Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[soulnet]

Feature request: When showing the log of a complete game (probably best to put in the log prettyfier directly?), add a button to generate a game report, stating the players and final score (possibly as player1 20 - 10 player2) the kingdom with the image of the cards as in the kingdom visualizer and the kingdom written down in a code box, to copy and paste into a forum post (for tournaments, but also for game reports in general, like in the Help subforum).

EDIT: Include in the game report a link to the prettyfied log itself. Preferable as an url tag.

[Awaclus]

Wow, that is awful when combined with the group blacklist function. If enough people do this, suddenly people who play #vpoff (the default way to play the game) are blacklisted by everybody that has, say, "Blacklist the 10% most blacklisted players" enabled. Way to abuse that feature.

Fun fact: I have the option enabled in hopes of blacklisting #vpoff people.

[AdamH]

Wow, that is awful when combined with the group blacklist function. If enough people do this, suddenly people who play #vpoff (the default way to play the game) are blacklisted by everybody that has, say, "Blacklist the 10% most blacklisted players" enabled. Way to abuse that feature.

Fun fact: I have the option enabled in hopes of blacklisting #vpoff people.

I'm really hesitant to enter into this discussion because people have been kind of snippy. So all I'm going to say is that I think this is a really really bad idea and I think you should reconsider.

[ragingduckd]

Sorry for not chiming in earlier.  I am going to implement VP counter options for automatch, probably sometime in the next week.  If you blacklist (no-automatch) #vpoff people in the interim, just remember to remove them afterwards.

[LastFootnote]

Playing the game by the rules means not using a point counter.

You can italicize stuff all you want but that doesn't make it true.

You're right. The fact that the rules don't specifically allow a VP counter makes it true.

To make my position clear, the reason I oppose automatching games based on VP tracker is that the more such qualifiers you have, the harder it is to find matches. Some qualifiers are important: "ranking ±X" and "Pro/Casual" are obviously key. But as you start including VP trackers preferences, hate list preferences, maximum quit %, etc., it takes longer and longer to find games, especially if your preferences for any of these are in the minority.

I'm not trying to force people to play the game "my way". Again, if two people agree to play a variant where a computer keeps track of the score for them, fine. I think it's a little strange that it's allowed in a "Pro" mode, but whatever. It's the fact that people who want to play by the rules are being discriminated against when it comes to matchmaking that gets me.

Sorry for not chiming in earlier.  I am going to implement VP counter options for automatch, probably sometime in the next week.  If you blacklist (no-automatch) #vpoff people in the interim, just remember to remove them afterwards.

But…can't I still just type "#vpoff" once the game starts? If so, this solves nothing.

On a side note, I have now turned off my "Always #vpoff" setting. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Apparently Dominion has been effectively abandoned in favor of this variant.

[Donald X.]

To make my position clear, the reason I oppose automatching games based on VP tracker is that the more such qualifiers you have, the harder it is to find matches. Some qualifiers are important: "ranking ±X" and "Pro/Casual" are obviously key. But as you start including VP trackers preferences, hate list preferences, maximum quit %, etc., it takes longer and longer to find games, especially if your preferences for any of these are in the minority.

Well it seems obvious that Making Fun is only working on the game because they think they can actually end up with a lot more people playing. And if they do then it will be less hard to find people who match whatever you've picked.

I did not end up including hate list as an option, so, if what I proposed is actually used, that isn't part of it (it would stop you from getting matched with someone in a casual game who forced a card you hate-listed to be used, but that's it). And I put quit% on the "blocked list" screen instead, thinking, most people aren't thinking about this and the best possible system wouldn't even include it (instead you let people finish the game vs. a bot if a player has to leave).

[ragingduckd]

Sorry for not chiming in earlier.  I am going to implement VP counter options for automatch, probably sometime in the next week.  If you blacklist (no-automatch) #vpoff people in the interim, just remember to remove them afterwards.

But…can't I still just type "#vpoff" once the game starts? If so, this solves nothing.

You can try...

[LastFootnote]

But…can't I still just type "#vpoff" once the game starts? If so, this solves nothing.

You can try...

I'm asking if it will work.

[ragingduckd]

But…can't I still just type "#vpoff" once the game starts? If so, this solves nothing.

You can try...

I'm asking if it will work.

As a wise old programmer once said,

"In a battle between Javascript and a user typing what he thinks are "commands" into an HTML widget--

[LastFootnote]

A simple "no" would have sufficed.

[AndrewisFTTW]

A simple "no" would have sufficed.

Cartman is better.

[SCSN]

To make my position clear, the reason I oppose automatching games based on VP tracker is that the more such qualifiers you have, the harder it is to find matches. Some qualifiers are important: "ranking ±X" and "Pro/Casual" are obviously key. But as you start including VP trackers preferences, hate list preferences, maximum quit %, etc., it takes longer and longer to find games, especially if your preferences for any of these are in the minority.

It has always been possible to select by those criteria, as you can just manually refuse games against people who you know don't satisfy them. There are only a handful of people who ever refused to turn the point tracker on after I asked them in chat "I strongly prefer to play with the point tracker, would you mind turning it on?" when they initially turned it off. Before it occured to me to blacklist them I just remembered their names and refused proposed matches.

And given that I won't end up playing you anyway, would you rather be matched to me, have your match rejected and be forced to restart automatch, or not be matched to me in the first place?

I guess your real answer is that you'd rather just play me under your preferred conditions, but as long as I can find a game that I know will be much more enjoyable to me within half a minute, I'm always going to prefer that one. I understand that it sucks, but it's a simple fact of life that those with options are the ones able to choose.

[SCSN]

Sorry for not chiming in earlier.  I am going to implement VP counter options for automatch, probably sometime in the next week.  If you blacklist (no-automatch) #vpoff people in the interim, just remember to remove them afterwards.

But…can't I still just type "#vpoff" once the game starts? If so, this solves nothing.

You can try...

Man, this evokes wild memories of when rating-based auto-kick was just introduced... guys trying to join your game over and over and over and over again.

I never understood what motivated them. After 19 kicks, do you really think the 20th attempt will get you in? Or are you just trying to annoy me because I don't enjoy playing games where I can open double Curse and still win?

[EgorK]

Playing the game by the rules means not using a point counter.

Playing the game by the rules also mean we must remember to timely reveal our reactions, not being prompted to do so. This is also important skill for live Dominion. So, as we already playing variant and not Dominion we can as well add point counter

[pst]

To make my position clear, the reason I oppose automatching games based on VP tracker is that the more such qualifiers you have, the harder it is to find matches. Some qualifiers are important: "ranking ±X" and "Pro/Casual" are obviously key. But as you start including VP trackers preferences, hate list preferences, maximum quit %, etc., it takes longer and longer to find games, especially if your preferences for any of these are in the minority.

Of course the more qualifiers individual players have, the harder it is for them to find matches. Everyone knows that. When you choose the option "I only want to play against players who will chat in Volapük" you know that it will be harder to find matches. If you do that anyway, it is because you think it's worth it, even though it gets harder to find matches.

But that doesn't mean that it will be harder to find matches among all players when players can state what they want. For me (and anyone who may want to play against me) it will be easier, for instance. As it is I find zero games with autoplay, since I don't use it as I don't want to risk meeting people who turn off the counter. I've been waiting for the coming feature since automatch was introduced.

I'm not trying to force people to play the game "my way". Again, if two people agree to play a variant where a computer keeps track of the score for them, fine.

That's good to hear; but then you wouldn't be against a method for us to actually do that?

[hsiale]

To make my position clear, the reason I oppose automatching games based on VP tracker is that the more such qualifiers you have, the harder it is to find matches.

I prefer to find less matches but not find matches I'd rather not play.

Some qualifiers are important: "ranking ±X" and "Pro/Casual" are obviously key. But as you start including VP trackers preferences, hate list preferences, maximum quit %, etc., it takes longer and longer to find games, especially if your preferences for any of these are in the minority.

What is important and what is not is a matter of personal preference, everyone should be able to finetune his filter. If it turns out someone's filter returns too few games, that player should reconsider the settings.

I'm not trying to force people to play the game "my way". Again, if two people agree to play a variant where a computer keeps track of the score for them, fine. I think it's a little strange that it's allowed in a "Pro" mode, but whatever. It's the fact that people who want to play by the rules are being discriminated against when it comes to matchmaking that gets me.

There is no difference between refusing automatch and refusing the game after automatch tries to pair us (other than we both waste more time in second case). If I don't want to play against you, I simply will not do it, no matter how tedious it is. Goko doesn't force me to play anyone.

Sorry for not chiming in earlier.  I am going to implement VP counter options for automatch, probably sometime in the next week.  If you blacklist (no-automatch) #vpoff people in the interim, just remember to remove them afterwards.

Could you add one more VP counter setting: "Allow others to use, but even when they do, don't display it to me"? I think (maybe I'm wrong) that currently denying your opponent the VP counter is the only way to not see it while using Salvager, maybe some people will be happy to let their opponents see the points counter if this doesn't mean they also have to see it.

To check the interest in the above proposal: @LastFootnote and other anti-counter players: would you be happy with such setting (you see no points counter, your opponent sees it) allowing everyone play the way they like?

[ragingduckd]

Could you add one more VP counter setting: "Allow others to use, but even when they do, don't display it to me"? I think (maybe I'm wrong) that currently denying your opponent the VP counter is the only way to not see it while using Salvager, maybe some people will be happy to let their opponents see the points counter if this doesn't mean they also have to see it.

Sure, it's always easy to take features away.

[GwinnR]

Just one note on the leaderboard-discussion: Wouldn't it be possible to search games where Goko says that player A is better and isotropic says Player B is better? Then you could compare how the games end and see which system is right in most times.

[ragingduckd]

A simple "no" would have sufficed.

Sorry about that, LF.  I didn't intend any offense.  It's not the first time I've tried to be funny and ended up sounding disrespectful.

Here's a clearer answer:

No, the Javscript has complete control over how the "#vpon" and "#vpoff" commands are interpreted.  The worst that an abusive user could do would be to modify the "vpon/off" in the automatch table (assuming he's the host). 

Even then, it wouldn't work unless he's running an old version of the extension, since the updated version will be able to deal with this kind of chicanery.  And an opponent who runs the latest version would be immune to it anyway.

So probably the worst he could actually do would be to turn #vpon for himself after automatching with #vpoff, and that only if he ends up being the automatch host.  And doing that would get a lot people to blacklist him pretty fast.

Of course, all of this is contingent on me actually coding it up correctly...

[sudgy]

To check the interest in the above proposal: @LastFootnote and other anti-counter players: would you be happy with such setting (you see no points counter, your opponent sees it) allowing everyone play the way they like?

No, that gives my opponent an unfair advantage.  When my opponent is using the point counter I use it (even though I don't like it).

[soulnet]

Another feature request: At the end of a game, a button to offer a rematch, if both press, do a rematch with the same options. Simpler version: host gets the button, automatically make a table with "For XXX #vpon/#vpoff" in the name. Other non-simple version: button to offer a rematch that raises a pop-up for the other player similar to the automatch offer one (or even the same) to accept/reject.

[eHalcyon]

Playing the game by the rules means not using a point counter.

Playing the game by the rules also mean we must remember to timely reveal our reactions, not being prompted to do so. This is also important skill for live Dominion. So, as we already playing variant and not Dominion we can as well add point counter

"We're already playing a variant so we might as well add other variant rules too."  This is a terrible argument.  Online Dominion is itself a variant of live Dominion with physical cards, by virtue of being a digital implementation.  That doesn't mean that we should take liberties with the rules.  Being online necessitates that some things will have to change, but the question is how faithful we remain to the original rules.  We have to draw the line somewhere.

On the question of reactions, no, revealing in a timely manner is not an important skill.  It's just etiquette, as is waiting to see if anybody wants to play a reaction.  This is why pretty much every reaction occurs when there is a natural break in the gameplay, so that players have time to reveal them.  There is often no such break in the online implementation though, because the computer will handle things like revealing cards from the top of your deck.  That's why there needs to be an actual prompt to reveal your reaction.  IRL, the prompt is the natural break in action, when you are dealing with whatever event that allows you to reveal the reaction in the first place.


On the point tracker stuff, it's a difficult subject.  Point tracker is certainly outside of the official rules, but it's also something that comes with the online territory.  People can track on their own, or look back through the log.  Salvager just facilitates the process.  SCSN is correct that tweaking automatch to take those preferences into account is also just facilitating the process of manually rejecting matches.

I think allowing for an automated point tracker is acceptable, and even practical considering the environment.  It is absolutely a variant though, and I respect that some people would prefer to stick as close to the official rules as possible.

[ragingduckd]

Automatch VP counter options released in v2.5.3.2 (beta).

If you use the automatch dialog, you can select On, Off, or Any.  You'll get the same result using auto-automatch by adding #vpon, #vpoff, or nothing to your game title.

As usual, there are cross-version complications.  When two beta users match, the vp option is binding like it should be.  When a beta user matches with a regular user, there's a fundamental conflict.  You can't have both the beta and the old versions behaving the way they're supposed to.

I've resolved the conflict in the most sensible way I could think of.  You'll probably won't notice the problem unless you go hunting for it, and it'll go away entirely once the beta code goes into the official release.

I'll probably also implement additional options for "Any, prefer On" and "Any, prefer Off," but I haven't quite worked out how these should operate.

[yed]

Automatch VP counter options released in v2.5.3.2 (beta).

Is this also in github beta branch? I have only 2.5.3.1 there.

[ragingduckd]

Automatch VP counter options released in v2.5.3.2 (beta).

Is this also in github beta branch? I have only 2.5.3.1 there.

It is now.  I had forgotten to push it to github.