Print

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

[sandstorm]

I think one of the current big problems with Goko relative to Isotropic is the way the multiplayer lobby is set up.  On iso you can just jump in and pick automatch and you will be up and running in no time.  Goko's current lobby requires you to create a session or join someone's existing session.  There is no way to sort and the whole thing is sort of a mash of pro and casual games.  Some games have a variable amount of seats, locked seats, and very specific game conditions.  The lobby feels clunky and a little chaotic.  Therefore, I present to you my framework for a solution to this problem

Use More Rooms

I'm not sure if everyone is aware of this but Goko's multiplayer lobby has about 20 different rooms.  However, when you select multiplayer it defaults to sending you to the 'Council Room' (homage to a lost site??).  I think it would be best if these different rooms were used to separate the different kind of game parameters instead of setting the parameters when creating a game session.  For example, in its most basic form you would have Casual rooms and Pro rooms.

Leaderboards

Goko currently has 4 different leaderboards.  I feel that 3 of these leaderboards are pretty much pointless.  Having an adventure leaderboard is absurd, casual leaderboard is almost an oxymoron, and daily leaderboard is simply unnecessary.  The pro leaderboard needs various improvements (mainly that you disappear from the board if you haven't played within 'x' number of days).  However, I think there is a golden opportunity to improve over isotropic.  Iso ranks everyone on the same board regardless of whether you predominantly play 2 player, 3 player, or 4 player.  This isn't really that big of an issue on Iso since I would guess that at least 95% of games are 2 player.  However, I think that if Goko created separate leaderboards for 2, 3, and 4 players it would not only make more meaningful leaderboards but it would also encourage players to branch out from playing 2 player exclusively.

Money Money Money

One other obstacle to having a meaningful leaderboard and an effective automatch function is the fact that not everyone will have purchased all the cards.  I feel that if you really want to have a good leaderboard everyone should be on the same level playing field.  You also don't want to enter an automatch and constantly end up playing someone who hasn't bought anything and be forced to play all base set cards with a much higher frequency than normal.  You could set the automatch to always pick the player who has bought the most cards to be the host of the session but that encourages people to be freeloaders essentially.  Therefore, I propose that in order to enter one of the pro rooms (as mentioned above) you must own all of the available cards except for Walled Village (explained below).  Goko could even place a 'Pro Pack' in the store that included all cards for some number of Gokoins that advertises access to the Pro Rooms.  This will also require that all promo cards become purchasable.  When guilds or any new expansion is added to the pool of available cards then those cards will have to be purchased as well to let you into the Pro Rooms.

For those that do not know.  You must be logged in with a Google+ account in order to acquire Walled Village.  I know that there are a variety of reasons that some people will simply not be comfortable or not want to log in with a Google+ account.  Therefore I think it is unfair to also require a Google+ account to play in a pro room.  Walled Village could still be randomly included in a pro game if all automatched players own it.

My Grand Vision

Step 1. You click Multiplayer from the front page
Step 2. A menu pops up with 3 options "Create/Join Private Game", "Casual", "Pro" (Pro is faded out if you do not own all cards)
If you choose "Create/Join Private Game" it will take you to a lobby that looks basically exactly like Goko's existing setup except without the option to make a pro game

Casual Step 3. Another menu pops up with the options "2P", "3P", ...."6P"
This then takes you to the corresponding casual room where a button labelled 'Start' will be available that begins the automatch process.  Once the set number of players has been matched one is chosen as the host and the game proceeds with a random set of 10 from that persons cards.

Pro Step 3. Another menu pops up with the options "2P", "3P", "4P"
This will take you to a pro room that works identical to the corresponding casual room except that these rooms will only include people who own all cards and games will be ranked on the corresponding leaderboard.


So there it is.  As easy as 1,2,3 start.  The only problem I see with this setup is how to best implement colonies/shelters.  For the pro games I am thinking they should either be included based on the rule book method or on a fixed % around 30%.  Some people like playing with colonies/shelters all the time and also want to be included on a leaderboard.  I'm not sure of the best way to handle this.

The other thing is veto mode.  This might be something Goko could look at down the road but I don't think it is necessary to have right away.

Any feedback to this outline is strongly encouraged.  I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site. 

[Schneau]

I basically agree with everything you've said except for forcing people to own all the cards to be rated on the pro leaderboard. I think there would be a big outcry against that, basically saying you have to pony up lots of money to be rated in the top tier. I don't really have a better idea, since I do agree that it would definitely lead to way too many Base Dominion games.

One solution would be to combine the players' owned cards when selecting the random kingdom. I sort of feel like this is how it should be anyway, to avoid things like people only buying a single mini-expansion that has cards they specialize in (a la Paralyzed).

[sandstorm]

I basically agree with everything you've said except for forcing people to own all the cards to be rated on the pro leaderboard. I think there would be a big outcry against that, basically saying you have to pony up lots of money to be rated in the top tier. I don't really have a better idea, since I do agree that it would definitely lead to way too many Base Dominion games.

One solution would be to combine the players' owned cards when selecting the random kingdom. I sort of feel like this is how it should be anyway, to avoid things like people only buying a single mini-expansion that has cards they specialize in (a la Paralyzed).

I understand what you are saying but I just want to clarify that you are not paying money to be rated in the top tier.  In my model you have to pay to be ranked at all.  My thinking was that an overwhelming majority of the players who are serious enough about Dominion that they want to be ranked on a leaderboard will purchase all of the cards regardless.

Unfortunately, based on the responses from Goko so far it seems unlikely that you will be able to combine the owned cards of all players involved in a game together.

[Slurms]

I'd prefer to have the options on the one page, rather than multiple popup menus that you suggest.

If there was a settings page where you can check: []Pro []2 Player
and then click 'Automatch based on settings' this seems to me the fastest way to enter a preferred game.
And if the settings saved, then on logging in you could just click 'Automatch based on settings' and go straight to a game.


I like the idea of separate leaderboards based on the number of players.

[Donald X.]

Iso ranks everyone on the same board regardless of whether you predominantly play 2 player, 3 player, or 4 player.  This isn't really that big of an issue on Iso since I would guess that at least 95% of games are 2 player.  However, I think that if Goko created separate leaderboards for 2, 3, and 4 players it would not only make more meaningful leaderboards but it would also encourage players to branch out from playing 2 player exclusively.

I am not sure I see the beauty of this. I think that people who care about the leaderboards would still focus on 2-player. You want to focus on one leaderboard and 2-player is the one you're most able to get games in for. And the games are faster, which is important to people playing lots of games, such as people trying to do well on leaderboards. The only merit of the 3-4 player boards would be that fewer people would be trying to top them.

There may be better leaderboards than what the system has, I am just not so impressed by "number of players" being the distinction.

One thing I've considered is turn order - the "going second" leaderboard. That way you don't need to bitch about how going second made you lose and thus hurt your ranking. I have not gone so far as to suggest it though.

You also don't want to enter an automatch and constantly end up playing someone who hasn't bought anything and be forced to play all base set cards with a much higher frequency than normal.  You could set the automatch to always pick the player who has bought the most cards to be the host of the session but that encourages people to be freeloaders essentially.

I don't like your suggestion at all here. It's tantamount to "give up on the pro leaderboard." I don't want people to have to have all the cards barring promos, and it's especially crazy to expect them to have the promos.

As it stands, I can play a casual game with a particular set of 10. I start the game and it's got my cards. I am ensured that my delightful full set of expansions is in use. I lose that in pro games. So it seems straightforward that the solution is, in pro games, use the set of cards that's larger (except in cases where one isn't a subset of the other). This also reduces the ability a pro has to try to game the system by not buying sets. I am not at all worried about freeloaders; people can already freeload all they want in casual games, and I like that people can be freeloaders.

The other thing is veto mode.  This might be something Goko could look at down the road but I don't think it is necessary to have right away.

I think people would like this but there are so many competing priorities.

I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site.

Currently Goko reports that 5% of played games have 2 or more humans. Five percent, that is not a typo. Obv. making games with multiple humans work better will increase that number, but it's still a significant factor in just how high of a priority this stuff should end up. Better meeting room / matchmaking still made Ted's latest top 7 things list - call it top 8 since Jay is pushing for a German version, which wasn't on the list.

[Kirian]

I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site.

Currently Goko reports that 5% of played games have 2 or more humans. Five percent, that is not a typo. Obv. making games with multiple humans work better will increase that number, but it's still a significant factor in just how high of a priority this stuff should end up. Better meeting room / matchmaking still made Ted's latest top 7 things list - call it top 8 since Jay is pushing for a German version, which wasn't on the list.

I think that's mixing cause with effect.  No one plays multiplayer because it takes a long time to find a game and there's no matchmaking.  Playing vs. computer is quick and simple.  Want to play multiplayer?  Go to Iso, as long as it exists, because it is still better than Goko at multiplayer.

[Donald X.]

I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site.

Currently Goko reports that 5% of played games have 2 or more humans. Five percent, that is not a typo. Obv. making games with multiple humans work better will increase that number, but it's still a significant factor in just how high of a priority this stuff should end up. Better meeting room / matchmaking still made Ted's latest top 7 things list - call it top 8 since Jay is pushing for a German version, which wasn't on the list.

I think that's mixing cause with effect.  No one plays multiplayer because it takes a long time to find a game and there's no matchmaking.  Playing vs. computer is quick and simple.  Want to play multiplayer?  Go to Iso, as long as it exists, because it is still better than Goko at multiplayer.

Dude, so are you suggesting that making games with multiple humans work better would increase that number? Somehow I felt like I covered that ground.

[RisingJaguar]

I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site.

Currently Goko reports that 5% of played games have 2 or more humans. Five percent, that is not a typo. Obv. making games with multiple humans work better will increase that number, but it's still a significant factor in just how high of a priority this stuff should end up. Better meeting room / matchmaking still made Ted's latest top 7 things list - call it top 8 since Jay is pushing for a German version, which wasn't on the list.

I think that's mixing cause with effect.  No one plays multiplayer because it takes a long time to find a game and there's no matchmaking.  Playing vs. computer is quick and simple.  Want to play multiplayer?  Go to Iso, as long as it exists, because it is still better than Goko at multiplayer.

Dude, so are you suggesting that making games with multiple humans work better would increase that number? Somehow I felt like I covered that ground.

I read this the same as Kirian...

Goko only has 5% multiplayer games, thus fixing multiplayer games isn't of the highest priority.  For what it is worth, it is in the top 7, sorta top 8, list of things to fix.

The one line about better multiplayer games will entice others to come, seems muddled up in there especially since it has a big but after it. 

[sandstorm]

Iso ranks everyone on the same board regardless of whether you predominantly play 2 player, 3 player, or 4 player.  This isn't really that big of an issue on Iso since I would guess that at least 95% of games are 2 player.  However, I think that if Goko created separate leaderboards for 2, 3, and 4 players it would not only make more meaningful leaderboards but it would also encourage players to branch out from playing 2 player exclusively.

I am not sure I see the beauty of this. I think that people who care about the leaderboards would still focus on 2-player. You want to focus on one leaderboard and 2-player is the one you're most able to get games in for. And the games are faster, which is important to people playing lots of games, such as people trying to do well on leaderboards. The only merit of the 3-4 player boards would be that fewer people would be trying to top them.

There may be better leaderboards than what the system has, I am just not so impressed by "number of players" being the distinction.

I'm going to have to disagree with this.  I find that Dominion is best played at 3 players and I know I am not the only one who believes this.  Even people who enjoy 2 player best will at times want a change of pace without fear that it will affect their rating which is solved by having a separate leaderboard.  People also don't like waiting for a match to play a game but if there is a separate room explicitly for 3 player competitive games it won't be a problem.  And lastly, the majority of real life Dominion tournaments involve 3 player tables for numerous rounds.  Players will be encouraged to practice for these tournaments online if there is an effective 3 player infrastructure in place on Goko.  However, I will concede that having a 4 player leaderboard is probably a bit of a stretch and not necessary.

One thing I've considered is turn order - the "going second" leaderboard. That way you don't need to bitch about how going second made you lose and thus hurt your ranking. I have not gone so far as to suggest it though.

I'm thinking that if this was implemented it would likely lead to two leaderboards that are almost mirrors of one another.  I would be very surprised if someone is a top 10 player when going first but drops out of the top 100 when going second or vice versa.  Ultimately, I think this would be an unnecessary added complication.  One thing I would recommend is that Goko determine turn order for a game randomly instead of using isotropics method of placing winners last in there next game.

You also don't want to enter an automatch and constantly end up playing someone who hasn't bought anything and be forced to play all base set cards with a much higher frequency than normal.  You could set the automatch to always pick the player who has bought the most cards to be the host of the session but that encourages people to be freeloaders essentially.

I don't like your suggestion at all here. It's tantamount to "give up on the pro leaderboard." I don't want people to have to have all the cards barring promos, and it's especially crazy to expect them to have the promos.

As it stands, I can play a casual game with a particular set of 10. I start the game and it's got my cards. I am ensured that my delightful full set of expansions is in use. I lose that in pro games. So it seems straightforward that the solution is, in pro games, use the set of cards that's larger (except in cases where one isn't a subset of the other). This also reduces the ability a pro has to try to game the system by not buying sets. I am not at all worried about freeloaders; people can already freeload all they want in casual games, and I like that people can be freeloaders.

I think ultimately you are right here.  My thinking was that Goko would not be comfortable implementing an automatch system that always chooses the player who owns the most cards to be the host of the game.  If they are okay with that then not having to own all of the cards to play a pro game sounds great.

I'm hoping that Goko becomes aware of this thread and it influences them to improve the multiplayer on their site.

Currently Goko reports that 5% of played games have 2 or more humans. Five percent, that is not a typo. Obv. making games with multiple humans work better will increase that number, but it's still a significant factor in just how high of a priority this stuff should end up. Better meeting room / matchmaking still made Ted's latest top 7 things list - call it top 8 since Jay is pushing for a German version, which wasn't on the list.

You are correct of course that adding an automatch function would increase that 5% a significant amount.  The other event that will cause that number to rise greatly is the day Isotropic goes down.  If Isotropic goes down and there is no automatch feature there is going to be enough angry customers that I would expect adding an automatch to quickly become a much greater priority.  Out of curiosity, can you reveal what the other 6 items are on that top 8 list?

[Donald X.]

I'm going to have to disagree with this.  I find that Dominion is best played at 3 players and I know I am not the only one who believes this.  Even people who enjoy 2 player best will at times want a change of pace without fear that it will affect their rating which is solved by having a separate leaderboard.  People also don't like waiting for a match to play a game but if there is a separate room explicitly for 3 player competitive games it won't be a problem.  And lastly, the majority of real life Dominion tournaments involve 3 player tables for numerous rounds.  Players will be encouraged to practice for these tournaments online if there is an effective 3 player infrastructure in place on Goko.  However, I will concede that having a 4 player leaderboard is probably a bit of a stretch and not necessary.

I prefer Dominion with 3, then 4, then 2, then 5. But isotropic has 3-player games, and lets you play them without having them affect your rating. So, if 3-player was really going to be a thing I think we would know that.

I think ultimately you are right here.  My thinking was that Goko would not be comfortable implementing an automatch system that always chooses the player who owns the most cards to be the host of the game.  If they are okay with that then not having to own all of the cards to play a pro game sounds great.

Casual games use the cards of the player who starts the game. So I mean. They've already done it, just not for the blind card selection.

You are correct of course that adding an automatch function would increase that 5% a significant amount.  The other event that will cause that number to rise greatly is the day Isotropic goes down.  If Isotropic goes down and there is no automatch feature there is going to be enough angry customers that I would expect adding an automatch to quickly become a much greater priority.

Well, it (% of games that have 2+ humans) will go up, I sure don't know how much. If most isotropic players are still on isotropic now, then this 5% reflects non-isotropic players more, and in the end we expect there to be more of those. And isotropic doesn't have AI, so who knows what % of those games would use the AI if there were one.

Out of curiosity, can you reveal what the other 6 items are on that top 8 list?

Tutorial, next expansion, expansion after that, better store, my changes to the adventures, something. And then better matchmaking/meeting room and well the list was what prompted Jay to say German plz so let's just consider that to be part of it. BSW got a lot of traffic and is down; supporting German soon is for sure the friendly move. I don't think the list is meant to include bugs being fixed, which is to say, it does not seem likely that bugs will be ignored in favor of these things. It's just, this is what they're working on, in various stages.

[sandstorm]

I prefer Dominion with 3, then 4, then 2, then 5. But isotropic has 3-player games, and lets you play them without having them affect your rating. So, if 3-player was really going to be a thing I think we would know that.

The only way you can play 3-player without it affecting your rating is by either not logging in, by playing against only unregistered opponents, or by making a separate account. The first two options are not very appealing if you want to play a competitive 3 player game.  The last option feels counter productive.  Players are trying to get as high on the leaderboard as possible.  Having two competitive accounts requires twice the effort to achieve the same gain.

The thing with isotropic is that it is very streamlined, contains almost the bare minimum to play, and is typically quite fast.  It is this intense speed that attracts many players who like to click as fast as possible.  Everything about iso screams 2 player.  For better or for worse Goko is not isotropic.  Goko looks and (once some more bugs are sorted out) feels more like the actual card game.  In this type of setting I think it is more likely for a competitive 3 player environment to survive.

Tutorial, next expansion, expansion after that, better store, my changes to the adventures, something. And then better matchmaking/meeting room and well the list was what prompted Jay to say German plz so let's just consider that to be part of it. BSW got a lot of traffic and is down; supporting German soon is for sure the friendly move. I don't think the list is meant to include bugs being fixed, which is to say, it does not seem likely that bugs will be ignored in favor of these things. It's just, this is what they're working on, in various stages.

Thanks for the info.  Any idea when the site will be considered officially launched?

[pinkymadigan]

Thanks for the info.  Any idea when the site will be considered officially launched?

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of this "It's still in beta" crap. If they are taking your very real money, then it's as good as launched.

[GendoIkari]

Thanks for the info.  Any idea when the site will be considered officially launched?

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of this "It's still in beta" crap. If they are taking your very real money, then it's as good as launched.

So long as Iso remains up while Goko is "still in beta", I'm perfectly fine with Goko saying in beta for as long as they want.

[Donald X.]

The only way you can play 3-player without it affecting your rating is by either not logging in, by playing against only unregistered opponents, or by making a separate account.

I guess people might not have thought it through, but if you force any card to appear in the set of 10, the game isn't ranked. Otherwise someone would beat people up with King's Court / Masquerade / Goons locks. So, just pick a card you like and you're there.

[Kirian]

The only way you can play 3-player without it affecting your rating is by either not logging in, by playing against only unregistered opponents, or by making a separate account.

I guess people might not have thought it through, but if you force any card to appear in the set of 10, the game isn't ranked. Otherwise someone would beat people up with King's Court / Masquerade / Goons locks. So, just pick a card you like and you're there.

Most people will immediately decline such a game though.

[GendoIkari]

The only way you can play 3-player without it affecting your rating is by either not logging in, by playing against only unregistered opponents, or by making a separate account.

I guess people might not have thought it through, but if you force any card to appear in the set of 10, the game isn't ranked. Otherwise someone would beat people up with King's Court / Masquerade / Goons locks. So, just pick a card you like and you're there.

Most people will immediately decline such a game though.

If they happen to notice. It's not the most obvious thing on Iso when someone sets criteria. And such games used to count for the leaderboard... this was the whole "Paralyzed" issue that happened last year. Someone got to the top of the leaderboard by only using that one Kingdom over and over.

[Donald X.]

The only way you can play 3-player without it affecting your rating is by either not logging in, by playing against only unregistered opponents, or by making a separate account.

I guess people might not have thought it through, but if you force any card to appear in the set of 10, the game isn't ranked. Otherwise someone would beat people up with King's Court / Masquerade / Goons locks. So, just pick a card you like and you're there.

Most people will immediately decline such a game though.

I guess you just like being contrary? Obv. you could say "hey let's play an unrated 3 player game, here's how I can make that happen." If people didn't agree to it then that would mean people did not in fact want to play unrated 3 player games.

Instead I think the approach to arguing that interest level for 3-player games hasn't been tested by isotropic is to say, people don't realize they can do them unrated, and know that you win less often when you have two opponents.

[LastFootnote]

Instead I think the approach to arguing that interest level for 3-player games hasn't been tested by isotropic is to say, people don't realize they can do them unrated, and know that you win less often when you have two opponents.

As far as I can tell, that shouldn't have dissuaded anybody. When you win a 3-player game on isotropic, it effectively counts as winning two games as far as your ranking is concerned. Perhaps that wasn't common knowledge?

[sandstorm]

I feel things are getting a little off course and missing the core point.

The main reason for the existence of a separate 3 player leaderboard is that Dominion plays quite differently at 3 players compared to 2.  I mean you are using the same rules and everything but the way you strategize and approach the game is much different.  Not to mention a significant number of cards have a different power level depending on number of players.

For example, consider tennis. Singles and pairs tennis have the same basic core rules but they are not compared against each other.  They have their separate rankings.

The only way to play 3 player competitive Dominion on Isotropic is to be ranked on the same leaderboard as everyone who mostly plays 2 player which feels awkward and inaccurate.  Isotropic is also an optimized Dominion speed machine.  These two reasons encourage 2 player Dominion.

If Goko were to create a separate leaderboard and competitive meetup room for 3 player then the game would grow.

[Fabian]

If Goko were to create a separate leaderboard and competitive meetup room for 3 player then the game would grow.

If the thought of playing 2 player games on goko is like poison, the thought of playing 3 player games is.. double poison.. or something. Ugh I can't even imagine how awful that would be.

[sandstorm]

If Goko were to create a separate leaderboard and competitive meetup room for 3 player then the game would grow.

If the thought of playing 2 player games on goko is like poison, the thought of playing 3 player games is.. double poison.. or something. Ugh I can't even imagine how awful that would be.

Haha fair enough.  This is all under the assumption that the many other problems and bugs related to gameplay are fixed.

[Kirian]

I guess you just like being contrary?

Nope.

/rimshot

Obv. you could say "hey let's play an unrated 3 player game, here's how I can make that happen." If people didn't agree to it then that would mean people did not in fact want to play unrated 3 player games.

Seems reasonable, and in fact I don't think there's much of a market for unranked games on Iso, with any number of players.  There will likely be more of one on Goko.  I personally don't see any reason to have separate rankings for two and three player games... so I guess you and I agree on that.

[dondon151]

If the thought of playing 2 player games on goko is like poison, the thought of playing 3 player games is.. double poison.. or something. Ugh I can't even imagine how awful that would be.

If 2-p games on Goko are poison, then 3-p games on Goko must be... toxic.

*titter*

[Kirian]

If the thought of playing 2 player games on goko is like poison, the thought of playing 3 player games is.. double poison.. or something. Ugh I can't even imagine how awful that would be.

If 2-p games on Goko are poison, then 3-p games on Goko must be... toxic.

*titter*

If 2P games on Goko are Poison, then 3P games are presumably Whitesnake, and 4P games are Def Leppard.

[eigensheep]

The most important function of a leaderboard is not showing who is the very best, it's letting people find opponents of a similar standard. Different leaderboards for different card sets or different numbers of players would be annoying, as players would have to look at 5 numbers instead of 1