No problem if it is for a 'valid' reason.
A bit annoying when people don't finalize as a habbit, without thinking (e.g. for no other reason but becase "this is how they do it"). Getting used to it though.
Hate it when done for the wrong reasons (when losing usually)

Yeah... it can really piss me off.

When the culture of the game is that nobody finalizes, fine, like in a variant or something or if there is a reason.
But when that's just somebody's policy that's kind of lame I guess.

Most annoying though is when everyone but one person finalizes and you see that they were online like three minutes ago. That drives me nuts no matter what the reason, lol.

Thanks for making this thread though that means a lot.

Its not obnoxious in game where there is a valid reason, for example, waiting for an ally to log in and respond to an idea before deciding what to do, or if you know that you're going to need the time and won't be able to reach a computer for awhile.

What annoys me (and is happening in more than one of my games right now) is when a player, reduced to one or two supply centers (or even zero) refuses to finalize their very simple retreat, disband, and limited move orders either to delay the time until they're inevitably eliminated, or out of spite and a desire to reduce the game experience for the players who have bested them.

When I started my first game here, I used finalizing to fit the schedule to mine like Chalks said. Later I decided that there was no point to that, since there was plenty of time to communicate with the people that were willing to communicate, but that may not always be clear. By the end of that game, where I was the last to be eliminated before the others declared a draw, I had almost nothing to do but retreat and disband; we all knew what we were doing, so it moved very fast. It never occurred to me to delay finalizing out of spite.

Now that I'm in a gunboat game, I often post orders without finalizing so that I can think about it in my head for a bit, but then a finalize a few hours later, so it's still moving rather faster than the official 24-hour phase length.

Except when people hold off on finalizing so the game won't interfere with their birthday parties, but that probably won't last.

oh yeah i definitely dont finalize when im trying to work around a day trip or something...

Of course, now that everyone has this fancy Blackberry/iPhone nonsense, a day trip soon won't be an excuse.

Though the one time I tried to enter orders from an iPhone it proved extraordinarily frustrating.

sometimes i wait for my allies to talk with me before finalizing too.

I'm a habitual non-finalizer. The schedule is very helpful to me, improves my game playing quality, and prevents me from NMRing. I will finalize if I'm facing imminent defeat, but otherwise, I don't because I think it ruins the game less than a NMR.

I'm annoyed by people who are annoyed by me. =)

I rarely finalize. Just join games of the right phase length and there won't be an issue!
I used to, but nowadays I leave it the full time to make sure the right decisions are made. Once the game is really going and we're into the endgame then obviously I finalize, but before that I rarely do. Living in the UK, I often get on in the morning to find that an ally in the US has made a request whilst I was asleep. If I had finalized this might have gone through without me updating my orders.

Chrisp, the feeling is mutual, we annoy each other :P

There are times when there is no negotiation to do, and no reson not to finalize.

Every single phase will always be 24 (or other) hours long, so if you commit to being online at least once every 24 hours, you can finalize, and if you can't commit then you shouldn't have joined in the first place.

I don't mind people who don't finalize a given turn because they're busy or have reduced internet availability on weekends or something, but when players absolutely positively never finalize, even when they have to make a single retreat that has no option but a single space, I must admit, it annoys me quite a bit.

Of course, we are each free to play as we choose, so I wouldn't call someone on it, but I'm free to be annoyed. :P

I have no problem with those who don't finalize, unless there's no reason not to.

If I see that I am the last one to finalize, the majority of the time (unless I am awaiting a response) I will do my final analysis and finalize to move the game forward. I like when that happens actually, cuz then I can check back in five minutes and see the outcome.

Doesn't bother me at all, because I've got so many games going. I think it mostly bothers those who just play a couple games at a time.

"Chrisp, the feeling is mutual, we annoy each other :P"

Well by my definition the feeling is muutal lol. It's not a question of commitment. You don't always know that there is no negotiation to do, even when it's just a retreat. At the same time I hesitate to finalize unless I'm close to elimination because finalizing changes when the phase processes and can leave me confused as to when I have to get my orders in. In addition if I'm the last to finalize the phase will process around the time when I'm most likely to do Diplomacy, which is often when I get up. This means that sleeping in means that I could miss any press I got while sleeping.

In the end, I find it strange that finalizing is sometimes viewed as the cultural norm and courtesy. I see it simply as a tool to speed up the game when there's a full consensus, where a full phase is the norm. After all, that's why you pick phase length. Is it that terrible to have to wait a few more hours?

I only really find it annoying when playing ina game that is supposed to be real time as we can only set a 1 hour minimum phase length. If you know the game is real time and you have agreed to thos rules (you have by signing up for it), then finalize. Otherwise, your free to take as long as you like. I always finalize in gunboat (although I may to put in orders and think on them) and only finalize in press games when I'm sure all press is done.

I do have to say that not finalizing in a Gunboat game is rather obnoxious. After all, there is no diplomacy to wait for. Once you've analyzed and decided on you rmoves, take a few hours to consider them more if you like, but finalize eventually. It's only polite.

Well, if you need the deadline to iensure you don't CD, you have to wonder: which is the lesser of two evils?

Ah yes, that's the other issue. If you know in advance that you are going to go away for 24hrs in a 24hr game, you need to be careful about when the cycle runs. If it 'goes' at the wrong time then you may miss an entire phase or have to pause. Sometimes, delaying by a couple of hours in one phase is long enough that the next is unaffected.

It would be nice if the program had this feature:

You know how, if nobody has any retreats to make, the program knows this and skips the retreat phase? Well, what if the only retreats to make are units that can only be disbanded? Then, just disband them automatically and move on!

Similarly, if you have no retreats, then you're automatically finalized. So if you only have a retreat or retreats where the unit must be disbanded, then let the program disband it and finalize automatically.

OK, that doesn't come up much, but it's come up in my gunboat game where one player never finalizes, so … it would be nice.

I don't find it super annoying when people don't finalized - except when it's you.

I will finalise only if I see I am the only person who hasn't finalised and/or I am sure that I will not be receiving any requests from allies (usually because I worked them out in advance).

if you are on a 3 day cycle, for example, and everyone is finalized in the first 4 hours, and you don't finalize just cause you don't like to, its annoying. If you are communicating or your schedule is hectic, its easily forgivable (but its always nice to notify people you are busy and may take a while).

"refuses to finalize their very simple retreat, disband, and limited move orders either to delay the time until they're inevitably eliminated, or out of spite and a desire to reduce the game experience for the players who have bested them."

lol thats a really useful threat in like a 72 hour game, you can threaten to go cd unless thdey support you somewhere.

lol so much fun to use.

When 6 players finalize and you see the last person logging in every few hours but they don't finalize, that is INCREDIBLY annoying. C'Mon Already!

Toby, that comes up again and again, and has been brought up on the dev-forum as well. There's quite a list of things that can be auto-resolved.

"lol thats a really useful threat in like a 72 hour game, you can threaten to go cd unless thdey support you somewhere.

lol so much fun to use."

you should stop playing the game

Agreed with Baquack. That's pretty low

This is a topic that confuses me to no end. If people join a game with 24 hour phases - why are they not willing to wait 24 hours?

I prefer to have my games in cycles - which is why I usually join games with multiples of 24 hour cycles. This way, I can play diplomacy at pretty much the same time every day - without having to be too worried about deadlines.

it only makes me mad when they dont say what they are doing so you end up thinking that they might be going CD but they dont

Remember, we're allowed the full time, finalizing is just to speed it up. So yes, it could possibly be annoying, but you shouldn't be.

We're alloted that time, and if we all finalize to speed it up all the better, but if not, then the game will run it's course regularly.

Now, if you don't have a reason at all to stop from finalizing, like the examples of losing above, then I would agree that it would be really irritating.

In that case, I would say that you have no right to delay the game.