 |
|
 BackgammonBackgammon and variants. Backgammon Links No tienes autorización para escribir mensajes en este boletín. Para escribir mensajes en este boletín se require un nivel mínimo de membresía de Brain Peón. Modo: Todo el mundo puede escribir
25. Marzo 2007, 21:44:55  Very unfair if we cant use auto pass if we want too 25. Marzo 2007, 23:00:04 Asunto: Re: Andersp: yes, but also i think it is unfair that soembody isnt going to move in their games until the last minute because the other person isnt using autopass. 25. Marzo 2007, 23:07:52 Asunto: Re: Oceans Apart: I agree that it can be unfair to the other players in the tourney, some of them might use auto pass. Ive told Fencer many times to forget the whole idea with autopass, the way he created it only causes confusion and unfairness.
26. Marzo 2007, 01:04:42 Asunto: Re: Andersp: Well that's silly, if it's not working it's because it's not implemented properly. Should be anyone who wants to use it can... whenever they want. Please nobody suggest that it be abandoned, only fixed. 26. Marzo 2007, 01:09:33 Asunto: Re: grenv: It wont be fixed....Fencer has said that autopass can only be used in games where BOTH players agree to it. = if you want to use autopass in a game but your opponent says "no thanks" then nobody can use it...sad but true. So even if you change your settings to autopass you can not be sure that you can use it
26. Marzo 2007, 03:07:52 Asunto: Re: Andersp: Once upon a time Fencer said he'd never implement auto-pass. Now we have a half-way implementation (which is better than nothing since at worst you can't use it which is the same as before). In the future with enough pressure from players it will be implemented properly. 26. Marzo 2007, 10:32:52 Asunto: Re: grenv: I agree with you, I am just not sure that the pressure from the players will be enough. 26. Marzo 2007, 14:07:31 Asunto: Re:In the future with enough pressure from players it will be implemented properly. grenv: Dont count on it  26. Marzo 2007, 01:30:24 Asunto: Re: grenv: Problem is that Fencer doesn't think it's "broken" and needs fixing. Something has been implemented and is labelled 'autopass'. It just doesn't match what others think should be called 'autopass'. A few weeks ago, a new gamesite opened. It doesn't have many games yet, and it won't implement backgammon (because it wants to implement games you don't find anywhere else), but it does have autopass/move. And you don't even get the option of performing mindless clicking. If you don't have a choice to make in a game, you don't have to click. 26. Marzo 2007, 10:36:55 Asunto: Re: AbigailII: So the only thing which is really unfair is the name of the feature (and maybe the promisses done). Now I 100% agree that "autoplay" would be the logical and useful sequel of "autopass". 26. Marzo 2007, 11:13:46 Asunto: Re: nabla: Whether that's the only "unfair" thing I cannot say. I leave that judgement to the person who paid for a black rook to get autopass. I would feel cheated if I were that person. Note that autoplay has been half implemented for years already: if for instance in chess, you click on a piece that can only move to one square, the game automatically moves it to that square. And you don't even have the option to prevent your opponent to use this feature. 26. Marzo 2007, 11:45:59 Asunto: Re: AbigailII: I don't know exactly what was the promisses done, so it is difficult to speak. But you are probably right that the implicit meaning of "autopass will be implemented" should have been "you will be able to use it in all your games". Excellent point about autoplay, I didn't think about it ! And actually, in some games like Ambiguous Chess, this feature is a real playing help. Sometimes I click on a square thinking that only one piece can go there, and then the system doesn't move it there, making me see that another piece could move there too (and that it would be very costly). We indeed have half an autopass and half an autoplay. 26. Marzo 2007, 14:06:40 Asunto: Re:I would feel cheated if I were that person. AbigailII: I suppose its me you refer too, yes i had a "deal" with Fencer "Add autopass and i buy 2 black rooks". I kept my part of the deal and Fencer installed "autopass" Cant say i feel 'cheated" since we never discussed any details but i had at least hoped to be able to use autopass in every game without asking for my opponents permission. Thats whats unfair, the "no sayers" have a choice but we autopasslovers have no choice. 26. Marzo 2007, 14:28:09 Asunto: Re:I would feel cheated if I were that person. Andersp: In your opinion, what would make Fencer implement complete auto-pass and auto-play ? More black rook subscriptions ? Testimonies from users who say they went to play on DailyGammon only because it had those features ? We know that we are right to ask for it, so there must be something working :-) 26. Marzo 2007, 21:04:47 Asunto: Re:I would feel cheated if I were that person. Modificado por Andersp (26. Marzo 2007, 21:05:15) nabla: I dont think anything would help, this seems to be the only "autopass" we can get AbigailII: I guess i trusted Fencer to do a good job :) 26. Marzo 2007, 16:05:38 Asunto: Re:I would feel cheated if I were that person. Modificado por AbigailII (26. Marzo 2007, 21:15:11) Andersp: Ah, yes, I thought it was you, but I wasn't sure and that's why I didn't mention a name. Anyway, if I were to ever make an offer in the form "I'll buy a black rook (or two) if you implement this-and-this", I'm sure to write down an exact specification of the feature. ;-) |
Fecha y hora
Amigos conectados
Foros favoritos
Comunidades
Consejo del día
|
|
Moderador: 
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, todos los derechos reservados. Volver a arriba |