolve? I certainly don't want to ask them if it resolves because I don't want to give them any hints that they should maybe counter the thing.
Can't you just solve this with simple communication? I know that this isn't ideal considering there are situations where you can use your knowledge of your deck/the game to gain an advantage in the matchup e.g. resolving spells under a chalice. I've resorted to constantly asking my opponent if a spell or trigger has resolved and if they say something like thinking I give them a little while before badgering them again. I've been burned too many times by trying to wait only for my opponent to finally them finally respond when I assumed a game action of mine had resolved, had a judge called and have the judge not rule in my favor.