Please use this board to discuss Tournaments and Team Tournaments, ask questions and hopefully find the answers you are looking for.
Personal attacks, arguing or baiting will not be tolerated on this board. If you have, or see a problem or something you are not happy about or think is wrong, please contact one of the above Moderators OR contact a Global Moderator HERE Tournaments
Modified by coan.net (10. December 2016, 02:16:34)
About that game - it SHOULD NOT have been ended as there was still a chance for a tie game - as white still had a piece on their home position. So if black could have made it to pin that piece, then the game would end as a tie/draw. [In this game, black was in no position to do that..... but that is in the rules]
All white needed to do was move that last home piece and the game should have ended automatically, so I'm not sure why they needed Fencer to finish it when you could have done it simply yourself.
MadMonkey: Thanks for letting me know - I almost made many of them "Random" as that is the "default" game choice when making a new tournament, and I kept forgetting to change it... well I remembered for all of them, except 1 it looks like.
Aganju: Yes, that also (and of course as long as he can not advance to the next round) - Currently Fencer does sometimes let pawns join new tournaments once that happens - of course in the case we are discussing now, they will be in the next round..... once it starts, which will mostly likely still be awhile.
For this situation, in my opinion is that the best solution would be a change in the rule of pawn in tournaments.
Current rule is a pawn can only be in 1 tournament at a time.
I think it should be change to:
Pawn can only be in 1 tournament at a time, OR if current tournament started 6 months ago or more, another tournament will be allowed to be started.
Most tournament (well if you play fast, you should join faster tournaments) last less then 6 months, so when these cases come up like this, then it would allow players to join other tournaments while the 1st one finishes.
Of course Fencer isn't programming much lately, so I don't think this will get programmed, but I think if possible, would be a good working solution.
Undertaker.: Well at the time it seemed like we were getting a lot of running tournaments, so this batch I put the 14 days in between both - both another has also asked me about it - and myself, Site Team Tournaments are the only one's I play also, so I do enjoy them - so when I start to make the next batch, I'll go back to my normal 7-10 days between tournaments
Marshmud: I did not even notice that - Usually I just leave it on the default and don't even touch that setting (default shows 8) - Possible a new bug which is resetting that to 20 instead of 8 when the tournament is created.
Sometime after May (last time a site team tournament had more then 8 teams) was correctly split apart - but now looking back, see July starting tournaments have the larger groups.
talen314: I like that idea. To build on it a little:
Maybe starting in January 2010 - have a tournament of 1 game time (Backgammon, most popular) - then each month start a new one of the next most popular game. (so by October we will be through the top 10 games.)
I would like to see a simi-shorter time limit of maybe 2 days, 12 hours - but with standard vacations. (Maybe just a standard 3 days?)
I would also like to see the games not count towards a users game/tournament limit, so it would be open to ALL pawns & knights no matter if they have "free" game slots.
And like you mention, don't even really have to offer a prize, but maybe a special icon or something, like a "brainking cup" like you mentioned.
Chaos: Well I haven't done that for awhile (SO PLEASE - Anyone feel free to correct me.)
But I believe in the process of paying for the membership, there was an option to do it automaticly or manually (manually is where Fencer would look at it and apply it.)
If you do it manually & then in the notes of the membership let it be known what your wishes are (AKA: Prize for this tournament: XXXXXXXX with link or tournament #), then Fencer can process the payment manually and apply it towards the tournament.
Again, maybe there is a different way? It's been awhile, and the last time I purchased something was using PayPal - not sure if the new methods are different or not.
MadMonkey: I'm surprised we were able to get at least 4... with only 33 current games being played of that game type, it's not that popular - so it is GREAT to see enough to play in the site team tournament.
MadMonkey: Yea, but I don't know how much he monitors or keeps track of those things. (He may keep very detailed information about it, but I've always tried to list as much as I can in the tournament descriptions so that it would be less work for him.)
DeaD man WalkiN: One of the issues I see is many tournaments last years - and who knows if you will even be on the site at that time, so it would make most sense to have it posted in the tournament description that way when the tournament ends, the tournament winner is not trying to figure it out.
Imsoaddicted: On the face, it sounds "good" to wait until it is finished before starting new ones, but if you think about it - 99% of the players no longer are able to play - so it might be good to start a new one so everyone can play again.
Of course the real solution would be for Fencer to program it so next rounds (like in this one) could start since we already know which teams will win.... WITHOUT waiting for all the game to be completed. Having that in there won't help every situation (since sometimes the slow games are the ones that will decide who will win), but will help out a lot and would be very welcomed if Fencer could put that in the "new BrainKing".
Imsoaddicted: Well we have "slowed" down in making them - I know for myself, I usually only make 4 a month (where I use to make 5-6 a month) - plus of course always try to spread it out to games which haven't had a team tournament for awhile - and spread it around to different types (like 1 chess, 1 lines, 1 gammon, etc...) that way hopefully at least one of them will be liked by someone who may not play many types of games.
Plus I've been trying to make a few "no days off" and now Fischer clock games & the gammon tournaments set to use autopass - so I'm trying to do things to help speed up the tournaments.
..... plus I always take suggestions if anyone has any (on type of game, time per move, etc...) - best to send it to my private message to I can more easily keep track of it.
Imsoaddicted: Well Tanein created THIS POLL awhile back which is suppose to end in about 9 hours about weather people wanted August team tournaments, and looks to be a yes - so possible she might be creating some here soon.
We usually take turns - each of us creating them every other month..... so I will probable create some September ones sometime after my "last batch" of team tournaments start.
Clandestine 1: I was thinking yes, the clock would continue to count down (even in the negative), but the time out job should have been turned off for 24 hours, meaning even if it was in the negative, you should have been able to make a move before the time-out process was turned back on.
.... At least that is how I would think it would work.
Lotus Flower: No Days Off - Basically means no vacation days or weekend days will be used.
Clandestine 1: Not all the time - if the server goes down for more then 1 hour (I think it is 1 hour), then when it comes back up the site will turn off the time out process for 24 hours to make sure everyone can get back on to make their move.
Snoopy: Just so things are clear, is it who wins the most games - or who wins the most game types.
For example - in a popular game like Backgammon, you might win 30 games and still lose that section to someone else.
In less popular games, there might be fewer players, so winning 10 games wins that section.
So it might end up that someone wins 100 games that are in the tournament, but never win a section - and someone else might win 5 different game sections, but only win 80 games total in the tournament.
*** I'm not trying to be a pain - just better to think of these things now rather then later. ***
rednaz23: Those 2 things are exactly what I suggested on March 22nd on this board (6 days ago). So there are more that would like to see that part of the site improved - we just have to hope that Fencer see's it as something that would help things also. (which would hopefully lead to more quality tournaments then a ton of less-quality tournaments)
rednaz23: I've agreed with that for a long time - but 10 is too low. (for example, when i was making a lot of "fast start" 5 player tournaments, I could easily make 15-20 tournaments... almost all would fill up and start in the first few days.
But a limit of 20 or 25 public tournaments waiting for "sign-up" would be something I would support.
Plus I would LOVE to see the the "time for deadline" be changed from the current 29 days after start to something more resonable like 5 or 10 days after start date.... which if someone REALLY wants it to wait longer can easily change the start date to keep it on there longer. (Most tournaments I see go a few days past will stay on there for the whole time with very few getting more players... so no point keeping them open for the next month.)
FrancescoLR: Sorry I never got a chance to answer before... but will try to jump in here and help a little if I can.
The best thing might be to be around when the tournament is ready to start, and before it starts - kick out any players that are not suppose to be there - since as Vikings said, once it starts, there is really no way to remove anyone. (weather Fencer will not give out a prize to someone would be something you would need to talk to him about.)
One thing you could do is a few hours before a tournament is set to start, look at the list - remove the players, and even change the "start time" to a time that has already past - which would mean that when the tournament start-up script runs within the next hour, the tournament will start... hopefully without anyone who is not suppose to be in there signs in.
Other idea - make it an invite only tournament - and if someone wants to play, have them send you a message where you can invite them