 |
|
 BrainKing.comBoard for everybody who is interested in BrainKing itself, its structure, features and future. If you experience connection or speed problems with BrainKing, please visit Host Tracker and check "BrainKing.com" accessibility from various sites around the world. It may answer whether an issue is caused by BrainKing itself or your local network (or ISP provider). World Of Chess And Variants (videos from BrainKing): YouTube Chess blog: LookIntoChess.com You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn. Mode: Everyone can post
<< < 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 > >> 11. November 2011, 01:32:06 Subject: How about a "New Rook" tournament In the same spirit as the other recent posts, perhaps Fencer could sponsor a tournament (perhaps hosted by someone else if he gets a volunteer) that is only open to people who buy a new rook membership (no renewals). Fencer could donate a prize of some brand new brains perhaps as an incentive, or something else that catches his imagination. 11. November 2011, 01:23:03 Subject: Re:  Gabriel Almeida: Yes, I agree, it's a good spirit. But I think that some members with " little " subscriptions as a bishop for example are about in the same situation as a pawn (they often have difficulties to pay their membership) so, for me, we could offer something to these persons too. I think that your idea should be developed. 10. November 2011, 20:44:28 SL-Mark: The pawn must be "indicated" for a fellowship. It could work with a Fencer's PM, something like "Fencer, I want to pay a 6 months knight membership to the pawn ####, and it must be noted for the fellowship MONKEYS SWINGING MADHOUSE", for example. Monkey: Fencer would create that Team Tournament for invitation(!!!), according to the PM received. Melusine: The job in the fellowship would be to get a "paid godfather" to the pawn they would promote. And receive him/her properly. When I came to Brainking, I knew nothing about the site, and some very pacient people in Tugas explained me everything. My point is to inforce that spirit! And, of course, it would create stronger union between the new paying member and the fellowship... seems a very healthy thing, to me! :) By the way... I would certainly pay a membership to a pawn, in that spirit! :) 10. November 2011, 15:57:02 Subject: Re: Gabriel Almeida: And, in the team, who will pay the subscription of the pawn ? The captain ? Or each member of the team will give a little money ? I think that this offer (very nice for a pawn) can block people who have difficulties to pay their own subscription. As it's something about money, it can be discriminatory for people having little means (I think to a student or a unemployed person, for example). Sorry to tell you this, because I see that your intentions are good.  10. November 2011, 15:00:54 Subject: Re:  Gabriel Almeida: Secondly, we need Team Tournaments to enter  lol10. November 2011, 14:38:35 Subject: Re: Gabriel Almeida: Firstly, the pawn must get into a Fellowship. How does that bit work? 10. November 2011, 12:53:53 Subject: Re: Gabriel Almeida: Oh: the pawn promoted for the team must play in the team tournament, of course! The point is to give a "good reception" to new-paying-members. 10. November 2011, 12:51:41 Subject: Re: Fencer: Listen to my idea: - A Team tournament (you choose game/games) where any team who wants to join in must promote a pawn to rook/knight/bishop for... 6 months, for example. The prize for the winning team is a "credit" to promote another pawn, for 6 months. Sounds good? 10. November 2011, 10:52:14 Subject: Re:  Gabriel Almeida: Well, I think we could make one more membership action with colour codes. Or something like that.  10. November 2011, 10:50:02 Subject: Re: Hrqls: It definitly is! :) Have you create any "special party" in BK for your bithday, Fencer? If you need any suggestion... eheheh 10. November 2011, 09:50:15 Subject: Re: Fencer: still ??? congrats!! hold on to that 3! its the best ;) 9. November 2011, 21:05:12 Subject: Re: Gabriel Almeida: Yes, it starts with a three. 9. November 2011, 17:59:45 Subject: Re: Fencer: Almost 30 years old, I bet!  9. November 2011, 16:05:47 Subject: Re:  Fencer: Another birthday? You had one around this time last year too. hmmmmm, I sense a pattern evolving. 9. November 2011, 15:24:53 Subject: Re: toedder: Thanks. 9. November 2011, 13:59:37  Happy Birthday, Fencer :) 7. November 2011, 20:49:01 Subject: Re: RE: Slow play JerNYC: lol well said. 7. November 2011, 20:22:11 Subject: RE: Slow play Yes, I've played some of the longest games ever on this site, but slow players are by no means endemic to Brainking. They are pretty much on every site. It does hold up tournaments for me on here but I can play plenty of tournaments on other sites with less restrictions. Besides, sometimes I can be slow too (from burnout or move contemplation) but I once start moving quickly again that's usually a bad sign for my opponent. Sometimes I would think if anyone ever asked me to move faster in those phases, I would say, "Why are you in such a rush to lose?" LOL So, being on both sides, I can understand all the frustration. It's best to stick to the time limits that work best for each individual person and to avoid those players that frequently move too slow or timeout. 7. November 2011, 06:45:40 Subject: Re: re number of games rod03801: ahhhhh 7. November 2011, 06:41:38 Subject: Re: re number of games  Artful Dodger: Fischer clock games 7. November 2011, 05:32:24 Subject: Re: re number of games Aganju: Is it possible in such a tourney set up that one could accumlate 7 days and keep that number? I suppose they'd have to keep moving to keep it up and that would be the point. But I'm curious as to how the numbers would work exactly. 6. November 2011, 22:43:36 Subject: Re: re number of games  Artful Dodger: Here is an idea which might help: I set up tournaments typically with 2 days or so, but accumulating time up to 7 days. That means you need to make a move within two days in average, but if you play rather fast, you will accumulate 7 days of time, so if you have a business travel or such, you can let that run down. The point is that you need to 'earn' that longer time by playing several moves faster than the limit of two days; you cannot use it for every move. I think that should work ok, if everybody sets tourneys up that way. Maybe even 1 day per move, accumulating up to 7 days? beach: I agree with what you wrote; these are games. However, some people are more competitive than others (and I'm in the first row here), and they can't help it when a player times out a lot of games. Not if he does against me - free BKR and wins - but if he does it in a difficult tournament: Imagine I squeeze a draw out of a strong player after a difficult game, which I'm proud of, and then he looses all other games on time. So the 'punishment' for me moving fast and playing well is that I get a draw, and all others get a 'win', so I'm one point behind in the competition. That has happened, and it does not go well with my mood... being less competitive would certainly ease the pain, but that's easier said than done - I am what I am. 6. November 2011, 22:22:03 Subject: Re: re number of games beach: Many people can handle many games. I am playing a few people who have more games than you and they do fine. But regardless, some tourneys have lasted years and it's usually one or two people who drag them out that long. That's just plain bad form on their part. Yes it's within the time limit, but I've always looked at the 7 days as useful for those that would be gone a few days etc. Not to be used as a literal 7 days per moves. But I get what you are saying and that's why I now try to pay attention to tourneys and only play in 3 days per move tourneys. Also, when a tourney organizer knows who the slow pokes are (those that move at the last minute) then like me, they likely would remove those players from their tourneys. 6. November 2011, 22:11:20 Subject: Re: re number of games  beach: Well said. I know it may be hard for some of the "10000 moves in a day" record-holders in here to believe, but some people actually do have a life outside online gaming, anc cannot afford to spend more than 10 minutes in a row at this site. The reason people pick longer time per move games is precisely so they can use that time - otherwise they'd join faster-paced games instead! I realise this must be frustrating for pawns and knights who have a game limit, but for rooks? If that extra game in your list bothers you that much, it's time to recheck your priorities. Sorry if I sound rude, but if people are expecting "30 seconds per move" games, maybe they're in the wrong website. 6. November 2011, 20:47:11 Subject: re number of games  I am a person who plays many games on this site, I prefer this site to other sites because as a rook I can play as many games as I choose with the time limits I choose, I pay for that prevlidge. I prefer faster time limits so I now do not enter any tournaments over 3 day limits. I think as a rook, we are entitled to play as many games as we choose. There a few people who get carried away, but from experience I find they tend to disappear fairly quickly. Personally I could careless if they time out, as for tournaments taking forever. I have one ludo tourament that is still going on and its 7 year old, should I tell the other player to hurry up and move faster, I think not. I think it would be nice if people could just remember its only a game site. If tournaments taking too long are the only problem you have in life you a lucky. I come to play and have fun, and frankly I think its quite rude of anyone to complain about how slow or fast anyone plays if they play within the time limit. I don't usually post much on any board, but I think you people complaining about other people's method of play should just give it a rest. Sorry if I offended anyone. 6. November 2011, 05:35:13 Subject: Re: Slow players  Mélusine: Yes Art is correct , how can anyone get upset with you. lol. You should be a professional arbitrator. I would never ask you or any BB to change anything due to a slow player and have you decide such a matter. But on the other hand if asked, as I have in the past I just tell them so. In your fellowship I play games but limit myself on who I play. There is many ways on bk to stay away from players you choose not to play. I won't put anyone in such a dilemma and you know well I respect you more then ANYONE on this site. You announced you point of veiw in a general form, speaking of the thousands of members who play. I agree with you and I know the person you are and you always give everyone the benefit of doubt. I was'nt speaking in a general term. I don't believe in game limits, however if a player over time proves he/she can't handle them all I do believe a limit should be placed. I have several good friends who play thousands of games and never a timeout. Even with 3 day limits and the reset of vacation days at the 1st of year takes a simple 3 day tourny 2 years to complete....for some. We speak of trying to get pawns to join, and some even say they play their pawns first so they can play quicky, enjoy more games and become members. I also believe this ....and the bishops and knights who can only play one tourny of each game....so I wonder how they all feel having to play 1 tourny for a year because someone holds the tourny up.... 6. November 2011, 04:00:05 Subject: Re: Modified by Aganju (6. November 2011, 04:00:56) Artful Dodger & others: From my experience, playing 500 games and staying ahead of things takes about 4-8 hours playing time a day. Every day. Of course that depends a bit on how much you think about each move, but it doesn't get much faster than that. I have managed to play 1400 games for a month or two, but it took its toll on my work live, and I got a yellow card from my wife. So now I'm working to get it down to less than 250, which will be nicely doable in the evening hours. I think there should be a limit for everybody (no matter what membership level), for example to not be able to have more than 500 games running, until you have more than 400 running for a month without timeouts, etc. If you can handle, the limit goes up. If you time out, the limit goes down again. But maybe it just takes a grown-up mind to control yourself. And a lot of players are not grown up, and behave like a kid in the candy store. We all know how that ends... 6. November 2011, 03:18:38 Subject: Re: Mélusine: I love the way you put things! That's why it's impossible to get mad at you. You make me smile. BTW, I think I've been behind that moral dilemma you speak of (more than once). Here's another thought on having so many games that you time out. I know there are some players that jump in any tourney posted. Some tourneys have limited participants and when one joins, and then times out, they may as well not played at all. And they used up a slot someone else otherwise might have wanted. So for me, as a rule of thumb, if you are timing out in your games, play fewer games. Also, if you are committed to playing over 500 games, be sure you move many times a day out of courtesy to other players. One person dragging out a tourney is bad form and ought to be avoided. But that's just me thinking out loud on the subject. 6. November 2011, 02:29:36 Subject: Re: Vikings: Ah yes, I see.  But a board too quiet doesn't interest people. I don't want to strike the match, I just say something true. 6. November 2011, 02:24:13 Subject: Re: Mélusine: no worries, it's just that usually leads to flame wars, and it's been good here for quite a while, knock on wood 6. November 2011, 02:16:27 Subject: Re: Vikings: Excuse me, I didn't know it was forbidden. 6. November 2011, 02:10:46 Please continue the conversation but without naming names thank you 6. November 2011, 02:03:12 Subject: Re: Slow players Modified by Mélusine (6. November 2011, 02:10:06) Marshmud: I like your reply full of respect (thank you !). I totally agree with you when you say : " I have been asked "Why are you not joining my tournaments" so should I lie or tell them the truth ? " : of course, you have to tell the truth, I would do the same. But you make me think to something : the player you are talking about (********) is in my fellowship and you also. If tomorrow, you tell me " I don't want to join your tournaments because he plays too slowly ", I must admit that it will be for me a moral dilemma ; on one side, I'd like to satisfy your request (because I appreciate you very much) and on the other side, it would be very difficult for me to punish someone who did nothing beyond the rules of the site. Yes, you're right, I don't see you complaining (not to me, that's is sure ). In fact, my reply wasn't about a particular player but a general thought about moves and time. 6. November 2011, 01:45:50 Subject: Re: Slow players Marshmud: For the reasons you have stated, I have posted on my profile that I only want to play 3 day limit games. It's frustrating when I join a tourney and forget to check and see that it's a 7 day tourney. I know that I could die before it's finished.  6. November 2011, 01:37:10 Subject: Re: Slow players Artful Dodger: I agree with you because my reply would be the same to such a poll : 3 days (1st) then 5 days (2nd). I can't blame someone who makes his moves in the last minute, because I often play my games on the last day, because of a lack of time for playing but not for annoying people. This doesn't shock me because, on the main page, I always hide the part " Opponent's turn in games ", so I never care about slow or fast players. I can't imagine what represents 1000 games  because I've already difficulties when I play 150. But everyone is different : me, I don't have enough time to play because I work but here, there are people who stay at home (don't work or on retirement), so why couldn't they play more games than me ? And, as I said before, the number of games isn't significant, example : for the same time I can do 5 moves for Ludo while I do 1 move for Chess.6. November 2011, 00:42:55 Subject: Re: Slow players Mélusine: I respectfully disagree. Maybe some history to this matter and you would understand. Then again play 2000+or- games and see how frustraiting it is to keep up. Then blame everyone else for your time outs. (btw at one time over 4000 games in progress) This is not a simple issue of one time out. And I'd like to see these rude messages. I can only imagine what he received but as he said its all fencers faught for his sporadic play. We have spoke about one player only. Not pawns, knights or you.... "Get better results if your nice" Well in that case I see why fencer doesn't respond to his HUNDREDS of complaints and sarcasium, but I'm (or others) can't complain of his massive amount of time outs? Do you have any idea what it does to a tournament? He is a very smart player, so he beats a few players and times out on the rest? It doesn't sound like a fun tournament at all to me. Your correct that he is doing nothing wrong. I meant ask the BB to create shorter tournaments. I have been asked "Why are you not joining my tournaments" so should I lie or tell them the truth? Also I am not the one who sent him the messages in question. In fact I never have wrote to him. But when he mention the fact of his timeouts and tries to justify them I had to speak up. How often do you see me here complaining? 5. November 2011, 16:13:24 Subject: Re: Slow players Mélusine: One solution is to never play in a tourney that is over 3 days per move. Frankly, I wish there were a serious game limit here. Who needs to play 1000 games at the same time? Even 100 is tough to keep up with. I did a poll in an fs once and found that of those that responded, 7 days was the least favorite, 5 days came in 2nd, and 3 days was hands down the favorite time limint by most. And yet, I don't see many tourneys with that time factor. While it may not be breaking a rule, it's just plain bad form to wait until the last minute to make a move. And that's my .o2 5. November 2011, 11:22:26 Subject: Re: Slow players Gabriel Almeida: I try to do the same (to clean my main page) but it depends a lot on the games you play. For example, it's more easy to clean games as Ludo and backgammon than games as Chess or some variants of Chess. Me, I also try to play " easy " games first (I mean games which don't need to think a lot, as Ludo). And games aren't the only thing we can appreciate on this site : I like to talk with people too (I know, I'm talkative ) on private messages and boards.5. November 2011, 11:02:05 Subject: Re: Slow players Mélusine: Well... we all agree in something, I see. Beeing polite is always the best solution. However, I must admit that in my point of view, we wouldn't need a shorter time limit (1 day, for example) to have a faster game, if people had that "logic" of playing fast. Of course, this forces you to have a number of games you think you can deal with. My "magical number" is 200 games (for the time I spend in BK, is ok). How do I know it is ok? Well... when I start playng (and stay connected for 1 hour), I "clean" my main page, until have Zero games where is mu turn to play. I would be very happy if everybody does it! ;)
5. November 2011, 10:40:08 Subject: Slow players I think that slow players can be a problem for players having a limit for games as pawns, bishops or knights. Before being a rook, I was a knight and very often I was blocked because tournaments weren't finished because of slow players. It's the reason why I'm a rook now. Nevertheless, I think that we can't blame a slow player when he uses the rules of the website, and I don't agree with a blocking on the games. If people want to play rapidly, they have the possibility to choose tournaments with a little limit (1 day for example). Marshmud : I don't agree with you (sorry) when you say " I suggest those who are upset is to just not join tournaments you are part of, and explain to the BB of said fellowship and explain why you won't play " ; I think that a best behaviour would be to ask to the Big Boss of the fellowship to create tournaments with a fast limit. From my side, I think that I'm rather medium for the speed and I try to make an effort about this but it's sometimes difficult not to join a tournament when a friend tells you that players are missing, or else when someone celebrates his (her) birthday with a tournament. Moreover, team tournaments begin without your choice when you're not the captain of the team. The consequence is that sometimes I've too many games, so I play slowly. In these moments, I wouldn't like that someone send me a private and rude message asking me to play more rapidly. I totally agree with Rod when he says " People need to realize they may get better results by being nice. ". When a nice player tells me very kindly that he likes to play rapidly (I think to you Gabriel Almeida  ), I do my best to play his games very rapidly, but I must admit that I'm a little frustrated when the game finishes too rapidly ! 5. November 2011, 05:30:57 Subject: Re: can't win Gabriel Almeida: Interesting. Doesn't sound like you disagree. I said "didn't break any rule" and "doesn't deserve rudeness" I said nothing about courtesy. 5. November 2011, 01:20:34 Subject: Re: can't win thisbeme: I would time out a lot if I had more than 1700 games running! ;) I agree interly with Marshmud, and disagree with Rod. Slow playing doesn't violate any formal rule, but violate basic courtesy, has Aganju said. But ok... only my opinion. Anyway, I still insist... always great when people can say it in proper words. Being polite, of course! :) 4. November 2011, 05:57:19 Subject: Re: can't win Marshmud: I timed out hundreds of games because I couldn't login into the site gateway 502 error and this was the only site I could not access so I thought that the site was down so the server would disable the timeout (losing about 15000 rating points). After that I wasn't motivated to play because of this for a bit which used up vacation. Also timing out by minutes because of the you are not the starter click pass BUG doesn't help. The lack motivation and boredom at continuously clicking pass lead to further timeouts. Anyway that is all ancient history other than that if someone I care about has a problem or my internet fails I'll possibly lose a few timeout due to no vacation, but things are a lot different now. Plenty of players have double my number of games or more. Mancala any legal series moves for a player on 25 pts or more wins yet the game is forced to be played out and the loser can get a timeout victory due to the BUG in the game! Chess a player can play on with bare king and get awarded a win due to to a BUG in variants where a lone king can't win. Playing on for months until checkmate is very disrespectful yet is common. If most move in a day is an "achievement" having a game you can't screw up the result is going to perversely reward playing on till mate. These above issues/bugs will slow my play down needlessly. It is news to me that anyone enters an event that has a particular time limit and is surprised that time is used. There are many opportunity to play 1 day a move or even less and no vacation games. Anyone who plays in the real world knows it is normal to use the time you have as you see fit! In any case I wasn't given a chance to respond to the message before they continue having a go because I don't immediately look at the latest message (usually a request for players for tournament, teams and ponds).. Spamming/harassing someone who doesn't reply within a day is clearly uncalled for. They weren't even a member when I timed out lots of games! 4. November 2011, 04:29:55 Subject: Re: can't win Modified by rod03801 (4. November 2011, 04:35:50) Marshmud: No clue what you are talking about. All I am saying, he has broken NO rule, and doesn't deserve someone sending him rude messages. And my point is, How productive are rude messages to him anyway? I personally react negative to rude messages, and would move even slower to someone being a jerk. I didn't say anyone specific was being rude to him, nor do I know WHO was being rude to him, NOR do I care who. It was a general comment. Worms? Road signs?  4. November 2011, 02:11:10 Subject: Re: can't win rod03801: Look at his threads Rod. Speaking of being rude ....I think fencer has heard every complaint in bkville that can be made. His comments made just opens a can of worms. Its a two way street here. My last comment on the subject. Good night all 4. November 2011, 01:51:33 Subject: Re: can't win Marshmud: I never said you or anyone was rude. I was simply responding to him saying he got rude messages. 4. November 2011, 01:51:28 I think this is a good and effective proposal. If a players times out on more than acertain amount of games, he gets limited in the number of games he can start. There are many possible thresholds, for example: Tmed out in more than 20 games in 24 h => cannot join tournaments or games for 24 h Or: Every time you time out (a single game), you cannot join any other game or tournament until you have no more games where it is your move. - this would force that player to make a move in all games before he can start new ones. Maybe a bit too harsh. Or: - after any timeout, you can only start games or join tournaments if the number of games where it is your move is less than the number where it is your opponents move (so you need to move in half of your games) There is an infinity of other ideas, most anything would do though. Just some limitation would help. 4. November 2011, 01:36:37 Subject: Re: can't win rod03801: And with all due respect Rod, being the "slowone" a few times over the years is a bit different to this scenario I speak of. 4. November 2011, 01:32:15 Subject: Re: can't win rod03801: I wasn't rude, just to the point and speaking for many palyers at bk about his comment. I would never be rude to any player who just is a slow player, I just avoid them as I suggested and would of never mention the slow play until he first made a comment. Slow play doesn't bother me but when people have problems playing the games they currently have, and I notice they have join new tournaments I just avoid them. This also not the first time its been brought up, and imo, some players who time out constantly should be placed on a game limit. 4. November 2011, 01:02:32 Subject: Re: can't win Aganju: Thank you for that reply; a second the motion. I wanted to say the same thing, but couldn't figure out a way to do so that wouldn't make me look rude. As a result I was silent until now.... << < 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 > >> |
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Back to the top |