grenv: No, at the time ponds were a "member exclusive feature" - so when people dropped their membership level, they are no longer able to play. (just like pawns are no longer to do much in a fellowship once their membership drops.)

I think it is found now that ponds are a little "stale" with all the same players, so allowing pawns to play a limited amount - in my opinion - will be a nice thing. (again, like others said - Fencer needs to make sure people are aware of the change since it can affect game play in a big way as explained already.)

joshi tm: I think what he means is if a current rook drops to a pawn, they know to just bid 1 more then their last bid. If Fencer changes it so they can play and does not let everyone know, then they will fall in the pond because of the rule change. (at least that is what I took from it.)

My opinion - let pawns play, but limit to 5 ponds at a time (5 ponds where they are still running - if they fall in, let them join another) (and if they are a bishop+ and have more then 5, and drop down to a pawn - let them continue all that they started.)

For those who still see some parts of the site loading slow, check out this post:

Computers (coan.net, 2007-03-12 20:16:01)

I posted some information awhile back about things in the settings you can turn off. (for example, not having every menu load on the game pages allows the game pages to load quicker.)

Just some general tips which may help.

rabbitoid: As a slow player myself (but one who never tries to purposely hold up anyone or any one tournament - or take more then my allowed vacation days a year) - I think the idea of a graph to show how often a player moves would be an interesting idea - IF AND ONLY IF - it was optional, and a person can turn off their graph if they don't want to show it.

On the flip side - people should then be able to create games & tournaments in which they can choose to have a certain "speed rating" - and of course the users who choose not to turn their on will not be allowed to play those - but they can still play any regular game or tournament.

Honestly - I think it would be a lot of programing work on Fencers part... in which I would rather have him working on new games, but I can see how some sort of "speed meter" could be made & used... again, as an optional part of the site.

pauloaguia: If a person has an option to double, then autopass should not happen.

But for a reply - well that is a non-issue - since if for example Player 1 makers their move on March 1st - and Player 2 makes their move on March 3rd.

Player 1 will make a move - get autopassed back to him - make his next move - get autopassed back to him - make his next move and then send to Player 2.

Guess what - Player 2 STILL makes their next move on March 3rd - so they can still reply or talk at the same exact time they would have originally.

So to me - not being able to chat is a non-issue. (I would be happy to turn off my chat box like some players do if we could get an autopass setup on all games that can use them.)

Ceiter: On the fellowship page, you can turn off fellowship messages from the BIG BOSS - there are a few BIG BOSSes who I feel use that feature way too much - well at least for my taste and I have almost that feature turned off in most of the fellowships I belong to.

As a BIG BOSS myself, I try to only use that feature when I really need someone for a team tournaments.

Regular messages - message about tournaments - Just post it in the fellowship message board. Every time there is a new message on the fellowship message board, there is a red (1) next to the fellowship name and I can read everything that way.

grenv: With the dice poker games being a popular game on this site, I would love to see my idea of Bankroll Dice Poker (and Triple Bankroll Dice Poker)

Bankroll Dice Poker - You start the game out with a bankroll of 26 rolls (78 for triple version). So you can use more then the normal 2 extra rolls for each round if you need to - but will run out by the end of the game - or use 0 or 1 roll to have extra rolls later on in the game. So if you REALLY need 5 in a row to catch up and have plenty of rolls left, you can roll extra times to try to get it. (I'm debating if it should be 26/78 - or add an extra 5 rolls to each to make the starting bankroll of 31/83 rolls for each game.)

It would give the game a little more "skill" since you now have to decide how many rolls to waste on each turn... that is if you already have four 5's, do you keep wasting rolls to try to get the 5-of-a-kind, or save the rolls for other things.

Ceiter: I would like to add to that a long outstanding request (which I have solved using my own .ccs file but not very pretty) - and that is have the option to have a submit button ABOVE the game board.

Most games I play, I play and then hit submit. Would be nice to be able to quickly do that without having to scroll down to find the submit button.

(and in addition to having a submit button above the game board, keep one in it's current place by the notes & chat box so if I do need to leave a message, I can scroll down - do so - and still hit submit like normal.)

AbigailII: I think one of the goals of an online game site is to make the games as much like real life game play... when possible.

I think it would be better if people could not figure out what pieces they could move by just hoovering their mouse.

But that would probable be a pain to program - and a good "medium" is just to keep that how it is now. (in my opinion.

About automatically moving a piece when it has only one available move - I think this is OK since you are already clicking on the piece to move it, and like Chess - you have to move the piece to block a check (for example), so no matter what piece you click, if it can only go to one place to save the king - then that is a good time saver in my opinion.

Sure, someone can go through and click every piece and learn where it might go and what might work best - not anything like what would happen in real life game - but (again, my opinion) - a good middle ground is how it works now.

AbigailII: I think Thad makes a good point.

For example, I was playing the Camelot recently - and all I seen was a forced jump that was bad for me - so as I moved my mouse to make the move, I noticed that I could also click on a knight to move it - which after a few jumps of my own pieces, was able to make a better move.

Now that is a rare thing for me to do - normally I would see only the 1 move and make it.

If the system was to make all "forced" moves right away, I would quickly learn that if the system did not make a move for me, then I MUST have multiple moves that I could make, and would help me in my games.

=======

Of course in "passing" situations where the person has 0 moves, I agree 100% that an autopass in those games would be very helpful.

I posted this request on another board a month or so ago, but realized it should be here... and wanted to repost it since it is still causing me all kinds of issues - I can multi-task on every other game site - except for the coding on this site does not allow me to do this.

Original post:

I've had this problem for awhile, and my usually way to fix it is to just close the BrainKing site and play on other sites - but I would love if a solution could be found.

I use Firefox (most current version). I have the no-fonts, use external style ccs (which "hides" the flying dragon but is really still there), have all my JavaScript choices in settings turned off (except smiley window on mouse click).

The issue is whenever I have BrainKing up in a tab - on the main pages, reading the boards, in private message (just about everyone except actual games), my Firefox starts to use between 75-97% of the CPU. If I don't change pages, this will last anywhere between 45 - 90 seconds.

It is a simple thing for me to test - I simply close the BrainKing tab (leaving the other 8 open), and the CPU goes down to very low. Open BrainKing in a tab again - BOOM, CPU pegged.

This has been a pain lately since I've hooked up a second monitor to my PC, I'm currently doing a lot more work - like currently a large batch job on pictures (normally can resize/watermark 1 picture every second - when BrainKing is up, it is down to about 1 every 20-30 seconds), plus when I watch a movie. (normally works perfectly, but when BrainKing is up, the picture will stop and usually I keep hearing the sound and the picture just won't move)

Again, when BrainKing is closed - everything works perfectly. (or if BrainKing is open but I've let some time go by 45-90 seconds), but usually I'm done reading a page by then, so when I switch - BOOM, starts over again.

The only thing I can think it is - is the dragon that "flys" across the screen.... since I think that normally takes 45-90 seconds. Even though I have it not to be shown on my screen through my external style, the browser still loads it.

Oh yea, my request.

Can there be a setting option to remove the dragon so it won't even load? You allow us to remove almost all the other JavaScript items from BrainKing, but not this one - and I know it probable isn't a problem for a lot of others, but for some reason the BK JavaScript stuff has always caused me speed issues.

Thanks.

Rainbow Road: I'm always looking for new ideas for polls - better if it has something to do with "BrainKing", but any good poll I will make.

Anyone can make suggestions on the Opinion Poll board: http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=153

MadMonkey: I would still like to add my request to make the move notation a user choice option on which type of games you have the move notation on.

On most games, I would rather have it off - but how some games are setup, you need to have it on to get IMPORTANT information about the game (Boat games to know which boat you are attacking - Ice Age Chess to know when the next ice age is going to happen)

So if important game information is going to be only in the move notation - I would love to be able to choose which games it will show up on - and which games it will not.

Pedro Martínez: Well that one at least makes since.... since the 2 players choose to play unlimited time. But 4 months and counting for a game which moves are suppose to take 2 days, 12 hours...... there is something wrong and needs to be fixed in my opinion.

People complain about how long team tournament take, so I made some with shorter time limit - but the abuse of vacation will most likely force most "fast" team tournaments to be no days off tournament.... which I hate to do since sometimes emergencies do come up, but if the abuse of the vacations won't be fixed there is little other options.

pauloaguia: yes, I agree - it would be better for the system to calculate time-out days without even paying attention if there is a vacation day set - since it won't time out anyway.

(If this is indeed a bug which some are taking advantage of, I'm just trying to come up with a solution to fix it.) People like that give good slow players like myself a bad name

pauloaguia: yea, I knew there was some way to play around with the vacations to get more then you really have - and that is why I would LOVE to have Fencer take a look and see if this person is doing something that is allowed (buying more vacation days), or messing with the system to get themselves more vacation days - which of course hurts the site & is a pain for every other good person on the site. (in which possible either 1. take away rest of vacations for offender, or better yet - fix it so once a vacation day is set, it can't be removed or something similar so the system is not abused.)

pauloaguia: Is that what happened in this case, or are you just saying that might be a possibility? If so, then they are purchasing a membership every couple of months to be able to continue to get vacation days. (and if not - would still like Fencer to look at it to make sure it isn't a bug)

I would agree that the practice of getting more vacation days when purchasing another membership should go away.

MadMonkey: Well I hope Fencer will look into it. How a person has used up to 75 vacation days (should have 45 vacation days at most for Black Rook) - and still have 13 left.

If it's a bug - it needs to be fixed. If it's not a bug, then how is it done?

mctrivia: Speed rating would not help in tournament & team tournament games when you don't pick the person you play.

In MadMonkey's game, I'm curious if the other person is using vacation days or somehow getting around them since doing quick math - July 7th - 15 weeks - can use 5 vacation days a week (2 weekend days) = 75 vacation days used!!!!!

If this is indeed a bug of some sort, then it needs to be fixed. The current system should work pretty well - yea, someone can hold up a game, but not forever like it seems some are able to do.

AbigailII: What I would like to suggest is that possible a setting for a game could be "Max amount of vacation days to use for game 1 person can use".

So for example, 5 days max vacation days - so someone can use vacation days, but after using 5, the vacation days will not work for that game anymore.

On one hand I think there are already a lot of possible settings for games, but I think this one would help those like you who don't mind people using vacation & time - as long as it is not abused.

Nirvana: That game does sound fun - goal to make a line 4 - but can not make a line of 3.

I know the hex board would be more work for Fencer to make - I wonder if the same rules can be played on a normal Five-in-line board? (which would be an easier game to make since Fencer would not have to make a new board)

.... and if Fencer does make a Hex type board - hopefully he will think of the idea of Hex Battleboats Plus.

diogenysos: I like that suggestion also.

As a side note, on the English Dice Poker Discussion Board, different users have reported their highest scores:

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=130

Of course these are just what the users reported, and not officially the "highest".

nabla: Yes, I agree - when I say "Auto-Pass" - I guess I should say "Auto-Pass/Auto-Move"

... and something that I would like to see if all games where it can be used. (again, auto-pass & auto-move being optional for each player. If a player wants to use it - let them. If another player does not want to use it - allow them to keep it off. If the other person does not want me to use it - O'well - Too Bad - I should be the one allowed to play how I want to play, not let others decide for me how I should play.... kind of how the current gammon auto-something is done now.)

Snoopy: I believe most who want the auto-pass on more games understand that some do not want to use the feature, and I know myself - I have always suggested making it optional for each person. (That is if I want to use auto-pass - let me use auto-pass on my turns. If my opponent does not want to use auto-pass - don't use auto-pass on his turns.)

For me personally - when I'm playing games, i want to actually play games - and hitting "pass" in a no-move situation is not really playing for me.... so if an auto-pass system can get me past all those "pass" moves to a point where I can play the game, I would enjoy that much more. (again - optional for each player - never force anyone to use autopass)

As for the outside auto-pass program, I never used that mostly for the fact I never liked the idea of giving my private information (password) to an outside party.... even using the same password on a program on my PC could still have hidden dangers. Probable very safe & no reason not to trust the programmer of those programs - but still something for security reasons I never wanted to do. So to compare the users of that outside program vs. players on this site is not really a fair comparison.

Thad: I wouldn't contradict your recent requests, I like them.

Never heard the one about a limit of vacation days on games - but that is a pretty good idea.

.... and I've always supported the request to allow tournaments to continue once the winner has been determined.

Czuch: I wasn't trying to contradict you or anything negative - I was just letting you know of some of the visible recently additions and improvements. And I haven't kept track, but from what I've read over the past many months (and longer) is one of the biggest requests is for improved speed & site performance - which is one of the announced improvements that Fencer is working on.

I know some people don't read the BrainKing.info site to read about what new features have been added & that are planned, so I was just simply stating them. I was not negative towards you or any ideas or requests, I was simply replying to a post - you can try to make it something bigger or "personal", but sorry to disappoint you but it was a simple post.

Czuch: Some of the things I can think of recently:

Allow 100% of prize tournament with brains to go to the players

New ways for users to get free membership

New option to pay for a membership added

Plus the one I'm looking forward to - the announced plan to physical relocation BrainKing in September which will hopefully solve many of the speed issues which many people have requested.

Even though I can't speak for Fencer - I believe that he has been doing work in the "background" to get ready for the September move. (again, this is just a guess)

AbigailII: Frog Finder & Frog Legs (along with 2 other games) is the only reason I have to keep my move list visable in ALL of my games - which when the game site is loading slow... the less I have to load the better.

What I would like to see is if someone guesses a spot where there is no frog, then mark that square with a small red "g" - with the possibility for someone to still shot that square if needed.

(I would also like Ice Age Chess to show what move you are on so you know when the next ice age is coming without having to have your move list open - plus in the boat games, I would like to know the last spaces I shot in the turn before so I know what "boat" or area I'm working on.... again, without having to have the move list visible.

MadMonkey: One solution would be if both players agree not to "waste" shots - where their shot will not at least uncover something new.

Myself, I never try to waste shots UNLESS my opponent does first... and then i just follow suit. I hate that part of the game, but if my opponents want to play that way.... then I will play that way..... even though it is a much funner game when it is not played that way.

ScorpionOct64: After reading your message on the General Chat board, am I guessing correct that pawns are writing you because you accept their games and then you don't play very fast?

As a very slow player myself, I can't think of the last time I got a negative message from someone because of my slow play - but it might be that I say so on my profile which helps. Maybe writing something about how you like to play and such in your profile - where many will go to your profile before sending you a message - it might help.

just a suggestion.

rod03801: What I meant was the byes are not counted - like you put an imaginary "fake" person in that spot to "play", and automatically lose to let the player move on to the next round. (Where the fake player's games that are automatically lost are not counted as a win/lose or anything - just there long enough to get the person into the next round.) - kind of a cheating way to program in byes into the tournament programming.

I think byes would be the best solution (over kicking people out of a tournament)

When the deadline hits, the system should:

1. First lower the number of spaces to the lowest possible - so if it was setup as a 32 player tournament, but only 14 players joined - automaticly switch to the 16 player tournament.

2. Then randomly (or I think some would say highest ranked?) pick 2 people to get the automatic byes into the next round.

I think for Fencer, just needs to image a "fake" user called bye who will be inserted into every empty space. This "fake" user automatically "loses" the game which allows the next person to move on. All games are "not counted" and "not rated" - that way the system will move the players on to the next round.

Rainbow Road: Chessversi's new rules are suppose to make the game much more even (less one-sided). Except for a easy win against someone who does not know better, why would anyone want to play by the old rules? (serious question since I can't think of any off the top of my head)

ChessVariant: I know Fencer is not a fan of variants of variants, but there are a few that I think would work really well. (including the ones mentioned below)

What I would love to see are more Dark versions of many of the games (dice, fisher/random, and crazy screen are 3 that come to mind). For a person like me (who is not very good at chess), dark, dice, and crazy setups make me at least believe I have at least a some-what better chance against players who are "experts" at regular chess.

Amandakmg365: If you know of another user in the USA that you trust, you could always ask them if you could send them a Money Order, and let them use their PayPal account (or whatever) to get the membership for you.

This would be outside of Fencer's control, so if the user double crosses you - you would be on your own, but I'm sure you could find someone that you trust to help you.

ScorpionOct64: Even with a "left click protector" - or disabled, it would still take someone about 3 seconds to still get the picture.

The only safe way to protect your family photos would be not to put them on the internet.

Fencer: yea... that is what I mean. One of the things that helped me with the site loading quicker was to turn off all the JavaScript items. (of course when I use the Chat, I would not mind using the JavaScript since I don't need the pages to load as quickly as I do when I want to run through a lot of games.)

Fencer: Thanks for the Chat Room page. (even though I would not mind using a java version of the chat box..... just don't want to have the java version loading on every page...... since when I want to chat, I will go to the chat room page.)

I would still love to see a page dedicated to just the chat box(es).

A page that ignores the java settings for those of us who don't want chat boxes on all the other pages so it does not slow those pages down from loading (for those outside of the BK quick load zone around central Europe)

You could create a simple page, with the chat option, and all the instructions on one page.

Nothingness: Jump on over to the Frog Finder board - we have been discussing some ideas on the game. (maybe if there is a good enough idea, maybe we can get another version of the game on the site)

As MadMonkey said, there are many games which 3-4 player games would be very very very very very cool!

It would take some extra programming work by Fencer, but I would not think it would be too hard. (The hardest part might be trying to figure out how the ratings are calculated).

Time outs - for some games like chess, that would be hard since what do you do with the timed-out users pieces. Do you end the game for everyone (The people who did not time out co-winners) - what if player 3 is in a very good attack position towards player 4 - but player 3 times out - do their pieces stay on the board (limiting player 4), are they removed, which hurts player 2 since he was "attacking player 3 and now his pieces are not in a very good position", etc.....

But other games would be perfect for 3-4 players - Dice poker, boats, etc... And my favorite - the game that WAS MADE to be played with 3-4 players, Frog Finder.

I'm sure it would take a lot of work to get it made, but having the ability to play games between 3-4 players would be very cool.

As for the ratings - that is where it can get tricky - since many times, the game is played totally different between 2 players and between 3-4 players. I know other sites just clump all the ratings together.... which at that point, some avoid the 3-4 player games since it hurts their ratings too bad. Maybe a way to have 3 ratings for 1 games.

Over all rating

Rating on 2 player games

Rating on 3+ player games

Ceiter: I would LOVE to see game-specific settings to either show or not show the game history/move list.

I do like it on the right - nice to see the board & notation on the same screen - but for 90% of the games, I would love to turn it off (since it does mess up the page loading and such and makes me mis-click often)

But for some games, the notation is handy (like Dark Chess, Battlboats), and for some games it is absolutely needed (Frog Finder, Ice Age Chess to figure out when the next ice age is going to happen).

If it was possible to have it only show on certain games - that would be an improvement I would LOVE to have for this site.

AbigailII: You may have something - probable better to sort them by more how they are played then just board size/setup like I have.

Gordon Shumway: Plus something that pauloaguia sort of hit on - possible even have a toggle where you can sort the games by 1 of 2 ways:

Games by category (like listed)

All games alphabetically listed (that way if you are looking for "Fevga" and don't remember what category it is in, a list of all games alphabetically ordered might be easier.

But again, just quick thoughts. Having a lot of games is great - but so many does start to get harder to organize.

pauloaguia: I agree that some sort of new orginization of games is probable needed.

So maybe AFTER Fencer gets tired of created new games (since we don't want to stop him from doing that!).

Some quick thoughts - any type that has more then 20 should be split up - and any that have more then 6 probable could use their own game type.

My quick thoughts (sorry if I skipped one or misplaced one - just did a very quick run through looking at the games)

Checkers (8x8 boards) (#1):

Checkers
Anti Checkers
Brazilian Checkers
Czech Checkers
Gothic Checkers
Russian Checkers
Thai Checkers
One Way Checkers
Parachute Checkers
Turkish Checkers

Checkers (non 8x8 boards) )#2):

Alquerque
Breakthrough (moved from other)
Canadian Checkers
Corner Checkers
Halma 10x10 (moved from other)
Halma 8x8 (moved from other)
Hawaiian Checkers
International Checkers

Chess 8x8 (#1):
Chess
Anti Chess
Atomic Chess
Behemoth Chess
Corner Chess
Cylinder Chess
Dark Chess
Dice Chess
Extinction Chess
Fischer Random Chess
Loop Chess
RecycleChess
Three Checks Chess

Chess 8x8 (#2): (non-traditional play/setup)
Amazon Chess
Ambiguous Chess
Berolina Chess
Cheshire Cat Chess
Crazy Screen Chess
Fortress Chess
Horde Chess
Ice Age Chess
Knight Relay Chess
Knightmate Chess
Legan Chess
Majarajah Chess
Screen Chess

Chess non 8x8 (#3)
Capablanca Random Chess
Chinese Chess (Xiangqi)
Embassy Chess
Grand Chess
Janus Chess
Japanese Chess (Shogi)
Los Alamos Chess
Mini Shogi

Pente (since there are 6 versions, give own heading)

Pente
Keryo Pente
Small Pente
Small Keryo Pente
Open Pente
Open Keryo Pente

maybe even split off the 4 Lines of Actions - or maybe even split the "place" type of lines (5-in-line, connect6) and the "drop" type of lines (line4, spider linetris)

Then to split up the "others" some.

Move Halma's & Breakthrough to the Checkers area since they are similar to checkers

Possible move Knight Fight to Chess #3 - maybe move Cheversi to Chess or reversi?

Dice Game:

Ludo
Dice Poker
Triple Dice Poker
Dice Poker 6D
Triple Dice Poker 6D

Other (now down to only 15):

Amazons
Anti-Froglet
Assimilation
Ataxx
Big Jungle
Frog Finder
Frog Legs
Froglet
Jarmo
Jungle
Logik
Mancala
Sphere Froglet
Tablut
Tank Battle

Card Games:

OK, no card games yet - but that would be cool to have some!

.... again, just what I quickly seen as a way to reorginize the game list. As pauloaguia suggested, sort alphabetically would help find certain games. (for for Chess, first game list Chess since that is the main - then after that, start with the A games, etc....) Of course I guess the issue with this would be the list would be different for each language so now as I write this, alphabetically sorted might not be the best.

But anyway, again - just quick thoughts.

Ceiter: I thought about that also. Another idea is next to total points, put the (xx) number next to the total points to show the points gained in the last move. Of course putting it in the game notation would help when going back multiply turns to review a game, but most of the time it is nice to see what was actually taken.

mctrivia: Clicking on the team that you are on listed in your profile takes you right to that team in that fellowship (allowing a quick click of "leave") (so once you are looking at your team list in your profile, a total of 2 clicks from leaving the team)

MadMonkey: I don't play the game, but as an idea - can you find any game pieces/images that include both the traditional image with the "move tip" both on the same piece?

I say this since I think it would be easier for Fencer to add another set of game pieces to choose from.

Fencer: I would love to see Plakato brought here.

I have also listed 3 other gammon ideas on the Backgammon Discussion Board: http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=26

Double & Triple Choice Backgammon

Dark Backgammon

New Russian Backgammon

I would love to see anyone head over to that board to give their opinions on those game ideas.

pauloaguia: Here are my thoughts on your suggestions:

1. I agree. I have turned off this information a long time ago, and always forget that the fellowships have this. A "Statistics" tab in the fellowship would be a good place to put this (and other things mentioned below)

2. Well I first agree since many pages do have a lot, but then I got to thinking what can be moved to different tabs. Finished & running tournaments (leaving open tournaments on main page). Same with challenges maybe.

3. It would be nice if when you click the "create tournament" instead of the game which was up being the only option to choose from from the drop down - that all fellowships games were listed would be nice. When I create site-wide tournaments, it is nice because I can create a tournament, hit the back button, change the important information and submit again. In fellowship, I have to go all the way back to the begining to start a new tournament.

4. This would be hard - since you have to pick your players who will play in each challenge - to have a checkbox to select them all - you still would need to go through each one to select your players - so I would not think this would be much of a time saver.

5. I agree - and in the "Fellowship list" which lists all the fellowship, instead of the long list of games that each fellowship offeres, it can be replaced by "All games"

6. A good thing for the Statistics tab

7. A good thing for the Statistics tab - but would also like to remind BIG BOSSes to also put the information on their discussion boards. I turned this option off on many of my fellowships because the BIG BOSSes were writing a message on the board, then sending the same thing out. I myself read all the discussion boards, so I don't need to read a message twice so I turned the all-fellowship messages off. So as a reminder to BIG BOSSes, to get to someone like me - make sure you also write in your fellowship.