>> Calculate attendance outside of ratings

[PLAYER57832]

How could you force someone to miss a turn???


I still would like to know why someone misses. Someone can end up in the hospital, have a computer go down, etc... and miss a whole lot of turns in a streak. Other people might miss one here and there for no real reason.

This might not be fixable. I still prefer an automated system, but is there a way we could indicate the time frames for the misses somehow?

[wicked]

2. the frequency with which a person is present

While this might be useful knowledge for some as you pointed out Pedro, how can we keep that from punishing people who only play once a day?

[Pedronicus]

They would be deemed 'Average' i.e. 3 stars.
There are those players out there who take goes so quickly - they should be recognised
There are people who take the average time of 18-24 hours
Then there are people who miss loads of goes.


it would show what we want to know.

I'm going to be around the 2-3 star rating, if this sort of automatic attendance idea is implemented. I'm not suggesting this so that I suddenly get 5 stars for a certain rating. I play when I get in from work and look in for three hours in the night.

I might be encouraged to log in in the morning if I were somehow rewarded and everyones games move a little faster. How can that be a bad thing?

[PLAYER57832]

It would also be useful to see how many people "ran out of time" on their turn...

i.e. how many people use the cheap freestyle double turn tactic.

Could that be included in the stat too?

C.

I have ran out of time in a few speed games trying to finish a board or make an elimination. This is something that happens to
many speed players. Please do NOT lump us in, with those chronic freestyle abusers.

This is a VERY good point ... happened to me as well. If running out of time is listed, speed games definitely should not be included.

On the other hand, in sequential, anybody who runs out has usually gotten called away and forgotten to come back or thought they hit "end fortification" and did not ... so I am not sure they should really be in the same category, either.

[wicked]

I don't see running out of time being used. It wouldn't be a good idea to include that, as it really has nada to do with attendance, as they've already "begun turn".

[Pedronicus]

agreed. speed games on maps / settings that are too large to complete within 5 minutes is the mistake of the person joining them.

This is all down to when you click 'start turn' from when it last became your turn.

[wicked]

This is all down to when you click 'start turn' from when it last became your turn.

no, disagree. attendance should be a calculation of MISSED TURNS ONLY, not how fast you play. else, it punishes people who play the site as casually as it was originally intended.

[skaterchild3]

What about Real time games where someone just quits in the middle of it?

[wicked]

Then that would fall under the gameplay or attitude attributes.

[Pedronicus]

What about Real time games where someone just quits in the middle of it?

my idea of timings would rate that as a missed turn.

Before you dismiss my idea - run some numbers on the rough settings i proposed a long time a ago in the original thread. See how they look. Lack must have the numbers that would help us to suggest improved ideas, all of this info is of no benefit to anyone apart from making an automated attendance record.

[PLAYER57832]

What about Real time games where someone just quits in the middle of it?

And just how do you define "Real Time". I am pretty tired of having someone insist that 1v1 .. or any other type MUST be "real time" and even giving me a low attendance rating because of it.

I PAID for premium. If I want a speed game, I will play a speed game ... but I generally cannot.

[richardgarr]

What about Real time games where someone just quits in the middle of it?

And just how do you define "Real Time". I am pretty tired of having someone insist that 1v1 .. or any other type MUST be "real time" and even giving me a low attendance rating because of it.

I PAID for premium. If I want a speed game, I will play a speed game ... but I generally cannot.

Definition of Real Time (RT) is quite easy, when starting a RT game, simply state in game chat that the game is RT. If you managed to accidentally join a RT game, state in the game chat that you had no intention of playing it in RT. Simple.


(statements can be made within the first round, so everyone is aware of the game expectations)

[wicked]

Sorry RG, but unless a RT game was agreed upon by all beforehand, there shouldn't be any expectation of a RT game, unless it's a speed game.

[richardgarr]

There are many who make RT games that are not premium, and as a result have to have it in the public forums till they fill up. Many a time people do not get into the game in time, and as a result a non-rt player joins. What I am saying is, for players to declare and agree in the first round that the games are RT. This would give the non-rt player a chance to state they did not join expecting RT. If all the players do not agree to this, it is no longer considered RT. This may help to curb unwarranted bad ratings.

[Beastly]

Is there a way, to show games played and games finished.... IF numbers don't match up close it would be obvious that someone is a common deadbeater.

[Visaoni]

Is there a way, to show games played and games finished.... IF numbers don't match up close it would be obvious that someone is a common deadbeater.

If I understand you correctly, you mean show something like (# of games kicked out of for missing turns/games played). While I like the method, simple and no room for arguing about what should count as a missed turn, the information returned from it would be minimal in most cases. Or at least it wouldn't show the worst offenders. People who sign up, join 4 games and never come back are annoying, but not the worst problem. It does us no good to see an inactive player has been kicked out of 4/4 games. It would show people that have a tendency to keep deadbeat but keep joining games, which would be very good to know. But the people who continually miss turns, even 2 in a row, but then show up for the 3rd most of the time would look like any other player with this system.

[ParadiceCity9]

This is all down to when you click 'start turn' from when it last became your turn.

no, disagree. attendance should be a calculation of MISSED TURNS ONLY, not how fast you play. else, it punishes people who play the site as casually as it was originally intended.

Ya I agree with that. Once school starts, I'm gonna be swamped with (pointless) work to do, and will probably only be able to play once a day, except on weekends. It just doesn't make sense to rate people on how frequently they play their turns.

[PLAYER57832]

There are many who make RT games that are not premium, and as a result have to have it in the public forums till they fill up. Many a time people do not get into the game in time, and as a result a non-rt player joins. What I am saying is, for players to declare and agree in the first round that the games are RT. This would give the non-rt player a chance to state they did not join expecting RT. If all the players do not agree to this, it is no longer considered RT. This may help to curb unwarranted bad ratings.

How about just paying the $25 and getting premium ....

OR "sucking it up" and saying "gee I am on this site for FREE, maybe I ought not to complain!"

The bottom line is that if you meet with others who want to play "real time" .. fine! BUT that is NOT an official game type and the idea that those of us who have PAID should be somehow "punished" because we don't comply with the rules that some (not all) freebies set up becuase they don't want to (or cannot) pay the $25 is just not acceptable!

You get acces to just about every aspect of this site, with only a few of limitations .. you can't play speed games, you cannot set up private games (you can play them!) and you are limited to 4 games. That is far more than most internet sites offer for free! If its not good enough ... pay the $25!

[Kemmler]

I don't like this idea since I was away and missed 2 turns in 50 games! Even though that would be small a percentage, it would not look good. I think this idea is bad since it'd be very hard to tell since it'd always be above 95% and who cares anyway

[Beastly]

Somebody who has missed 2 in 50 games, wouldn't be frowned on... It would definitely curb people from purposely quitting the game or deadbeating if we could see just how many games someone has played and finished. missing turns is part of life.

This system would especially be useful for premium players because the ones that play loads of games, will show more games played with less games unfinished.

Then if someone deadbeats you won't have to report it, it will just show up on their rating.

It would also help people to finish the speed games... or real time.

[herndawg]

I like it,

kicked out for too many missed turns percent
missed turn percent overall.

how bout 2 percents? Or click on the percent sign and it shows how many kicked out too?

[lackattack]

1. no
2. yes

2 is relevant, then. If lack is going through the game logs/querying database for data linked to game logs then the missing logs in Feb also will skew the data.

To generate your % the program will go through your past game logs and look for "missed a turn" entries, so yes, lost game logs and old freestyle blocking tactics will skew the data. But the effect should be minimal.

[chipv]

1. no
2. yes

2 is relevant, then. If lack is going through the game logs/querying database for data linked to game logs then the missing logs in Feb also will skew the data.

To generate your % the program will go through your past game logs and look for "missed a turn" entries, so yes, lost game logs and old freestyle blocking tactics will skew the data. But the effect should be minimal.

Yes, counting missed turns in the log is one way I guessed you might do it, but also considered for the purposes of kicking people from games, that there might have been a separate counter to save going through the log. In that case the missing logs won't have mattered, but I can see why there wouldn't be.

Agreed on the minimal effect.

[Ghost715]

I know it's being picky....can you reverse your statement?
> Ratings will be based on attributes that are subjective, not objective.
change to ...that are objective, not subjective.

objective: factual, easy to verify
subjective: subject to interpretation, may have many different views of the same matter

[JoshyBoy]

I love this idea!!!