Your own private space

I'd like to have a place for myself. Somewhere where I can have my own thoughts and scribbles - within this website (so I can read it, regardless of which device I use to access this website). An option could be to add another forum tab (which could be toggled of for those who wouldn't want to use it). In this place, I could write down stuff which would be relevant for me, with respect to D12. For instance: a small to-do-list, or some learning points, or even links to all the things I want to have quick access to (e.g. some forum posts, some people, some games, anything goes). What do you guys think of it? -Alex

Hi Alex, One thing you could do is send a message to yourself in the message system, and keep updating that. It doesn't allow editing sadly, but given that this is a pretty niche use case, it could be a good start?

it gives a whoops page now if you do that. i use to do that..(send messages to yourself) but after the migration it no longer works.

Use the Notes section in a finished game. Your first for instance, so it’s easy to find. Nickname the game ‘Alex’s Diary ♥️‘. Then add to it whenever you feel the urge to scribble down your most inner secrets. Solved.

[quote=vikingo1337]Use the Notes section in a finished game. Your first for instance, so it’s easy to find. Nickname the game ‘Alex’s Diary ♥️‘. The add to it whenever you feel the urge to scribble down your deep thoughts. Solved. [/quote] I've wanted to test bbcodes, make quick links for myself, notes the same as alex suggests..hyperlinks don't work in the tabs. it was quite useful to send myself notes, but the work around i have used for myself is to send messages to a non activated never used accounts when i've wanted to do some message formatting..

[img]https://i.gyazo.com/eba601696b16de693476ec1934bb1789.png[/img] I managed to do it. I tested it just yesterday because I wanted to make sure it worked before suggesting it ;)

who did you send it to? From: Cireon To: I get a Whoops page when I send a message to Hoodlum

I sent it to Cireon I think. Maybe I used the wrong box though. Try sending it to nobody

[quote=Cireon]Hi Alex, One thing you could do is send a message to yourself in the message system, and keep updating that. It doesn't allow editing sadly, but given that this is a pretty niche use case, it could be a good start?[/quote] Yes, that is something I've considered myself too as well as used - however, it's rather cumbersome and doesn't do all the things I would want it to do (as Hoodlum mentioned, it's pretty annoying with (copying) BBCode). [spoiler=Example of my first experiments with this tactic:]Message: Send to myself? Possible? From: AlexCheckMate To: AlexCheckMate said: 15 Jan 2019, 13:44 Thanks for the swift and rather elaborate answer Matty! Makes perfect sense to not disclose all of the code - I'm not even interested in that either. Reading through your post / code, it seems rather straightforward, but looks might be deceiving... So... just to give myself an example... Numerical example for a 6 player game (click to show) As a base - for losing; you lose 20 rating. With this number getting adjusted to be lower/higher, based on your rating with respect to the average rating of the game. As a base - for winning; you win 20 rating per opponent. With this number getting adjusted to be lower/higher, based on the opponents ratings with respect to the average rating of the game. So..... it makes no difference for the losers against who they lose? Its just about the average rating in the game? In case I made some errors somewhere, please do point them out to me (+ corrections xd). ///\\\///\\\///\\\ \\\///\\\///\\\/// As for the little modification regarding 2 player games with the loser having >3x the rating of the winner (e.g. 1500 player beats 4600 player). Is this being processed in the way it is intended? It seems that when A > 3B, the MORE big A is with respect to B (e.g. A = 7B ), the rating distribution becomes ever so more less profitable for B...? As an example: Numerical evaluation of 2 player games with high ranked player >3 low ranked player (click to show) It does indeed protect the high ranked player, but it also rewards the low ranked player in an increasingly more awkward way. I assume rating is not supposed to be 'created' out of thin air... but perhaps the winnings should not be comprised? Only tackle the losses? The current mod is only in favour of protecting high players, but does not reward low players in a fair way. For a 'low winner', it is more profitable to win against someone exactly 3x his/her rating, than someone who's supposed to be even better (so s/he's also less likely to win against this person) and has a rating >3x of the winner. In the same logic; better to win against someone with 2x your rating, as someone with 4x your rating (gains/losses of 26 and 24 respectively). As a sidenote... I assume the default rating starts at 1000? That way it'll be rather difficult to drop down to 500, 200, or even lesser rating... it does however make perfect sense to treat cases approaching the limits differently.. (e.g. a 200 rating player beating a 1000). Then again..... no real use in having 'exception' catchers at all places... Once more - thanks for the input! Happy to hear some more / my current thought(s) reviewed =) - Alex AlexCheckMate said: 16 Jan 2019, 02:24 That's a definite Yes! =) Going over a 4 person game (played it yesterday). 4 player game (click to show) I'm fine with the explanation of the code as is. Thank you Matty! If someone would want to... a spin-off topic could be to discuss whether they feel like the rating system, in the way it currently is, is fine - or some tweaking would be in order. In my opinion... I'm not going to burn my hands on that project - yet. Once more - thanks a lot Matty :) AlexCheckMate said: 19 Jan 2019, 00:14 The following is wrong :D //source: https://dominating12.com/forums/2/general-discussion/3078/inner-workings-of-the-game-engine/ But want to send it to myself anyway - as it took quite a bit of effort to compile :3 Matty I edited my post a couple of times, as I realized more and more what happened - that highlighted line by you is edited out, as I don't think so anymore. In fact, I actually think Vexer's formula is pretty smart. You see, if we cut it off at 30, it's unfair for the higher rated player. Let's take the 5000 vs 1000 case in comparison with the 2000 vs 1000 case. If the 5000 player wins, he gets 6 rating. If he loses, he loses 20. If the 2000 player wins, he gets 13, he loses 26. So if they both end up playing 2 games, winning one, losing one (not unreasonable for 2p games), with Vexer's formula the 5000 rated player loses netto 14 rating, the 2000 rated player loses netto 13 rating. That's actually quite fair IMO. If we'd cut off, the 5000 rated player would've gambled losing 30 (rather then 33), for only getting 6! That's a net loss of 24 rating, which means he should probably never play 2 player games if he wants to keep his rank. Just noticed your edits! However... the added examples on the top of your table.... they're wrong :# (First 3 - next quote) and as such the reasoning that follows from it too... So then maybe you do want to go back to your original thought? Or kick out the ELSE and go with the IF always (I do not think that is the better idea). Matty For reference, this is the weird 2p behaviour of rating. I actually never calculated the results before (Vexer put it in a long time ago). This is how it is with Vexer's modifier. Winner Loser Won/lost 5000 500 3 5000 1000 6 2000 1000 13 1000 1000 20 Matty [...] The way we calculate the rating (click to show) As you said here^ (Post #2); it's only working IF the low player wins - IF the high player wins, the IF statement is not taken into effect (go ELSE). //added some red/blue I'm happy to see so many (and quick!) replies ^_^ AlexCheckMate said: 01 Feb 2019, 22:57 Just checking in with our 2 main suspects for Mafia.... Muzthebus &Bought myself 8 Spray Paints, was all the cash I had, got refunded immediately due to the capitalist regime. Figured I might use them sometime... so why not buy them now... free of charge =D (Hence the change of cost for them SP... V98 thought I found a loophole ;/) Not something that's especially related to town/mafia/neutral - just using my head? If you actually FIND this message, send me an inbox (you know who I am), do not respond on this in forum (AND CERTAINLY DO NOT QUOTE XD) - let's check who's observant. I'll graffiti something tonight - it should be pretty recognisable that it's coming from me Mayba, are you still around? It's been pretty silent around the both of you... if you wish to remain in the game, I'd suggest you try and clear any suspicions people might have on you... -Alex size0 text in there =d[/spoiler] It's really tricky to copy/quote from my own inbox. Hence my suggestion to just get another forum tab (for those who it would be a bother for, they can toggle it off? or better yet, have it toggled off by default and have people toggle it on, if they wish to make use of it?). Remembering how easy/quick it was to just add the Tournament page, I figured this would be an easy thing for the programming team. So albeit it's for a pretty niche use case, considering the effort to get it in seems negligible, it's still very worthwhile? IRT Hoodlum I filled in that I send to myself and it then also leaves out the "To: (blank space)" - not sure why it goes differently on your account? Is it some beta testing thing which I enabled? No clue. Just testing it again now with a new message thread: [i] Your reply has been sent. Oops, sorry! The number of unread messages had to be corrected :]. Search messages Create message Messages Displaying 1-20 of 613 messages. Between Message Last reply Options « 1 ... 31 » To: myself New! test (2) 1 second ago [/i] So it went from 0 to 1 - which was a tad strange for the system? As it doesn't predict to go up a counter from your own actions?

Best way to currently do this is to send a message to yourself (aka, To: "AlexCheckMate") and then mark it sticky. [quote=Hoodlum]I get a Whoops page when I send a message to Hoodlum[/quote] LOL. No, you don't. You do get a whoops if you send it to hoodlum though :S Fixed ;)

I'm already talking to myself; it's not fulfilling. How to mark sticky? Is there a downside to a private forum space?

[quote=AlexCheckMate]I'm already talking to myself; it's not fulfilling. [b]How to mark sticky?[/b] Is there a downside to a private forum space?[/quote] The star icon on the far right of the messages page :)

Why not just use Google Drive and a word document (or spreadsheet)?

[quote]Is there a downside to a private forum space?[/quote] We'd have to put time and effort into a feature that will be used very little. From a web design perspective, it is also not a good thing to just have more and more links everywhere, so we should be selective with what we add.

I like the idea of a private, personal notes area....that is not tied to a game. I would say that this is not a priority item compared to many other things the programmers could be doing. But if it is easy to do, it would be nice to have. (since the Notes tab is already there in games, I am wondering if it is easy from a coding perspective to just put something similar outside of games.) regarding the clutter and links everywhere, it could go in the user's dashboard on the left sidebar. As for "used very little" -- well if that is true, then there can be no strong case for doing it, you are right. Do we know that it would be used little? I don't think "message to self" is a very good workaround, though it does have some value. Again, not a priority. But would be nice.