- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
As a different fix to the vacation system, how about the following:
Rather than moving immediately, while you are on vacation, any moves you make are stored, and
sent immediately you leave vacation.
This prevents you being timed out, because there is no window where you are due to move, but your opponent can hit a skull. But you cannot disrupt tournaments or pump your rating, because you cannot finish games either.
I believe this would also fix 0/N games, as your timebank will decrease until you leave vacation.
You can still join tournaments (on of my concerns), but you cannot move.
Originally posted by gezzaWhy would we want to stop people from moving while on vacation? That would slow the vacationer's games down even more.
As a different fix to the vacation system, how about the following:
Rather than moving immediately, while you are on vacation, any moves you make are stored, and
sent immediately you leave vacation.
This prevents you being timed out, because there is no window where you are due to move, but your opponent can hit a skull. But you cannot disrupt tourname ...[text shortened]... you leave vacation.
You can still join tournaments (on of my concerns), but you cannot move.
- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
Originally posted by SwissGambitThe point was that there had been complaints about the vacation system. The suggestion would actually meet the original intent, that you get to move after coming back from vacation without your opponent being able to time you out.
Why would we want to stop people from moving while on vacation? That would slow the vacationer's games down even more.
It might have the effect you said, but might have the opposite effect, since it would also discourage people from putting the flag up unless they were on vacation and completely unable to move for a while.
It was one of several ideas I threw into the open, to see what came back. In this case, not much.
I have two objections about the current vacation system:
(1) When one player in a game is on vacation, he has immunity of being time out. I think the other player in the same game should have immunity too. In fairness.
(2) Subscribers have vacation rights, non-subs have not. This brings into an unfairness between two players, one sub, the other non-sub. I say that vacation rights should be equal to all. In fairness.
Originally posted by FabianFnasI reckon the sub desreves more than the non sub but could see the non sub being allowed say 10 days or 14 days per year to our 36.
I have two objections about the current vacation system:
(1) When one player in a game is on vacation, he has immunity of being time out. I think the other player in the same game should have immunity too. In fairness.
(2) Subscribers have vacation rights, non-subs have not. This brings into an unfairness between two players, one sub, the other non-sub. I say that vacation rights should be equal to all. In fairness.
Originally posted by MctaytoI reckon, to be fair, the vacation system shouldn't be available in any games where non-subs are playing.
I reckon the sub deserves more than the non sub but could see the non sub being allowed say 10 days or 14 days per year to our 36.
For example: it should be an equal terms game at all times.
[unlike the grossly one-sided rules at present]
I seriously don't understand why someone who pays money should get a bigger timebank - no way can anyone justifiably say they "deserve" it..
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveWe all take holidays, we all run the risk of being timed out because of it. Vaccation days take care of that.
I reckon, to be fair, the vacation system shouldn't be available in any games where non-subs are playing.
For example: it should be an [b]equal terms game at all times.
[unlike the grossly one-sided rules at present]
I seriously don't understand why someone who pays money should get a bigger timebank - no way can anyone justifiably say they "deserve" it..[/b]
If I was running the site then personally I would widen the gap between subs & non subs on all fronts. At present other than clans and vaccation system a non sub is more prone to open multiple accounts thereby achieving volume of games required etc.
Originally posted by MctaytoFair enough; you need vacation time but it shouldn't be one-sided and used as a timebank against non-subs. I agree subscribers should get extra but not extra advantages in the actual games. That's completely wrong.
We all take holidays, we all run the risk of being timed out because of it. Vaccation days take care of that.
If I was running the site then personally I would widen the gap between subs & non subs on all fronts. At present other than clans and vaccation system a non sub is more prone to open multiple accounts thereby achieving volume of games required etc.
Also, I would think it's more likely to tempt certain people [non-subs] to get multiple accounts to counteract the disappearance by vacation of their opponents.
Personally, I don't care really - I only play a few games at a time, by choice. 🙂
- Joined
- 12 Nov 05
- Moves
- 145614
i think vacation should only be appliable in tournies/clan matches/clan leagues where the outcome is more important than just rating points
also if you are not allowed to move during vacation then you will be mass timeouted as soon as the flag drops - on the page it says "in games of risk of timeout move before your vacation ends"
How about this (abstracted from other suggestions, not original ideas):
1. Vacation grants immunity to both players
2. Scheduled vacation periods are shown so that the other player, not on vacation, knows when it's scheduled to end
3. At least 24 hours notice with full protection is given if a vacation is cancelled early
4. Play continues during scheduled vacations, as it currently does
This grants equal protection to both players (non-subs and those who did not schedule the vacation).
It's fair to all, preserves the vacation system, and still allows games to progress, rather than stalling them for what could be two and a half months each year.
Originally posted by gezzaBetter still, just get rid of the stupid vacation system.
As a different fix to the vacation system, how about the following:
Rather than moving immediately, while you are on vacation, any moves you make are stored, and
sent immediately you leave vacation.
This prevents you being timed out, because there is no window where you are due to move, but your opponent can hit a skull. But you cannot disrupt tourname ...[text shortened]... you leave vacation.
You can still join tournaments (on of my concerns), but you cannot move.
Originally posted by adramforallThat might be better, but even so, there are some things that are not likely to happen. For instance, it would be great if Antarctica were to have the same climate as Western Europe or the US mid-atlantic states. We'd have a lot more farmland, but there would be consequences too. Either way, wishing it were so isn't going to make it happen. We might, however, be able to affect some changes to the vacation system that would make it fair to all players, and also more transparent, taking away some possible manipulations.
Better still, just get rid of the stupid vacation system.
Originally posted by FabianFnasHow is that fair? The sub is paying $29.95, the non-sub is freeloading. Of course the sub should get a better deal. Non-sub should just get a taste of the system (say six games TOTAL) and then have to decide if they want to continue (and pay) or not. Just like if you download software and get to use it free for a limited time, to see if you like it.
(2) Subscribers have vacation rights, non-subs have not. This brings into an unfairness between two players, one sub, the other non-sub. I say that vacation rights should be equal to all. In fairness.
Originally posted by Dr Strangelovecarry that logic further, and you can't justify ANY benefit for being a member - like not seeing the adds and oh, tournaments and unlimited games and so on. And if there's no benefit, why would anybody pay sub fees?
I reckon, to be fair, the vacation system shouldn't be available in any games where non-subs are playing.
For example: it should be an [b]equal terms game at all times.
[unlike the grossly one-sided rules at present]
I seriously don't understand why someone who pays money should get a bigger timebank - no way can anyone justifiably say they "deserve" it..[/b]