Summertop: At least that is a good thing that I have to go through each person individually to send a message to - it also allows me to look at "last login date"

On a very positive note, it looks like that any pawns who are members of your fellowship no longer show up in the teams. That is good because I did not really want to through pawns out in case they renew their membership.

Summertop: Plus in addition to that:

3. It would also be nice to know when someone new joins the team. I'm currently tryint to figure out what all my team players like so I do not end up picking someone who really does not want to play in a certain type of game - and if someone new joins after this point, I might miss them completly when choosing teams.

Summertop: I second that..... (As I get ready to go through and send each team player a PM)

ellieoop: You can't have "pictures" in the drop down box - so maybe something like a " - " or a " + " or something like that for different types of games would work.

Shouldn't Extinction Chess have a different color boarder like some of the other variants which look similar to regular chess, but play much differently?

alanback: That is an interesting idea - a way to collect names & send a message to a certain group of people.

At the same time, i would also suggest a way to "opt-out" of all mailing list messages. I have left fellowships where the BIG BOSS sends out too many "group messages" where you read the same information on the fellowship discussion board, and I'm sure there would be a few that would also send out a lot of these also if allowed - so would be nice to block all..... if that feature request is done of course.

pgt: No refund, but if you get the February bonus, you will get 1/2 of your next lifes membership free! <joke>

Czuch Chuckers: The BIG BOSS when they create the tournament can name it just like any other tournament. It might be easier to get them to just start naming the tournaments instead of just keeping the default name.

WhiteTower: Here is something I don't think you will hear me say often, but I believe Fencer's second answer is wrong. (not really wrong, but not the correct answer.)

The first question/request was about putting a green dot on the game page themselves to see if a user is online.

The answer to this is that if the user's "doing" is under their name, they are on-line. If nothing is there, then they are not on-line. No need for a greed dot also.

The second question/comment was that it did not work if someone was cloaked.

The answer to this should be that it does work when someone is cloaked. If a cloaked user is on-line, you will see the "user is cloaked" message instead of they are doing. If they are not online, then you will see nothing.
... and if you are the cloaked user, you will see a message saying "- disabled when you are cloaked -" if someone else is on-line. Again, blank if they are not online.

That is how it is set up now. I'm cloacked, and what I see instead of what someone is doing is " - disabled when you are cloacked - "

plaintiger: Like Vikings said, being cloaked should not matter.

If a person who is cloaked is on-line, it will say *cloaked* or something like that (telling you that they are on-line)

If a person is not on-line, nothing will be there.

So if you see the doing line under their name, it is the same as if there is a green dot.

plaintiger: And something I mentioned before, but it would be nice if fellowships which have stairs - if the big bosses could add/remove games from stairs also. That way if a new game is added to the site, they do not have to create a totaly different set of stairs for just the 1 game, but be able to add the 1 game to the stairs which have already been on there way.

pauloaguia: The tournaments that are completed are in the finished area. In progress tournaments are in the running area.

mctrivia: That would be interesting. I wonder, lets say if a piece falls to the left of a peg, when it hits the next peg - would there be a greater change (lets say 60%) that it would continue left, or do you think the computer should pick 50/50 each time?

Czuch Chuckers: That may be difficult. I believe the rankings are only updated once a day (Maybe every hour?) - But unlike the BKR's which are calculated right away, the system does not know your new ranking until it runs it's script.

(And I would guess running a new script every time a game ends would overload the server)

Salkkuman: Yea, this was recently discussed on the tournament board.

To me, I think it is a current bug since for "cubed" backgammon tournaments, the S-B is counted by each game won, not the number of total matchs won.

So how it is now - if you win 5 games worth 1 point, it is worth more S-B then if you win one game that is worth over 5 points with the cube.

I think making the site about playing to "win" money and such is not a good idea. As it is now, some people feel the need to cheat to win - if it was for actual money, it would bring out a lot more cheaters using programs and such. Another reason is many people play from work, or certain places which does not allow people to play on gambling sites - and even if the person is playing the "free" stuff with no money involved, it would still be considered a gambling site and could be blocked. (Not to mention the programs which automaticly block gambling sites.)

I came up with an idea awhile back to turn the Brains into a little game/money type of thing awhile back. That is you earn brains for winning games, and tournaments. (very few for games with limits, more with tournaments, and even more with tournaments with a lot of players.) You could also earn brains doing other things, players could offer their brains as extra prizes for their own tournaments, etc... etc...

With the brains in turn, nothing would actually equal out to actual $$ - but things that would not cost Fencer anything - like for XX amount of brains, you could post an approved system message on the front page for everyone to see for XX amount of days. Or you could change the color of your rook/knight to special design colors like purple, red, or multi-color (NOTE: This idea was before gold rooks were introduced - to tell you how long ago I had this idea). You could also buy things like being able to post with your own special icons/smiles in your posts only. Maybe buy your own private discussion board, extra vacation days, post in different colors, post in slightly bigger/smaller fonts (not enough to actually mess anything up - but to help make a post special) etc... etc..

I believe I still have my "long" idea around somewhere. It had a lot more detail, with restrictions to keep people from cheating too bad to get extra brains.

I think something like this would be an interesting addition to the site - give players something else to go after - but with the bottom line that they can not be used to actually "buy" something like extra membership time since that would take away money going towards a new server.

Would be nice if we can edit in-game notes (TO SELF).

Now that the notes can be places above the board where you can see them, in games like Dark Chess, Espionage - I like to try to keep track of my opponenets pieces.

It would be nice if I can just edit my one note instead of having to copy-paste it all into a new note with the couple of changes/additions that needs to be done.

Daniel Snyder: Once a tournament is set up, the time limit can not be changed.

The only thing that can be changes is the title & description - and only after it is approved.

alanback: I believe you can put the person on your blocked users list, which will also block all in-game chat. They can still write to you, but you will never see it if I remember correctly.

You will not be able to get PM's from them either, but I'm guessing that will not be a problem.

mctrivia: If I were to make a multi-player (more then 2) version of Battleboats:

One big board - maybe 15x15

All players pieces goes on the SAME board

The computer randomly places ALL pieces on the 1 board. (Player can not place them since 2 players might accedently place a piece in the same space.)

The more players, the less pieces that can fit on the board - so maybe something like one "4 long", two "3 long", and two "2 long" pieces for each player.

Each player gets a chance to shot on the board - of course they will know where their own boats are on the board, but are able to shot anywhere else on the board.

Each player gets to see where the other shots - when a hit is made, you do NOT know who's boat it is until it is sunk. (So player one makes a hit, player two sees that and shots around it to get a second hit, etc...)

..... This can also be set up to be teams - 2 against 2 - where the 2 team mates get to share notes and try to sink the other players boats. If one of the player loses all their boats, they are out and the 1 player has to continue. (They can still "win" the game if their team mate continues to sink all their opponents ships when they are not even playing anymore.)

I will post this on the Battleboats board if anyone wants to add more to this.

I would like to request that when you edit stairs (Fellowship stairs in my case), that you would also be allowed to add/remove different games from those stairs.

For example, in my ◙ The Gammon Cube ◙ Fellowship, I have stairs with all 6 gammon games. If you were to add a new gammon game to the site, it would be nice if I could add the new game to the current stairs which is already well on it's way.

(This might also be helpfull on site stairs for when you add new games to the site and would like to add them to the already made stairs)

alanback:

< i > = Italics < /i >

< b > = Bold < /b >

< li > = Ordered list - like this list

• < ul > = indents things - don't forget closing tag on this one < /ul >

< a href="hxxp://www.coan.net"> = Links! < /a >

I think that is all of the HTML codes that work on the message boards. Just take out the spaces.

If you are a member, you can test and play with them in your Notepad - http://brainking.com/en/Notepad

MidnightMcMedic: No, current tournaments have a min. of 4 per section - and draws are allowed.

diogenes: Like brackets? Yea, if so - that is one of my long-time request for this site. (like dailygammon's tournmanets)

Basicly:
Player 1 vs player 2
player 3 vs player 4

then winner of first, and the winner of the second meet and play each other

(Nothing wrong with the current tournament way, but to have additional options would be great)

Jason: In settings, as members you can also places the ad's at the bottom of the page. I do that - that way every once and awhile I can go click on them to help Fencer make a few extra cents here and there - and the ad's are not in my way on the top of my screen. (Again, only a member option I believe.)

About a week ago, there was a time when the google ad's were both not loading - would get an error about not being found, but everything else loaded fine.... and only laster about 5 minutes. Other then that, I have had no problem with the google ad's. (Think I will go click on it again to help Fencer out!)

Thad: I don't know - I would guess more games. He normally does not like to share it that way if for some reason he does not do the top thing first, he will not get bombarded with questions of why - or what is taking so long - or other questions like that. This way he works at his own pace and gets things done when he can.

... or at least that is what I think.

Thad: I do not think Fencer is against creating different rating systems for different games, but I do know that it is not on the top of his list either.

I would not be surprised that in due time, Fencer will code a Backgammon friendly rating system here and also back-track all ratings for those games into the system.

.... just something that I'm sure will not happen for awhile but I believe may be on Fencer's to-do list.

WhiteTower: World culture would be cool (as long as it stayed off politics as much as possible) - in my opinion.

Jump This: To have a public politics board will probable only lead to problems in my opinion. It would probable be dominated by a select few people, probable on the anti-bush, anti-optional war, etc.. type of talk.

If you are a paid member (knight or above), there is a "Debate club" fellowship which has it's own board to debate and talk about politics. I was pretty active in there until recent when I finaly got sick of the same idiot making up lies about what I have said and such that I finally left.

Anyway, I think many people are put off by political discussion boards, and would probable only lead to problems if one was put up on this site.

alanback: Also auto-vacations will not show up since those are taken at the "last minute"

Do not pay 10,000 Euros for auto pass yet - I heard that around Christmas, Fencer will have a 10% off sale for auto pass - I would wait until then!

Fencer: How I understand how Fencer works is he has a list of things that need to be done, 2 of which are listed above, but a lot of other smaller things. The "priority" of these items as I understand change all the time. He does not like to give a "time frame" on when things will be ready because if I remember correctly, the last time he did that and he ended up not having it ready "on time", it caused more problems with people asking "Hey, you said you would have this done."

A list is a good idea to keep on the top of this page so people know what is hopefully going to be here down the road, but can also bring on a lot of "Hey, that's been up there for awhile - when are you going to get it done" type of questions.

I was reading about a game called Latrunculi which seems very interesting - like a cross between Hasami Shogi & Talbut.

While searching sites, a few different versions of rules since it is a very old game (Romans - BC)

Basic rules (that I like):

12x8 board.
Row 1 on each side are the players pieces (12 each).
Each side has a "king" which starts in row 2.
The back row pieces act just like Hasami Shogi - you move, capture, etc just like in the game of Hasami Shogi. But the goal of the game is not to get 5 in a row, but to capture the opponents king on all 4 sides like in Talbut.

I would add that if a king is along the edge, then only 3 pieces are needed to capture it.
If a king is in the corner, then only 2 pieces are needed to capture it.
King can only "jump" their own pieces, not the opponents.
If no captures are made in 30 moves, game is over - person with most captured pieces wins.

Wikipedia has an entry for the game which shows the board, the the rules listed there are a little different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latrunculi

Other sites which all have a little bit different rules, but overall - looks like it would be an interesting addition to this game site:

http://www.di.fc.ul.pt/~jpn/gv/latrunculi.htm
http://www.bethanddon.com/page/1168564608.html (about 1/2 way down the page)
http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxk116/roma/latruncu.html

We may have to discuss this to get a good set of rules that will work well, but I think something could be worked out.

NOT a floosie: We can talk more about it on the Backgammon Board

Copy of problems is that if you can not see where your opponents pieces are, then how do you know not to move your own pieces there? (Answer would be if you land on a spot that has 2 of your opponents pieces, then your piece goes to the board)

Fencer: Looking for a multi-player game where it will not matter if 1 player times out / quits playing.

Multi-Battlebaots

One big board - 15x15

3-4 players - each with lets say 1 "4-long", 1 "3-long", and 1 "2-long" ship.

Computer RANDOMLY places boats on the same 15x15 board.

Each player takes a turn at making 2 shots each. (They see their own boats so they know not to shot themselves). - then goes around to each of the other players.

If someone times out, then they are eliminated from the game with no more shots - BUT any unhit boats still remain hidden and act as "dummy" boats for the other players - meaning if those are sunk, it makes no difference in the game.

Fencer's reply:

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=3&ngi=259329

Can we get a different color boarder for this chess game also since the pieces move different then regular chess.

eagle eye: When only 2 players are playing in a final section, there are now actually different options that a tournament creator can pick.

(X number) wins match
(X number) points match
(X number) games match

Which of course for this, the SB does not really do anything. Only in sections with more then 2 people does the SB really do anything.

Pioneer54: My thoughts

1. This would be great if it would not put too much strain on the server. Maybe once a day when the server is the least busy, have a script run through current tournaments to see if it can be determined if there is a winner for each section - and start next round if so.

2. This can be a good idea, but at the same time - many players don't understand the points & S-B in a tournament and may not be able to determin if they are out or not. (Then what will happen if a pawn "removes" themself from a tournament, but then to find out he would have won?) Maybe just a change in the restriction would be beter then worring about this.

3. I could see 2 options for panws. (A) Let pawns enter as many tournaments as they want as long as they do not go over 20 game limit. or (B) Make it so they can only start a new tournament once a month - so at the 1st of the month they can enter a new tournament even if the first one is not done... and they are still under their 20 game limit.

I would also like to see the restriction of 1 of each game type of tournaments for knights removed also. For players who play MANY different types of games, this restriction does nothing. But for someone who only plays chess, well this could be a killer. Just having the 50 game limit seems like enough.

4. I would also like to add that it would be nice if a check could be put into place when a pawn/knight enter a tournament to see if they have room AT THAT TIME - instead of when it starts and then kicks them out. It would not be full proof since one might get in, but then be over the limit by a second round starting elsewhere - but I think it would be helpful.

Fencer: Ohh... neat.

*runs off to notepad*

[ps. Just out of curiousity, how did you discover that it's bscx?]

Because I know everything!

Oh, and if you do a search for a message, and when those messages come up, there is a link that says "show message in context" - that will put that message (BSCX=) as the first post showing the rest of the messages under it.

... since you asked.

playBunny: Yea, that would be nice.

Right now if you want to do that, you have to "trick" the system.

For example:

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=3&bscx=383873

That link will take you to Board #3 (Feature request), and put the post #383873 (a post by me a little ways down) to the top of the list.

Of course that is a lot of work, but it should work if you REALLY want to do that.

I would like to see the "Top 50 players" list expanded to include more players. Or manybe something like "you are in XXX'th place with an average BKR of XXXX" - that way people can see how close they are to making a list.

Same request goes for the "top player" section.

Third request is to make a tab from Statistics to go directly to the daily / all time move page. Instead of having to keep the link on our main page, I think it should also be included in the Statistics area - if not only a quick link to where the page is currently located.

I would like to request an easy way to see when I have finished a game in all the game types last. That way if I need to at least play a couple of games of a type I don't play that often - I can do that before the deadline reaches the time where I'm taken off the BKR list.

nobleheart: Yes, paid members also have access to ratings graphs very similar to LittleGolem - where you can look at the history of one game to see yours or someone elses history.

I believe it is his own posted words - in a discussion in the Debate Club - Religion fellowship board. If I remember correctly, reza has to pay for each minute he is online so I would guess he types most of his post off-line, then pastes it when he is on-line.

My suggestion would be if you know your post is going to be large, just make 2-3 smaller post that way you will not run into that situation again.

nobleheart: Instead of trying to get everyone else on the site to play within the time limits that you like, why not leave all the time limit options available and each person can join what most fits their needs.

playBunny: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_clock

WhiteTower: Plus some have already played with using the Fischer's Cloak set to 1 hour time limit (no bonus) - which made for almost "live" games - with a game / tournament taking no longer then 2 hours to complete (up to 1 hour for each player).

There was just the minor problem that when you reach 0 minutes left, since the time-out process does not run on BK every minute - a couple people got a little over an hour to play - but still complete a full game/tournament is a very short amount of time.