@
Vexer, I'm no programmer, this is true, but if I (or anyone else here) wanted to learn, where is the best place to begin (for a total non-programmer)?
I don't deny that this is still the best site I've seen for this type of gaming. That's kinda why we're all here. I never said
everything was wrong, just that some things could use improvement.
This doesn't negate my critiques of the futility of the forum or that it is largely a waste of time, as meaningful discussions go. It sounds as though there was no place to go but up and nobody can deny that dictators get
things done. This is not to say that decisive imperial control doesn't have its place, but it does not scale well. The site grows and there will come a point (perhaps it's already here) that you and the rest of the staff could use more help from those of us who also want to see the site remain the best place for this type of gaming on the Interwebz. However, that assistance will not come from people who perpetually feel their opinions are discounted simply because they haven't been here since the Earth cooled. There are many suggestions that could make this site better but by the same token,
just because you can do something, does not mean you should.
Sadly, I tend to think that maybe we have gotten off on the wrong foot so to speak, as the only time we tend to interact is when we are "explaining" our sometimes opposing positions on certain changes (proposed and/or implemented).
For the record, my thoughts on some of these suggestions and general themes that seem to be widely discussed are as follows:
First, the elephant in the room: "
Advanced Increasing" (3+ versus 5+ for mid-turn turn-in)- I obviously prefer 3+,
a set is a set always, model but can understand that not everyone prefers this. The main problem I have with the re-implementation of the 5+ card requirement, was the disingenuous way it was sold as somehow more difficult to implement without requiring password-protected games than with them. This seems a though it was done solely to keep players from using the 3+ option, so that "Advanced" players could be saved from accidentally joining games with 3+ cards. I don't like that 3 months on, password-protected games are still required to use the 3+ option, but
IF it is, as I suspect,
only to discourage its use, just say that and give a time-frame when the 5+ default might be sufficiently re-entrenched that the restriction can be lifted.
BTW, aeronautic had a suggestion for additional card set composition here, if any are so inclined.Secondly, the main suggestion at hand in this particular thread (before it went off the rails) The "Resign" button - As I mentioned
earlier, I tend to think the feature does save some time for impatient players who, for whatever reason, have not budgeted enough time to finish a game where people might use all of their allotted time (SEE:
Rule #7). However, given that
EXCESSIVE swearing (RIP:
andjelicicic) is generally frowned upon and therefore prevents a certain release of frustration by defeated/irritated parties. The children/childish here have no other recourse but to waste players' time, to gain what little petty instant satisfaction that may keep the present outrage from spilling into targeting/suicide in subsequent games. I still propose the "resign" button be
DISABLED in
Fog games,
especially Fog Capitals games, as its use provides substantial, game-changing information.
Finally, I'd like to offer suggestions to the perennial problems which many of the rules and much of the staff's time are geared to nullify: noobiciders, "luck-based" players, and general miscreants/trolls.
Simply follow some easy steps:
1. Use tools already available to exclude undesirables or include only those with whom you want to play, such as: minimum points
(On a side note: I would suggest that players invited to minimum points games by the creator, be exempt from the minimum point threshold.) and password protected games. (Be patient with noobs and
help teach the teachable.)
2. Don't feed the trolls
3. Let social-Darwinism exclude repeat offenders, who will either be left without players with whom to play, or leave the site entirely. Mission accomplished
4. Remember, it is still only a game. Have fun
tl;dr I don't program,yet. This site Rocks (due in VERY large part to Vexer's contributions). The forums could be better. "Adv. Increasing" STILL requires a password, why? There are many rules here and more is not better. "Resign" in Fog Capitals is BAD. Social-Darwinism could free much staff time. Have fun
@[url=http://www.dominating12.com//index.php?cmd=member&sec=profile&act=view&id=1774]Vexer[/url], I'm no programmer, this is true, but if I (or anyone else here) wanted to learn, where is the best place to begin (for a total non-programmer)?
I don't deny that this is still the best site I've seen for this type of gaming. That's kinda why we're all here. I never said [b][i]everything[/i][/b] was wrong, just that some things could use improvement.
This doesn't negate my critiques of the futility of the forum or that it is largely a waste of time, as meaningful discussions go. It sounds as though there was no place to go but up and nobody can deny that dictators get [url=http://s2.postimg.org/dljbi4yrd/Achievement.png]things[/url] done. This is not to say that decisive imperial control doesn't have its place, but it does not scale well. The site grows and there will come a point (perhaps it's already here) that you and the rest of the staff could use more help from those of us who also want to see the site remain the best place for this type of gaming on the Interwebz. However, that assistance will not come from people who perpetually feel their opinions are discounted simply because they haven't been here since the Earth cooled. There are many suggestions that could make this site better but by the same token, [b]just because you can do something, does not mean you should[/b].
Sadly, I tend to think that maybe we have gotten off on the wrong foot so to speak, as the only time we tend to interact is when we are "explaining" our sometimes opposing positions on certain changes (proposed and/or implemented).
For the record, my thoughts on some of these suggestions and general themes that seem to be widely discussed are as follows:
First, the elephant in the room: "[url=http://www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=631&page=19#post-19554]Advanced Increasing[/url]" (3+ versus 5+ for mid-turn turn-in)- I obviously prefer 3+, [i]a set is a set[/i] [b]always[/b], model but can understand that not everyone prefers this. The main problem I have with the re-implementation of the 5+ card requirement, was the disingenuous way it was sold as somehow more difficult to implement without requiring password-protected games than with them. This seems a though it was done solely to keep players from using the 3+ option, so that "Advanced" players could be saved from accidentally joining games with 3+ cards. I don't like that 3 months on, password-protected games are still required to use the 3+ option, but [b][i]IF[/i][/b] it is, as I suspect, [i]only[/i] to discourage its use, just say that and give a time-frame when the 5+ default might be sufficiently re-entrenched that the restriction can be lifted.
[size=8]BTW, [url=http://www.dominating12.com//index.php?cmd=member&sec=profile&act=view&id=14411]aeronautic[/url] had a suggestion for additional card set composition [url=http://dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=1278]here[/url], if any are so inclined.[/size]
Secondly, the main suggestion at hand in this particular thread (before it went off the rails) The "Resign" button - As I mentioned [url=http://dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&act=view&id=1455&board=20&page=1#post-20981]earlier[/url], I tend to think the feature does save some time for impatient players who, for whatever reason, have not budgeted enough time to finish a game where people might use all of their allotted time (SEE: [url=http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=tutorial&act=rules#7]Rule #7[/url]). However, given that [url=http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=tutorial&act=rules#2]EXCESSIVE swearing[/url] (RIP: [url=http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=member&sec=profile&id=15955]andjelicicic[/url]) is generally frowned upon and therefore prevents a certain release of frustration by defeated/irritated parties. The children/childish here have no other recourse but to waste players' time, to gain what little petty instant satisfaction that may keep the present outrage from spilling into targeting/suicide in subsequent games. I still propose the "resign" button be [b]DISABLED[/b] in [i]Fog[/i] games, [size=14]especially [b]Fog Capitals[/b] games, as [i]its use provides substantial, game-changing information[/i][/size].
Finally, I'd like to offer suggestions to the perennial problems which many of the rules and much of the staff's time are geared to nullify: noobiciders, "luck-based" players, and general miscreants/trolls.
Simply follow some easy steps:
1. Use tools already available to exclude undesirables or include only those with whom you want to play, such as: minimum points [size=10](On a side note: I would suggest that players invited to minimum points games by the creator, be exempt from the minimum point threshold.)[/size] and password protected games. (Be patient with noobs and [url=http://www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=1589&lastpost=1#post-21471]help teach the teachable[/url].)
2. Don't feed the trolls
3. Let social-Darwinism exclude repeat offenders, who will either be left without players with whom to play, or leave the site entirely. Mission accomplished :)
4. Remember, it is still only a game. Have fun :)
[size=14][b][u]tl;dr[/u][/b] I don't program,yet. [b]This site Rocks[/b] ([u]due in [b]VERY large part[/b] to [url=http://www.dominating12.com//index.php?cmd=member&sec=profile&act=view&id=1774]Vexer[/url]'s contributions[/u]). The forums could be better. "Adv. Increasing" STILL requires a password, [i]why?[/i] There are many rules here and more is [b]not[/b] better. "Resign" in Fog Capitals is BAD. Social-Darwinism could free much staff time.[/size] [size=18][b]Have fun [/b]:)[/size]
![[image]](http://s14.postimg.org/rn3pwx4ip/Aim_Lower_Bear.png)
