Site Ideas
07 Nov 09
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasThat's why it should be optional. People like you can SET AUTOSKULL OFF, preserving 'friendly' games. People like me, who prefer strict enforcement of time controls, can SET AUTOSKULL ON.
Okay.
This is my opinion:
Auto skull is not good. Sometimes I want to play with a friend, where time doesn't matter. If he is out for a month, then he'll know that the game is still there when he returns.
Also, when someone asks me nicely to not skull him out, if he has a good reason, then I might ignore the clock.
In both these cases auto skulling would destroy.
(I didn't know other corr sites with auto skulling. Thanks for the info.)
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by SwissGambitIf RHP were to have Autoskull of any kind, I think it should be part of the game set up.
That's why it should be optional. People like you can SET AUTOSKULL OFF, preserving 'friendly' games. People like me, who prefer strict enforcement of time controls, can SET AUTOSKULL ON.
I'd hate to think I got timed out when I couldn't get online (busy doing something else) by a guy who wasn't online (busy doing something else).
P-
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitActually nothing about you threatens me Phlabs.
So, you prefer I have no say in site ideas?
How is this?
Read through my posts here, I've given several reasons why I think timeouts should NOT be automatic and all you can do is feel threatened by my opinions on the subject.
Nice work.
P-
What irks the hell out of me, is you are going on about something that doesn't even effect you. Christ you don't play enough games for the option to mean anything to you one way or the other.
You don't think it is a good idea for people to be able to decide for themselves if the they want the skull on or off? Why?
Be nice to hear from people who actually play the game on a regular basis!
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitRHP shouldn't be exactly like OTB.
If you were playing OTB, and your opponent's flag fell while you're in the shower, picking up a pizza, or doing dishes is it possible to have someone else claim flag for you?
Or do you have to check the clock yourself?
P-
Take illegal moves. If RHP was like OTB, you could submit an illegal move, and it would be up to the opponent to submit a claim. Let's say he doesn't notice it until 40 moves later, and then makes the claim. The game now has to be reset to the last legal position! Woohoo, now we're holding up tourneys because one game has to be re-played.
The computer is able to enforce legality without bias to either player. Why shouldn't it be allowed to do the same with time controls?
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by SwissGambitInteresting idea! That it would be possible to submit illegal moves!
RHP shouldn't be exactly like OTB.
Take illegal moves. If RHP was like OTB, you could submit an illegal move, and it would be up to the opponent to submit a claim. Let's say he doesn't notice it until 40 moves later, and then makes the claim. The game now has to be reset to the last legal position! Woohoo, now we're holding up tourneys because one gam ...[text shortened]... thout bias to either player. Why shouldn't it be allowed to do the same with time controls?
But I would suggest (if this idea would come true) that if I recieve an illegal move, I can accept the move, or claim it illegal before I make the next move (and not 40 moves later). If I don't claim it illegal right away, I forfeit the right to do so in the future, in order not to delay a tournament.
But what will happen if I do claim an illegal move? Do I win the game immediately? Or do I get extra days in my timebank? Interesting question.
But apart from this - I find the current rules quite okay. Leave it as it is. Ket the system make illegal moves impossible.
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitThat raises a good point - it wouldn't be fair to have games with one player using autoskull and the other one not.
If RHP were to have Autoskull of any kind, I think it should be part of the game set up.
I'd hate to think I got timed out when I couldn't get online (busy doing something else) by a guy who wasn't online (busy doing something else).
P-
So, make it part of the game setup, with a popup warning if it goes against the player's preference.
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by SwissGambitCC is never exactly like OTB, but I still feel each user should be there to click the skull UNLESS they've BOTH decided at the start of game that timeouts will automatically clock.
RHP shouldn't be exactly like OTB.
Take illegal moves. If RHP was like OTB, you could submit an illegal move, and it would be up to the opponent to submit a claim. Let's say he doesn't notice it until 40 moves later, and then makes the claim. The game now has to be reset to the last legal position! Woohoo, now we're holding up tourneys because one gam ...[text shortened]... thout bias to either player. Why shouldn't it be allowed to do the same with time controls?
So if auto skull were to be an option, I'd prefer it were a per-game option at start and not per user option.
P-
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitThen we have the tourneys/ Clans, Clubs & Site to consider. It would have to be one way or the other for those.
CC is never exactly like OTB, but I still feel each user should be there to click the skull UNLESS they've BOTH decided at the start of game that timeouts will automatically clock.
So if auto skull were to be an option, I'd prefer it were a per-game option at start and not per user option.
P-
I would prefer auto skull for those personally.
09 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitI think that is a good compromise.
CC is never exactly like OTB, but I still feel each user should be there to click the skull UNLESS they've BOTH decided at the start of game that timeouts will automatically clock.
So if auto skull were to be an option, I'd prefer it were a per-game option at start and not per user option.
P-
How about this implementation.
- Autoskull preference can be set ON or OFF.
- When I create open invites, it sets them up according to my preference.
- If another user with the opposite preference accepts the invite, they get a popup warning them that the game's autoskull setting doesn't match their preference. They can bail out if they choose.
- If I try to enter events, like tourneys, that have auto-skull, and my preference is NOT to have it, I'm given a popup warning.
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by SwissGambitWell, that's why it's set PER GAME, not PER USER.
I think that is a good compromise.
How about this implementation.
- Autoskull preference can be set ON or OFF.
- When I create open invites, it sets them up according to my preference.
- If another user with the opposite preference accepts the invite, they get a popup warning them that the game's autoskull setting doesn't match their preference. ...[text shortened]... urneys, that have auto-skull, and my preference is NOT to have it, I'm given a popup warning.
At start of game each user should know there and then IF the game is set for autotime.
It shouldn't have anything to do with a player setting, it's part of the game set.
Much like you or I don't have a setting for Rated/Unrated/Set Position.
You shouldn't look to a player to see if they are AutoTime control, you should look at the games they are playing to know if they are autotimed.
The reasoning for this is much like users who turn vacation on and off. This would be part of the game setup, not a player preference.
P-
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitYes, I agree ... for open invites, make autoskull a game-by-game setting. The autoskull preference would mainly be to warn the user before they accept a game that doesn't match their preference.
Well, that's why it's set PER GAME, not PER USER.
At start of game each user should know there and then IF the game is set for autotime.
It shouldn't have anything to do with a player setting, it's part of the game set.
Much like you or I don't have a setting for Rated/Unrated/Set Position.
You shouldn't look to a player to see if they are Auto ...[text shortened]... vacation on and off. This would be part of the game setup, not a player preference.
P-
For tourneys, clan challenges, etc. I think it all needs to be played the same way - either all autoskull, or none. I think tourneys at least need to be autoskull so that they can't be delayed too long.
22 Dec 09
Originally posted by SwissGambitWe have way to many pop-ups...
I think that is a good compromise.
How about this implementation.
- Autoskull preference can be set ON or OFF.
- When I create open invites, it sets them up according to my preference.
- If another user with the opposite preference accepts the invite, they get a popup warning them that the game's autoskull setting doesn't match their preference. ...[text shortened]... urneys, that have auto-skull, and my preference is NOT to have it, I'm given a popup warning.