rod03801:
Thank you, I didn't realize it was moved.

KJ: Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but in the message you get, when you win/lose (now in the "Events" box), there is still an offer to invite to a new game. It is all the way at the bottom of the message.

(Though, perhaps not, if it is a person who has invitations turned off, that I'm not sure of)

I miss the line on the main page that says when you win or lose the game and gives you the option to re-invite that person to another game.

The Events feature is great, but is it possible to preview the last event when the mouse hovers over the number next to Events, like the mailbox?

talen314:
i would love to see official bk all games site run tournaments monthly, or preferably as they fill up.

Hi all,

New achievements for Ludo

100 wins
500 wins
1000 wins
2000 wins
5000 wins
win with 1 opponent at home
win with 2 opponents at home
win with 3 opponents at home
win with all 4 opponents at home
capture 2 opponent in one turn
capture 3 opponents in one turn
capture all 4 opponents in one turn

nodnarbo: Lets use an example: 10 people vote on a poll - 3 different options:

Option #1 - 8 of the 10 people vote for this one (so 80% of voters picked this one)
Option #2 - 5 of the 10 people vote for this one (so 50% of voters picked this one)
Option #3 - 7 of the 10 people vote for this one (so 70% of voters picked this one)

Once I pictured that example, it was more clear to me what you were talking about (hopefully help others & Fencer if he decides to add something like this.)

coan.net: I would also like to see a reminder of how I voted, when the results are tabulated. Once in a while, I can't remember! I guess that sounds dumb, though. But it's true!

coan.net: I wasn't sure how to explain it any clearer, if you can, please do.

nodnarbo: It took me reading your message a few time to understand what you are saying, and now I do - AND AGREE.... maybe a link to toggle back and forth between the current way and the way you propose to take the percentage from the number of voters (and not number of votes).

I would also like to see Opinion Polls be sortable so the top vote winner will be sortable - so when there are polls with 20+ options, it will be easier to see the top voted option.

For checkbox opinion polls where you can choose more than one option I feel like it would be more helpful for the percent listed after the option to be the percent of voters that voted for that option than it is to have the percent of the total votes it got. With polls with 20+ options you could easily have an option that only got 15% of the total votes, but had 80+% of the voters vote for that option. It wouldn't change how the votes are counted, it would just make the popular options stand out more.

Thom27: Give up, there is no logical reason, nor can there be. It is not mandatory because it's not mandatory.

I just can't understand why it is not mandatory.

There should be an option... Instead of having a black or white pick but a 2 game both sides...

Orlandu: The easiest way would be to look at your profile, click on the Fellowships tab, and scroll down, and it shows you what teams you are on in any fellowship.

Is there any way to show what teams we have signed up for in our fellowships?

talen314: The current system does not allow to make more sophisticated filtering.
It might be possible in the future.

Hi all,
I would like to see greater ability to filter tournament searches.
Examples include:
Search for tournaments that need just one more player.
Allow players to filter out tournaments for games that are not of interest. (Allow the list of tournament games to show only the games desired by the player.)
Filter out tournaments that have undesired time limits.
Highlight the names of players that a member has no wins against to help in going after some of the achievements.  Or allow a search for tournaments that include players that a member has not faced.
Talen314

Snoopy: Thank you very much

"GERRY": you just click to disable wall button on your wall page

How do you remove your wall on your profile as i see on others don;t have it?

Thom27: Yes, this is a much needed feature.

Thom27: This is a great idea... When someone has alot games of one type... it is really needed... I had a frog finder game that I kept guessing the same move 10 times before I noticed...

to a message sent to the opponent in a game, not only date and time should be given in the list of messages, but also the move number.

Sometimes a message refers to a move, and afterwards it can be difficult to find out which move it was.

El Cid: It does, in the way aaru understood it. :)

Ok, now I got it..., then it seems that I will have much more trouble than I thought in getting to the 10 public tournaments in some gametypes (even so, I think the feature request makes sense anyway)

El Cid: But it's an Achievement awarded for team tournament wins, not fellowship tournament wins. :)

Pedro Martínez: http://brainking.com/en/Achievements?aid=93&submit=Submit&p=1 This is the fifth of them (1 tournament; 10x; 25x; 50x and 100x)

El Cid: I am afraid you are wrong, there is no Achievement for fellowship tournaments.

Pedro Martínez: In that case, I should have 3 or 4 game types marked in the achievements page and I only have one. I have always understood that the ones that count for the achievements, and are considered as public (and when counting them it usually makes sense) were only non private tournaments, and of course no-fellowship, because those are on a different achievement (which is also being bug counted)

El Cid: Public tournaments = non-fellowship tournaments, irrespective of whether they are open to everybody or invitation-only.

aaru: It's more like public+private. The fellowship are on another tab..., but for that you can go to the finish games tab, and you won't have to filter by game type, because you have all the information there

rod03801: Yeah but public+fellowship. El Cid (& me) want to see only public.

El Cid: Unless I'm misunderstanding, (which isn't unusual, lately ) You can already do that.

On your profile page, at the top, click on Won tournaments.

On that page, at the top, you can filter by game type.

Could there be a quick indication of how many public tournaments have we won for a certain gametype (I think I have won 10 public tournaments on 2 game types, but in my achievement page it only shows 1). This could be useful when only one tournament is missing for a game type to count for an achievement, so instead of having to enter the won tournaments page (especially if you are trying 50 or 100 tournaments per game type) you could simply watch the number and choose the one(s) that would be easier or faster to do so

rod03801: & Pedro Martínez: I meant that I'd like to see an option that would allow us to see what members actually click on the fellowship (i.e.The ORIGINAL Flame Pit) to read, as on the Chat board.
Besides most members I find are in a cloak mode when looking at "Who's on-line" so there is no way to tell what members are actually involved in a fellowship.

Groeneveld: Actually only the tournament creator gets the message, not the people who signed up. (but if it is added, hopefully it is an option - I already get too much "junk" mail here on my BK Message box of information I don't really need.)

this normal happens allready

I'd like to get a message when a tournament section that I signed up for is deleted due to lack of sign-ups. I might want to go looking for another tournament when this happens.

alilsassy: Ahh, I see i misunderstood your question. I was going to mention the "Who is online" link in the "Statistics" part of the left menu, as Pedro did, but I assumed you knew about that. lol.

alilsassy: a function showing the members that are present

http://brainking.com/cz/PlayerList

alilsassy: The chat room already does tell who is "present". It looks like it lists people who are either on the "static" page, or have the actual chat box enabled. It looks like it is split up in to 2 parts. From what I have seen, when someone has actively typed something in the chat box, their name goes to the top section of the list. After a certain period of time, it drops back down to the bottom part of the list.

With the new BK3 in the makings, I'm curious if there would be any way to add a function showing the members that are present, as in the Chat room?
I also think there may be an issue with pawns clicking on private fellowships just to boost ratings on the "Today's top visited boards"....If a pawn is unable to be part of the private fellowship then their clicks should not count as a visit.

Are there any plans in BK3 for fellowships to beable to delete smilies or put them in folders (like smilies for Christmas; happy smilies' dancing ones' etc?)

the ability to catalog would be useful.

I wish the system made it easier to gather the data that would demonstrate the severity of this problem.  As I've said elsewhere (I think), it could also help pinpoint when the problem began (or was it always this way?), which should help identify what changed to cause it.  I also wish the problem occurred 100% of the time, which would make it impossible to dismiss.  As it is, we have only the beginnings of statistical support for our claim, and gathering the aggregate data that would provide more solid support is a daunting task...for us the members.

Fencer is quite correct about the groundless wailing over poker or dice cheats.  There's plenty of that online; such complainers are easy to find, and the vast majority deserve our scorn and satire.  But the genuine exceptions (in online poker especially) that have come to light should give one pause.

Hats off to those who stood their ground in such cases, labored to gather the data, and revealed the truth at last.

(added comment Wednesday evening / Thursday morning):  I plan to make one last good-faith effort to present some useful data.  I plan to examine all of my backgammon (but no variants) games stored here from 2009--that's 13 matches, and a total of 137 games in which at least 2 rolls took place.  I have no reason to believe that that year is appreciably better or worse than any other year of mine.  I'm sorely tempted to separately track the opening rolls that I "won" and "lost", but I don't plan to do so for this exercise.  If I'm understanding the situation correctly (and there are good "numbers" people here who will be able to correct me if I'm wrong), the responder's roll should theoretically match the opener's roll 1 in 18 times (or 5.555_ %), on average.  I'm also going to report the percentage of responder's rolls where both dice differ from the opener's roll.  Theoretically, I think that should happen 4 times in 9 (or 44.444_%), on average.  But I think the actual observed value is going to shock and convince even the most diehard skeptics here.


Average expectation of opener's and responder's both dice exactly matching out of 137 played = 7.6111_ games.  Observed number=38 games (27.737%)

That's about 5 times the expected frequency!

Average expectation of responder's dice both differing from opener's dice out of 137 played = 60.888_ games.  Observed number=28 games (20.438%)

That's less than half of what's expected.

Pedro Martínez: oh, that should be interesting. i'll have a look.

plaintiger: Read also the Backgammon board. It has been discussed there quite a lot, and someone has even downloaded a bunch of games and made a statistical analysis of the occurrence of the opening rolls.

Pedro Martínez: oh good...i'm glad to hear somebody chime in so i don't sound like the lone lunatic (however clear-sighted). thanks, Pedro.

plaintiger: It is obvious to everyone who plays back on a regular basis here and has their eyes open.