View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
GamesOnTheBrain

Joined: 14 Jun 07 Posts: 191
Location: Cleveland, OH
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:51 am Post subject: Karma Points / Restricting Games to Certain Players |
|
|
No amount of comments on a game title will prevent slow players from joining games. This can be frustrating to players (like me) who don't know enough people to start passworded games but want to play reasonably quickly.
I'm proposing the addition of Karma Points... something like Days of Wonder's on their Ticket to Ride site.
When creating a game, it would be great if you could make it so that only players who had a Karma rating of X or higher could join your game, where X is a rating between 1 and 10 (or 1 and 5 stars) that is calculated based on the number of turns played, games played, average time per turn (lower the better of course), abandoned games (harsh penalty per game abandoned), etc.
Another idea would be to simply make an option that would require a player to have a certain maximum average time per turn in order to join.
You could even have something that would restrict players joining to a certain range of timezones.
What do you think? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stargate

Joined: 09 Dec 04 Posts: 603
Location: North Attleboro, Ma USA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
having played a few game here
the cure for slow games is >>> be in more games
some things I have learned >>>>>
some of the slowest games can be with people that live within 50 miles
some of the fastest games can be with people who live 12 time zones away
try some games with fewer players
1. most times they play faster
2. these games will help you meet people you want to play with
and a last reminder --- SBW is not BSW  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
GamesOnTheBrain

Joined: 14 Jun 07 Posts: 191
Location: Cleveland, OH
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do play a lot of games at once.
Yes, I agree that the timezone thing isn't as important, but it's very clear that people often join games which clearly state 1-2 turns per day with no intention doing so.
I think the easiest thing to add would simply be a system to only allow players to join if their average time per turn (not including vacation) is under a certain amount. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bkruppa
Joined: 08 Nov 05 Posts: 241
Location: Fremont, Ca, USA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just for your info Bob, I live more than 50 miles away  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
hagin
Joined: 12 Aug 07 Posts: 121
Location: Perth, WA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure that this Karma thing is the right way to handle this but honestly I think we need something.
Personally I think two things would be really useful:
- Games by invitation. It's open (no password) but joining doesn't mean you join. It just puts you on the list of those wanting to play for, say, 24 hours. The creator then simply picks people from those that applied;
- Configurable turn time allowances. I think a game can currently go on for a month (?) before being considered abandoned. Perhaps something in between is needed. Just say you set the turn time to 1 day. Each time a player takes longer than 1 day to do a turn they earn a "Slacker point" or something and you can see how many of those someone has. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We can't have had this conversation for, ooh, nearly a month now.
Really, slow play isn't a problem. It's a minor niggle maybe, but it certainly isn't worth 'solving'.
I say 'solving' in quotes, because every time someone suggests a 'solution' it usually goes down the road of discrimination (of one sort or another). The current modus operandi is fine. if you want to be able to take a turn every time you log in, then join more games (ie, more than 7 ), then you won't notice which ones are moving slowly because it won't matter.
This is a play-by-mail site. It's your turn when it comes around. No sooner. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Mistake! There was an attempt of an automatic insert of the message in a forum. Your message is sent to hell. Try still times who knows - can it will turn out? Still probably, that you too long wrote the message - then pass to page back, copy the text, update page, insert the copied text and press button "Send". |
OK, who composed that error message?  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
hagin
Joined: 12 Aug 07 Posts: 121
Location: Perth, WA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
freduk wrote: | I say 'solving' in quotes, because every time someone suggests a 'solution' it usually goes down the road of discrimination (of one sort or another). |
Getting fast players when you ask for fast players is "discrimination"?
Quote: | The current modus operandi is fine. |
For you maybe but the fact that the issues comes up, like you say, pretty much every month tells a pretty clear story that it isn't for everybody.
Quote: | if you want to be able to take a turn every time you log in, then join more games (ie, more than 7 ), then you won't notice which ones are moving slowly because it won't matter. |
Utter nonsense.
Your "theory" has three flaws:
1. Being involved in more games is worse than being involved in fewer games that player quicker;
2. If a game goes on sufficiently long, you forget what is happening and there is a tendency to simply lose interest. I had a Puerto Rico game go on for 3-4 months just recently and by the time it was over I was simply glad it was over; and
3. More games = less concentration on each one. I'm usually in between 10 and 15 Reef Encounter games at a time and sometimes one will end and I'll struggle to remember what happened and how I won or lost. Its lost in a blur of other games.
Quote: | This is a play-by-mail site. It's your turn when it comes around. No sooner. |
That's fine for you and you feel justified in removing alternatives from people who want to play quicker why exactly? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stargate

Joined: 09 Dec 04 Posts: 603
Location: North Attleboro, Ma USA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am with freduk on this
this thread is a repeat of many others
and he is correct the >>> the solution will become some form of discrimination
since 11/29/2006 I have logged 1464 completed games
many of which were open games I created >> my comment line is ALL WELCOME
or open games I joined
my guess is that less then 1 percent of those games were painfully long
and maybe another 2 to 3 percent more were slow
note >> my idea of slow may be different from others on this site
my math on this is 122 completed games per month
and most days I have between 45-65 active games
also in that time only 7 games have been added to my abandoned games list  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kanga
Joined: 27 Oct 05 Posts: 1503
Location: Moe, Victoria, Australia
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think these suggested modifications, which would only be of use to the few players who do care, fall under the category of "useful suggestion, but time would be better spent developing new games".
If you want some fast moving games, then one approach I have successfully used before is to create a game with a password, and put a maximum average turn time (of say, 4 hours). Post the password in forums, and you'll soon have a speedy game.
Or alternatively, do the same without a password, just put a comment like "players with average turn times less than 4 hours only please". Most people will respect this.
I'd say that when creating "speedy games" without a password, in over 50% of the cases I get a genuinely fast moving game.
If you state 1-2 turns a day you dont guarantee fast moving players. If you log in twice a day, but both times are close together, then you'll still be a slow player for everyone who doesn't play in your timezone. Average turn times tend to sort this out. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, the same old arguments are repeated each time. You could ake a look though the previous threads, but to save time, I'll give it a go here.
Quote: | Getting fast players when you ask for fast players is "discrimination"? |
No, but having a automatic rating system whereby the faster you play, the more stars you get, will quickly lead to a situation where only the fastest players will be able to join games, because everyone will set that entry level in their games. The same goes for the "I only want players that have completed 20/50/100 games" argument. (not yet mentioned in this thread, thankfully). This will prevent players with reduced internet availability from joining games. Imagine what would happen if you went on a 3-week holiday.
Most people respect a game request that states "1-2 turns per day". Some don't, but you meet these people in all walks of life.
Quote: | For you maybe but the fact that the issues comes up, like you say, pretty much every month tells a pretty clear story that it isn't for everybody. |
If you look, you'll find the issue comes up regularly, but only from "new" members. Once you've been here a while, you'll realise it isn't a problem. I thought it was a problem when I first joined. I now realise it isn't. If you're that interested, take a look back through previous threads and you'll see it's brought up by relative "newbies", and argued down by "old-timers". Maybe you'll be on this side of the fence in a year or so .
Quote: | Your "theory" has three flaws:
1. Being involved in more games is worse than being involved in fewer games that player quicker; |
Why? Apart from being a generalisation, you don't give your reasons (unless these are the next 2 comments, in which case we'll downgrade my flaw-level to 2 )
Quote: | 2. If a game goes on sufficiently long, you forget what is happening and there is a tendency to simply lose interest. I had a Puerto Rico game go on for 3-4 months just recently and by the time it was over I was simply glad it was over; and |
There is a pretty good gamelog, if you need to refresh. There is also a notepad facility in which you can make game notes to remind yourself of your strategy.
Quote: | 3. More games = less concentration on each one. I'm usually in between 10 and 15 Reef Encounter games at a time and sometimes one will end and I'll struggle to remember what happened and how I won or lost. Its lost in a blur of other games. |
Isn't this the same flaw? I'm dowgrading myself to flaw-level 1 now
Incidentally, this comes with the same solution. Reef is a good example of where you should use the gamelog anyway, as it's not immediately obvious from the board position what your opponent(s) did that turn.
Quote: | That's fine for you and you feel justified in removing alternatives from people who want to play quicker why exactly? |
I hope I've answered that question. auto-ranking people by speed (or games completed, or percentage win, etc) will lead to slower/newer players finding it increasingly harder to join games. If you really find it a problem, set up a passworded game, then advertise the password in these fora. The general standard of forum-reading player is much higher than those non-forum-reading part-timers!  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good grief, it took me so long to write my last reply, two other people snuck in the gap! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
GamesOnTheBrain

Joined: 14 Jun 07 Posts: 191
Location: Cleveland, OH
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just so everyone knows, I'm not trying to start a fight or anything. I'm just trying to have a cordial debate...
"this thread is a repeat of many others "
The fact that is a discussion that frequently comes up is a sign to me that it's a real problem.
"and most days I have between 45-65 active games"
I agree with hagin on this... More games = less concentration. My mind would simply fry if I tried to play 50+ games at once with any amount of attention whatsoever.
"Or alternatively, do the same without a password, just put a comment like 'players with average turn times less than 4 hours only please'. Most people will respect this.
I'd say that when creating "speedy games" without a password, in over 50% of the cases I get a genuinely fast moving game."
So by your own admission, 50% of the time you ask for a fast game, you don't get one? That sounds to me like you agree that this *is* a problem. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK, taking the specific examples of your 7 currently active games.
3 have comments to the effect of requesting fast play. They all have last-turn dates of today.
The other 4 don't have this request in the comment. None of them is more than 2 days old.
Looking in more depth at the 3 games that requested fast play. In one of the games, there was no action on Nov 21st. Apart from that they have all seen movement every day since they started.
Is this really a major problem?
I don't mean to sound as though I'm picking on you, but I'd far rather the developers spent their very precious time on new games or genuine gameplay bugs. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
smlait

Joined: 16 Jul 06 Posts: 392
Location: alberta, canada
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hagin wrote: | Getting fast players when you ask for fast players is "discrimination"? |
Define "fast player". I consider myself to be a pretty darn speedy opponent on most days; however, my average turn time is 4.2 hours because I've left a few games to languish for weeks because they were buggy (bugs reported, of course). I also went on vacation once, letting my opponents know that I'd be off for 2 weeks. So, apparently, you don't want to play with me - though I'd bet you really do. (I've had games complete in a day or two when playing against stargate, shizzane or some equally speedy opponent.)
Also, any automated system *will* discriminate against new players since they'll have no record and therefore can't qualify to play in "fast" games. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|