plaintiger: yesssssssssssssss!

Would someone who chooses not to use auto pass please explain the reason for there choice as i just cannot understand it.Thanks.

Carl: It would have to be someone like "Dunbar" from the book "Catch 22"

Carl: because I've paid to actually. you know, play the game.
seriously, I have played with auto pass and I do not like it when a game comes back to me after 20 passed moves and I don't recognize it

Vikings: Your point is?

Carl: Um, you asked for a reason, and he gave you one.

Carl: you asked for one, I gave you two

Vikings: By the way, would you mind if the other person could use auto-pass, even if you don't want to use it (like I think it still does not happen at the moment)?

Vikings: Shame on you,not understanding auto pass.

El Cid: I don't care if my opponent wants to use it, I just prefer not to

Carl: You shouldn't ask for reasons if you aren't interested in those reasons, or are going to chastise for those reasons.

Vikings: When I don't recognize a game, it would be great if I could back up until I did recognize how the position arose.

Oh, wait.  I already can do that.  Never mind.

Does anyone have a more logical reason for not using auto pass than "i don't like it"?

Carl: He had a more logical reason than "I don't like it" If you are looking for an argument take it some where else. Thank you.

If Ludo Autopass I'd had a lot more !!

I want to see my opponent's dice roll right away in games where it can be shown (games without the doubling cube, etc.).

I create many Tournaments that i have created in the past (and i am sure many of us do).

I know we can create Templates, and then edit information that needs changing each time, but i had a GREAT (well i think so) thought

e.g. My Random 'Lines' Games Elimination Tournament finishes ( here Random 'LINES' Elimination )

On that page how about a button that just says RE-CREATE !!

Just click that, and it would open up a set up image of that Tournament.

The only thing that would have to change would be the date (but the option to edit, add or remove would be there), then it is done

I know it would certainly save a few of us time

MadMonkey: I can think of a certain person that would love that implementation.
I mean the one to whom we re indebted for the 421542125 tournaments on the list

rabbitoid: i doubt they even read there 'Tournament is Finished' messages or come to that take any notice of how there Tournaments are doing

I just know it would be a great help

This is a feature request regarding earning achievements, that I know has been brought up before, but I don't believe there has been any response.

It would be nice to be able to view a table so you know which games or tournaments you are lacking in order to earn an achievement. Example # 1: "10 won tournaments of 50 game types" -- As this applies to public tournaments only, it would be nice to see which of my 35 game types that I have already met this. It is nearly impossible for me to tell simply by looking at my finished games page, as I have many fellowship tournaments mixed in with this.

Example # 2: "10 won games of 50 game types" - It shows I have 39. I would like to know which 39 game types have already satisfied this. In looking at my finished games, I have 65 game types that have appeared to satisfy this, but I do not know which 39 of these 65 have truly satisfied the requirement. If I knew, then I could focus on playing games of the other types in order to reach 50. Going along with this, it would be nice to know how many games within each game type have satisfied this requirement... i.e. 9 won games of Frog Finder, so I would know I need to win one more game against a unique opponent.

There are many such examples in these achievements, but I have only listed the 2 above.

Thanks!

cd power: For me also

I'm a new player here, but I really happy to find this site for online reversi play with tournaments and ELO-like ratings. And I have a suggestion how to make games faster and much more comfortable for all.

That would be great to have this feature in reversi game. I have a lot of situations when opponent just need to get into the game and pass his move 3-5 time in a row. And when he does it once in couple of days game becomes unreasonably long.

Most of the times such positions are at the end of the game and I believe this would be a good way to skip additional waitings for opponent turn.
In any case he is able to view turns history to know what has been done during autopasses.

I would really appreciate your help! Thanks in advance.

vrsTankist: Nice to meet you, and hope you are enjoying yourself here

This arguement has been going on since the early days of BrainKing (back in 2002), and in short the simple answer is that there is very little chance of it happening.

Fencer (the owner of BrainKing) is totally against having Auto-Pass (or Auto-Move, when only one move available) here.

Saying that, we do have it now in Backgammon so who knows, maybe it will happen, just don't hold your breath

To myself and many others, it is needed (in games like Ludo, Reversi etc....) so all we can do is wait

Enjoy your games

MadMonkey: Did Fencer actually say that he is totally against auto-pass / auto-move?

If a player uses auto-move (if the server allows it), it need not concern the other players or the webmaster (at least if the server does not force the players of a game to agree on both using or not using that option, as it is currently (and I can only wonder why it is so)).

A player may not easily recognize the game situation after some automoves in a row. But that is the player's own business; he may switch automove off. And the server could, preferably, support a better solution: display the game after the last move made explicitely, together with a replay button to go through the following moves.

Another point is what happens if the opponent has sent a message together with a move, and the reply-move is done by the server. Possible solutions: don't automove in this case, or notify the opponent that the move was done automatically and the player has not yet seen the message.

Thom27: If I may put in an opinion: In reversi the situation is different from backgammon. There it is indeed an autopass, since the move involves the intervening dice throw.

In reversi, however, the situation resembles more that of checkers, where a piece jumps several pieces in a row. If, after player1's move player2 has no playable fields, player1 must place another piece (or pass, if he can't, in which case the game is ended here). It should be treated as a multi-move, not as an autopass.

That's the way it is implemented, for example, on Goldtoken. I don't know about other sites.

Thom27: Simply yes he has lots of times.......but as i stated below he did let us have it on Gammon games.

In my opinion (and many others) it makes sense as long as both players agree to it

The point you make about messages being sent with a move is true (and one of Fencers arguements) but that can easily be written into a script.

note: I wish hexkid would come back and repair his greasemonkey script, that was amazing.

I sometimes like to check my opponents stats when game is finished. So my request is to have a link to the opponents profile page in the event informing the game has finished. The link was there before when these messages were received in message box.

puupia: It's still there. Below the results, there is an area to send your opponent a message. Their name in the "To" area is a link to their profile.

rod03801: Oh, there it is. Thanks.

I would like to be able to send a message ocaisionally to all the moderators of a fellowship please. I can to team captains and to individual teams but not to the moderators and it would be useful to be able to do so please.

I finish games all the time, but since most of them are part of a multi-game match, BK doesn't record them for purposes of keeping my BKRs active and I fall off the leader boards a lot. I'd like to see players stay active on the leader boards anytime they complete a game, even if it's part of a multi-game match.

Thad: in all muti-match games your rating does not change until all games are finished.

Thad: There is also the "show inactive players" link on the list so you can see everyone, including those who are not meeting the 1 finished game a month (or every 6 months for members)

My point is that, if a player finishes a game, whether it's part of a multi-game match or not, he/she should stay on the leader board. The way it is now, I could have finished 1, 10, 100, or 1,000 games over the previous month, but if they're all part of unfinished multi-game matches, I'll still fall off the leader board. It shouldn't be that way, should it?

Thad: I agree. I'm glad there has been some sort of rule put in place to keep the ranking list "active" but I think in some ways it's a little too strict. Maybe ONLY in the way that multi win/point action isn't counted until the end. It could use tweaking, but I'm glad it's not how it "used to be".

Thad: Possible abuse of your proposal : the #1 ranked player could always keep a 10-point match going in order to minimize the risk.

A solution to your issue (and to the general rating issue) would be :
1) Using the Glicko rating system in order to have a continuous measure of activity.
2) Taking in account the length of the match in the rating adjustements (backgammon sites know how to do that).

The bad news is that it will not be implemented.

nabla: I don't see that as abuse. Are they actively playing? Yes. Should they appear on the leader board? Yes.

Could a player take advantage and stay on the leader board with minimum effort? Yes. But the benefits of having other players (like me) who are playing games in multi-game matches and who deserve to be there (in several different games) would outweigh what one or two top players might do in Backgammon. In games with less luck, it would be just as easy, or maybe even easier, to play a game against someone with a really low rating every four weeks in order to maintain a top rating using the system that is in place now than it would be to maintain a multi-game match and finish a game every month, so my proposal doesn't introduce any new risk or abuse.

I agree that a complete overhaul of the scoring system would be a benefit to all. BK could be a lot better if he'd just be willing to implement a few key things that matter to many players even though they don't matter to him.

Thad: In games with less luck, it would be just as easy, or maybe even easier, to play a game against someone with a really low rating every four weeks in order to maintain a top rating using the system that is in place now than it would be to maintain a multi-game match and finish a game every month, so my proposal doesn't introduce any new risk or abuse.

You are right, the abuse thus introduced would be insignificant (btw the Glicko thingy also take cares of the technique you mentioned, since games with a lot of rating difference count for almost nothing in the activity).

I agree that a complete overhaul of the scoring system would be a benefit to all. BK could be a lot better if he'd just be willing to implement a few key things that matter to many players even though they don't matter to him.

You hit the nail on the head.

coan.net: Is there a time limit on the statistics board before a player goes inactive?

Universal Eyes: Yes.

I was wondering why the option of using doubling cube is not available in Ludo? Especially the endless waiting for the final 1 could become astronomically amusing...

bobowski74: Doubling cube is a backgammon feature... but i second the request for other dice games.

i would love to see site run tourns. posted for every game, time limit 1 week, and when 14 or how many you think would work sign up, then they automatically start, and then the sign up list starts again. this is just a hope and a suggestion. i miss the site run tourns. here.

ellieoop: Official tournaments will be included in the next version of BrainKing.

Fencer: that's good news. we're looking forward to it.

Fencer:
Thats great news. Any idea how much longer till the new version will be ready to move here?

alexlee: Sooner or later. It's always more work than it seems to be.

Fencer: thats a joke,right?

Bwild: Say what?

Fencer: thats a joke,right?