coan.net: Agreed, that is how i imagine it

For example, in a 64 player Elimination, only 50 enter, players 51 to 64 are called Fake (BYES or whatever) then they first are placed equally throughout the first round draw. Then the entries are placed.

If you are lucky to get drawn against a Fake player, you go through to the next round. So simple

Its the most major thing the site is missing

MadMonkey: YES - I think Byes would be the best solution.

I would not think it would be too hard to (from the programming side) image putting "fake" ghost players called "empty" into all the empty spaces, and just have them "lose" against whoever they play so the real player automatically moved into the next round.

Undertaker.: Thats is the only other way to do it

We have been asking Fencer to allow Byes for a long time, then everyone would get to play. Its so sad when Tournaments get deleted when they are just a few players short.

Its quite simple to do, but alas we keep waiting and hoping that Fencer will get time one day to code it

In single elimination tournaments, many times the number of players that sign up isn't enough to start that tournament. For example, a single elimination tournament with 64 players, but only 39 sign up, will be deleted. So, why not create an option, when a person is created a new tournament, to allow that a single elimination tournament with 64 players, but only 39 sign up in time to deadline, can start with 32 players (the 32 first players to sign up)?

My idea is: single elimination tournament with 64 players (for example) and if the number of players isn't enough, will there be an option to allow start it with 32 first players to sign up or 16 players or 8 players or 4 players.

And of course, the creator will be free for active 32 players only or 32 and 16 players or all options or don't active anyone.

This way, we can have in same tournament:
Backgammon: 64 players
Hypergammon: 64 players
Chess: 32 players
Checkers: 16 players
etc.

The new 10x10 version of Dice Chess is great Fencer, and as you said when you released it unlike the normal version it cannot be over in 4 moves. Its now much more fun

Thinking along the same lines, Behemoth Chess can be over before you get you SECOND go, how about doing something similar with that ?

Maybe spread the Kings out a bit, as long as there is at least 4 squares between them, so the Behemoth can not wipe you out before you have a chance to move one lol. Maybe 2 kings would work

Just another idea anyway, i like the Behemoth, nice to have a third player as such

Fencer:
Somebody may not care about colors, but serious player do. To attract more people to play, it's better to have the setting as most people play.

Snoopy: I'm not sure if that would be a good idea. (Note - I like to use autopass, and in my opinion - should be automatic anyway.... but that is a different complaint.)

Anyway, I would not think it would be a good idea since for some reason there are some people on this site who may not want to play with the autopass feature on, and only sign up for tournaments with it turned off - so they sign up, and all of a sudden it starts and it's not what they signed up for.

Or a better example - I create a tournament with autopass on, you sign up - then right before it starts I turn if off - leaving you stuck in a tournament with it off when you signed up for a tournament with it turned on.

Anyway, point being that it might cause more issues to have options that are editable that can create a different type of game then what people originally signed up for.

Fencer: try http://worldothellofederation.com/rules/rulesenglish.htm

OK, I know, I know. reversi, not othello.

rabbitoid: I know. It was a joke. But nobody ever showed me a reliable proof of exact rules that are absolutely clear about the colors.

Fencer: Ouch! as a chess player you wouldn't have said that if it concerned the king's game... at least I hope not. (Even if it IS true). Reversi players may be just as confused when inverted, if they follow the literature.

midyear: Who cares? It's just a color.

For a standard reversi game, black should play first and white play second, does anyone notice it?

pauloaguia: try just getting 63, lol

nodnarbo: I'm guessing he meant that unless pawns get to play in ponds, paying members will have a hard time finding a 100 player pond to join, let alone a 200 player pond!

joshi tm: well, you can't get the achievements for buying memberships as a pawn either...

joshi tm: Speaking of which - I'm starting to think that getting 100 players to sign up for a pond should be an achievment as well
Charco para Façanha

Pawns should play in Ponds... that's the only way to achieve some stuff...

AbigailII: Well if it ever did (which i do not think) it does not do it now, unless a little gremlin is about lol

Pauloguia:

MadMonkey: Froglet does this, doesn't it? That is, if you click on a piece, and there's only other piece it can take, said piece is taken. Note that in Froglet there is not requirement to capture additional pieces.

But checkers could be improved. Due to capturing mandatory, there are often forced moves. No human intervention is needed. The system could do it for us.

MadMonkey: The older checkers variants don't have that feature and it would be welcome as well

Just a thought Fencer, in Checkers (well i think all versions & Camelot) if a piece has to jump a particular piece and more, the system does it for you

Could we have this in Froglet & Anti-Froglet at some point please

could we get a "no play list" set up on the stairs games?  He has plenty of others he can invite to a game and he knows I don't want to play him.  He holds up games and is in general a pain.  If there is only one person on the tier, then playing them could be forced but if he has other choices, he should play them.   Otherwise maybe he needs to be banned from there as well.  It is afterall another form of a tournament.  

Hi guys, it's time to create a new, smaller version of KnighFight ... here is a proposal:
1. Game is played on a regular 8x8 board
2. Each player has one knight of different color.
3. Fields are assigned numbers from 1 to 64 ...
4. The first player to play is a white Knight which can be position on any chosen square.
5. The players collect and accumulate points that correspond to the numbers assigned to fields.
6. The second player is Black of course, and than White and so on ...
7. Unlike in Knight Fight players CAN place their Knights on the fields that are under direct attack of the opponent's Knight ...
8. Winner is the player who collects more points when the game is blocked or there are no more fields to jump to...
9. BUT WAIT , there is a new feature ... game can ends also when one of the players will manage to collect 5 consecutive numbers in the course of his/her fight.
10. These numbers do not need to be collected in one swap, nor do they need to be in a special order ...
EXAMPLE: white player collects : 62, 52, 17, 39, 53, 24,
51, 49, 13, 50 .... and that's enough to win since he got numbers 49,50,51,52,53 during his tour ...
EXAMPLE: black player collects 2, 49, 56, 5, 1, 35, 42, 4,
18, 3 and this secures his win since he collected 1,2,3,4,5 .
REMARKS: we have two independent objectives in this game ... one has nothing to do with the other (except for the tactics) and choice belongs to the players ... this new feature successfully eliminates known "problem" from KnighFight namely the ability to block white player by choosing the opposite color of the color white player started ... or at least it loses its power significantly ...
In this game we have to watch constantly what route opponent chooses ... total points or consecutive numbers.
Hope you like this new, refreshing idea to play knight games.

I have another suggestion, that I think is easy to implement. Could the marked "vacation days" disappear only when the day ends, and not when it begins. For example, if I choose tomorrow (8th april) as a vacation, could that be shown on my profile, until 8th april 23:59 (11:59PM), so that people know that I'm on vacation that day (this is good when people are not using auto-vacation)

Edit: Hope I made myself clear

pauloaguia: To be released later today.

How about the possibility to see the list of players that got a particular achivement?

Stingette: still a very easy and quick thing to have, and so useful

 MadMonkey: ...Especially if the team captain is a little forgetful.

Fencer: At least all the pawns would get that, and some of us paying members too

joshi tm: That's more like it.

El Cid: Better something as "Have less than X autovaction days during a year."

Thad: How about "more than 45 vacation days in one year", has an achievement

I was just sitting here thinking about a reply to AbigailII's post when I thought of another idea:

Fischer vacation days!

Thad: A GREAT solution would be to be able to specify the maximum number of vacation days useable in any game//tournament.

It's not so great for games that last more than a year. I've played games that take more than 400 moves, and even if both players play 1 move/day, such games still take a year or longer. No reason people shouldn't be allowed to take vacation in the second year.

joshi: I think a black list is no good idea, people on the black list cannot get rid off that reputation.

I think a blacklist is an excellent idea. We already have whitelists (private tournaments, fellowships) where people can select who participates, creating blacklists is just another step. If I want to create a tournament without participation of a certain person whose name cannot be mentioned because the moderator of this board will modify your post without any notice, I can now create a private tournament and allow anyone in, except the person whose name cannot be mentioned because the moderator of this board will modify your post without any notice. But this is a hassle, both for me and the people signing up. Instead, if there were a blacklist one could exclude people you do not want to participate in your tournament. Or sign up only for tournaments that exclude the people you do not want to play.

Maybe auto-vacation should be used just an x times, say for example ten, each year then. Well, the misuser can still plan in his "vacation", but if he does so, everyone knows when those extra days are planned. On autovacation, the player hides his "vacation", till the day comes the games are timing out.

I think a black list is no good idea, people on the black list cannot get rid off that reputation.

Thad:Time controls are a major part of games.  As an over the  board chess player, I can tell you that the time factor weighs heavily on the game's outcome.  One must use his time wisely or find himself making hasty moves.

There is a reason for the time controls.  And when people sign up for tourneys, many do so with the time controls in mind.  I always do this.  I expect reasonable time off periods for weekends and vacations.  But when vacations days become a method to avoid any timeouts, that is abuse IMO. 

I believe that a majority of people agree that some restrictions on vacation days is in order.  I think that fact matters more than any $ that can be made by allowing people to purchase more vacation days.

The person in question here abuses the system.  He holds up tournaments, plays games down to the last seconds even if losing, and he does so just to annoy his opponents.

He was out of vacation days a week ago.  I was playing a game with him (1 day move) and he was moving in a timely way.  Now he's timed out once so has 34 days of vac left.  Plus, just now, he let the clock run down to about 1 min before making his move. 

I'm a black rook so don't have to consider buying future memberships.  But if I weren't a lifetime member, I'd think very seriously about renewing.  I suspect others feel the same way.  How is it beneficial if 10 people get fed up with the current system and won't renew as a result just so a couple of people can purchase multiple blocks of vacation days? 

BTW, they aren't vacation days when misused.  They are nothing more than insurance against timing out in a game.  I am totally opposed to such a thing. 

Artful Dodger: A GREAT solution would be to be able to specify the maximum number of vacation days useable in any game//tournament. That way, players who want to buy 35 extra vacation days so that can make no moves can do so and those of us who think that's ridiculous can keep them out of our games and tournaments.

Fencer is not going to change the current set-up that allows players to buy additional vacation days. Why should he. He's getting extra money from inactive members of his site!

PS: I had a player re-up his vacation count TWICE in a game against me. That's 105 vacation days!! I feel your pain.

PSS: I think listing the names of players who play super slow, buy extra vacation days, etc. should be allowed on this board. After all, we're not stating anything that isn't fact.

Just a fast mention to this discussion group (I’ve already suggested them to Fencer) of my three favorite chess variants--ones that I would like to see here, someday...

Alekhine Chess
Played on a 14x8 board, this variant includes three non-standard piece types: the Cardinal (Knight + Bishop), the Marshall (Knight + Rook), and the General (Knight + Bishop + Rook).

Inheritance Chess
In this variant, the white rook pawns begin on the third rank and the black rook pawns begin on the sixth rank, castling is not permitted, en passant captures are not permitted, and, most importantly, pieces have inheritance powers.  Pieces of a given color on the same file inherit the movement powers of one another.  These powers do not stay with each piece for the entire game; the inherited powers are only inherited while the pieces are on the same file as one another.

The Lost Pawns
In this variant, white's pieces actually start on the 7th and 8th ranks, and black’s pieces start on the 1st and 2nd ranks, with the direction of the pieces remaining the same as with a standard chess game.  In other words, all pawns are just one square away from promotion.  Two-square pawn advances and en-passant captures are obviously not possible since all pawns start on their 7th ranks.

Now that beep! has more vacation days, I can expect more of these:

Backgammon     Fast Stairs     personsname     black     8.      0 mins

and now there is:  23 hours 57 mins

34 vacation days left

so much for "1 day, standard vacation"

And I can't avoid this player because they invited me via the ladder games. 

Pedro Martínez:

"# If a Moderator or member of BrainKing Staff consider a subject or post to be off-topic or irrelevant, it may be removed. Should you be asked personally to cease a subject or remove a post, this must be done immediately. Please respect the wishes of a Moderator or member of BrainKing Staff, whether you agree with it or not. Failure to adhere to this may result in you being banned from the Discussion Board, or possibly, banned from posting on all Public Discussion Boards."

I have to go for a while, so this board is now on Approval only.

rod03801: I want to see the part of the User Agreement that prohibits me from posting names here.

I will put this board on all posts needing approval, if necessary. The only other option is to start banning if the specific name keeps showing up.

Pedro Martínez: Because it would turn into bashing of one person, and it is not necessary when it comes to the issue at hand. Fencer knows the person that is being pointed out, and this person cannot join new tournaments anymore anyways.

I don't encourage anyone to do it, at the risk of being banned. Thank you!

Artful Dodger: Of course. Besides, that person and many slow players don't use auto pass. So, i can conclude they do that with bad intention, waiting win by time-out, because a simple game or tournament can take a long time.

Fencer:With all due respect:  35 already used days plus 35 new days is 70 for the year and it's not fair to the rest of us.  The person in question has been making timely moves in our current games but when he had vacation days he used those to both prolong games and prolong tourneys.  He does this sort of thing to many members on BK and he has even held up tourneys in games he is clearly losing.  I don't see why anyone can buy more vacation days.  The ability to buy more days defeats the purpose of time controls.  And the bottom line, it's not fair to the rest of us paying members. 

rod03801: As Martinez said, why not? I don't see problem. I'm here to discuss
holidays and auto pass, so if i mentioned a name was because that was
an abusive situation and for everybody has a better perspective about my point...

Don't forget to delete Martinez lol.

rabbitoid: Undertaker. did mention a name and I encourage everyone to do so as well.

rod03801: Neither Undertaker nore anyone else has mentioned a name. Funny, though, we all seem to know what we're talking about. Must be telepathy

rod03801: Why not?

Undertaker.: Specific people should not be brought up when it comes to this issue. The general issue is of course fine to discuss. Thank you.