Liste des forums de discussions
Vous n'êtes pas autorisé de poster des messages dans ce forum. Le niveau d'adhésion minimal requis pour poster dans ce forum est Cavalier.
FrancescoLR: >would do that even bigger >than .. lets see who never use vacation day and >never times out during the year and finish more >than lets say 1000 games ??
That's interesting. Maybe the achievement can be titled: Have a Nice Game Holiday
FrancescoLR: That's impossible! Say you are on holiday, I do not have Internet access during my holidays so better should be, do not use autovacation days for a year, and of course fix the mentioned turtle trick.
SL-Mark:i would do that even bigger than .. lets see who never use vacation day and never times out during the year and finish more than lets say 1000 games ??
All this debate about vacation days is quite tedious. What about a big fat achievement for those that use no vacation days during a 12 month period (for pawns - no timeouts?) and at least 50 games must also have been completed in this period (avoids inactive accounts being awarded).
Fencer: I guess I misread the discription. the person I mentioned only had 5 on their main page...but after clicking the individual section, turned out to also have 14 achievements. my mistake
Fencer: But it was not the point :) Bwild only pointed out that he is not content with the situation of having 14 poker achievements and not the mentioned one But, I think, it is not possible to have this achievement with only 5 poker ones :))
Fencer: I just looked at the acheivments for texas holdem....how can someone that only has 5 poker achments have a poker pro achvmt....I have 14 poker achmnt...but not that one???
In order to make this achievement fair to users who already purchased a Black Rook membership, the bonus code rules have been slightly changed.
Since today, a bonus can be applied only if a Brain Rook or higher membership level is purchased. Otherwise it would be possible to get a Black Rook for the price of 7 Brain Knight membership which is, actually, very low amount.
Of course, if someone got a bonus for a Brain Knight order in the past, these achievements will not be deleted.
As a suggestion, since you have all kinds of cool names for the achievements (Mission: Impossible) for different games, I would love to see it a little more organized with possible the game name in the achievement name.
So something like:
Knight Fight - Mission: Impossible Knight Fight - Double defeat Knight Fight - Path of twins Knight Fight - Galloper Gammon - Stick around Gammon - My three sixes Gammon - Double strike
... it's well organized in a persons profile, but if I go to the Achievements page and use the drop down, it's hard to know which achievement is for which game.
coan.net: Ha ha! Very funny. Actually, achievements are checked only when player triggered moves are performed. To make this check contain autopasses too would mean too much extra work, ergo I won't do it. Anyway, achievements should not be too easy to accomplish, so who wants to get this one, should play a couple of games without autopass. Nothing is for free.
AbigailII: I never noticed that one - yea, I think that one is stupid also. I mean a pass is a pass - no matter if the so-called "autopass" so called "feature" is used.
Well I don't consider it a true autopass feature anyway, so maybe Fencer should count it anyway?????
Fica por aí (Stick around) Obrigar o adversário a passar 10 vezes seguidas num mesmo jogo de Gamão ou variantes. (Force the opponent to pass the move 10 times in a row without using the autopass in a single game of backgammon or its variants.)
coan.net: Of course myself I don't think I could force myself to lose on purpose, but many others would, and I think having achievements that encourage you to lose are a bad choice.
What I find even worse is the Stick around achievement which encourages people to play without autopass (you don't earn it if you play with autopass).
coan.net: There are achievements that encourages sub optimal play (of even playing losing moves) under certain conditions (for instance, not taking your opponents King in Dice Chess, hoping to score "Pawn of glory" or "Deadly king" later in the game; prolonging a game of Anti Backgammon or Cloning Backgammon (by taking your opponents checkers when you shouldn't) trying to gain "Double strike" or "My three sixes"; marking up your 6 1's as a "Chance" instead of a "Six of a kind" in order to win "That was really close"; discarding full hotels, cars, houses after the second roll in order to try gaining "Five lucky dice" or "Six lucky dice"; taking the 11 instead of the 98 in Knight Fight in order to gain "Double defeat", "Path of twins" or even "A little more horse power"), so achievements for losing isn't that far off.
OTOH, a meta-rule of "you cannot gain an achievement (nor a partial achivement) one a game you did not win" would eliminate some of the sub optimal plays. And prohibit any achievement that requires one to lose.
lukulus: I have an issue with achievements for losing - that is if I want to try to go for more achievements (which is what I think Fencer would like), it would encourage me to lose on purpose to get them... that is purposely lose just to gain them.
Of course myself I don't think I could force myself to lose on purpose, but many others would, and I think having achievements that encourage you to lose are a bad choice. (Like the Pond BKR gain achievement... something I mentioned before, where if I ever want to fall outside of the top 10 and still gain BKR ratings - I would have to purposely lose many games to lower my BKR just to have a chance at that achievement.)
Why receive achievements only for winning? Draw in knight fight is quite rare (not by mutual agreement or in match on 2 games). Or some underdog's achievements - lose dice poker by 5 pts and less, lose knightfight by 3 and less pts, e.t.c.
Lotus Flower: If you click on Achievements in your profile, then click on "Membership", you will see the exact same page you saw when clicking his link.