But you got to remember, the auto refresh is turned off to pawns.

I don't really want to restrict pawns, but I guess I was thinking how frustrated I get when I think that I am a paying member and cannot get on. Then when I do, I find there are 70% of non-paying members on.

My apologies to the pawns. Its nothing personal.

i am a non-paying pawn contemplating moving up in "rank".
i agree with grenv about limiting us to 100 moves a day, i dont know how much easier that'll be for Fencer as far as keeping access to the site open and free but it is a good idea.
In response to Eriisa, Are the pawns the whole problem as far as getting on to the site?

Just my 2¢

pawns are not the only problem, and possibly not the biggest. they are the only ones not contributing to the solution however. Having said that, if I was still a pawn I probably wouldn't join until the site performance increased.

Attrition of paying members is likely to be a problem for the future of the site I would imagine, so anything that improves performance and availability should be tried.

Here's another thought: turn off the auto refresh, or limit the lower number to 5 minutes. I suspect the number of people who leave the browser up while not actively playing is causing some unnecessary performance problems.

Is there a way of tracking that player by player?

could it be turned off for everybody , every one has a way of refreshing there page

This almost seems like a conversation for the BrainKing.com discussion board.

It has already been discussed there, Zucan. It usually comes back to the same thing, needing a new server! Its pretty much been talked to death. Fencer will fix the problems in time.

Oh no, Animal, I never meant to imply that pawns are the problem. The problem right now is more of a hardware issue of the server becoming overloaded. As grenv said, its just that pawns do not contribute to the solution, becuase they are non-paying members. If a large portion of players online at one time are pawns, would not that mean that the majority of resources were be used at that time by non-paying members? I think that is more of where I was thinking.

ok, you've cleared that up (a little) I guess

I agree with you... I know it already has been talked there, but talking about it here won't make it happen any sooner.

I do understand that everyone is frustrated with the current performance and availability of the server.

We had about a week of Hell but mine at least has been much better than last few days. Knock on wood.

LOL, your right harley. I think its really more of us venting than anything else.

I must be one of the only people on this site that has few problems accesing the site!

a move and go to......game with least time left?

:)

Not sure if this has come up before, can we have an indication as to where our last shot in Battle Boats was? When playing several games it is hard to keep track of where you were targetting! Well it is for me anyway?? LOL

On my screen, I have the "Game notation" on the right side of the board which tells me where my last shot was... including all my shots before that. I almost always look at that to see what I've been doing in a game before I make my next move.

Doh! Ofcourse. I guess I was just being lazy and looking for the wee highlighted square LOL

I must remember to check that list next time. Thanks BBW

I still think that your last move should be highlighted on the board. I have webtv, and I'm not sure that it shows up right if you try to switch things around so that the game notations are in a different place. So it would be much easier to be able to just look at the board, rather than scroll all the way down to the game notation.. Yes!, just being lazy !!! :-D
Also, maybe the highlight around your opponent's last move should be highlighted a different color than the blue or red. I know on webtv, I have a hard time telling which square is highlighted. (If I had a huge movie theater sized TV, it might show up easier)
None of that is all THAT important to me, but I wanted to add my opinion..

:-P

At least they don't divide people further by giving members Monarch chess names and stepping on the non-paying members by calling them pawns.
It sure don't promote fairness, or equality!

I understand the site has to live by having paying members if they choose so, but really, must we create an "I'm better than you are!" situation to make others feel like they ain't nothin' unless they got money?

That's my only qualm with this site, they take the "competitive" thing all too serious and harsh, what happened to just playing for fun?

Of course I can remove all chess symbols and make all users equal. And then I will close the site at all because it costs me more than $200 each month just to run it. When I find a sponsor to pay all my expenses related to BrainKing.com, I will make all features available for free.

hmm... the amount of money they ask for is quite small, and if you want to play for free you can. I was suggesting the number of moves restriction only to improve performance, not to encourage membership.

please please don't close the site fencer :( you will have a lot of unhappier people! i personally think you do a great job, there are just the odd few who have their say.. most of us appreciate what you are doing, i wish i could afford to sponsor you!!! as i am sure a lot more of us could too :)

Don't worry about that :-) I've just wanted to explain why it is necessary to have several levels of membership.

how long before we will be able to play sabotage on here i was trying to learn on iyt but i can never get on now

i too would love to help sponser this site but at the moment i just do not have the money to do it. i think the site is great

I like the different levels of membership. I think its an ingenious idea to use chess pieces for levels. I don't think it segregates people, when I was a pawn I never met a rook who treated me badly because of my membership level, and I hope I have never said anything to make a pawn feel lowly since I have been a rook. From my experience the majority of people on this site are just not like that.
I think it did encourage me to buy membership though! I liked the look of the rooks next to members names and wanted one for myself! :o)
Stick with it, Fencer, theres far more people appreciate this site than you think.
Maybe we should have an 'appreciation board'! lol, we seem to have boards for everything but saying how great this site is! (only kidding!)

i too think its good to have the different levels too :) that gives people a chance to try it out :) then depending on their playing as to which level to decide to get a membership for :) some of us (like myself ) are very regular players and really do appreciate the rook level .. others the knight is enough :) each to our own...
when i was a pawn, i certainly didn't feel any segregation.. each and every pewrson was as welcoming as the next, whatever level they were!
this is the friendliest sute i have ever played at..and it will never change due to the great people here.

i for one think the levels are right too , and there cant be anybody that doesnt think a membership isnt worth the money .(when things are running smoothly ;) lol ) i couldnt manage with 20 games but thats just me

Don't get me wrong, Fencer!
I only meant it's not a good idea to use chess pieces to belittle non-paying members. (How about colors or numbers instead?) I wasn't saying you shouldn't have the option for people to pay and help support the site. I understand that a site needs money to keep goin'! And this site beats the goat out of IYT. If you could stop the server trouble, maybe take into consideration my suggestion of a different type of "membership level" representation, then it would be as perfect as can be (in an imperfect universe)! :·)

The people here have a better attitude than the folks at IYT. Did you hear about the "Politics" message board bein' taken down because of all the nasty hatefuls there?

I for one think that board was no good anyway, they made the right decision taking it down.

Having "colors" would just confuse people on who is a "higher paid member", a "middle paid member", and a "non-paid member".

I like it how it is - because as long as anyone knows much about chess - it is easy to tell how is the "bigger" people around here - not that the "bigger" people are better then others - just they have paid and have more games and options.

For example it is easy to know not to invite a pawn to my fellowship.

It was only a suggestion wolf.

I don't like it when people whine and complain about something wrong and then don't bother contributing any ideas on how to change it! Soo, I was just trying to help :·)

I'd still like to see what Fencer has to say.

P.S. Since when is it soooo important to be "bigger" and for everyone to know you're "bigger" and you're forking out more money than they are? It's not like it matters. You got what you got and everyone else got what they got, just be happy and play! Simple.

Magenta Spiral,
that right there having the poltic board closed on iyt is a fine example how a few people can ruin something for everyone. its your opinion that board needed closed down. you didnt have to read that board it was your choice to read that board. if you didnt like what was being said u didnt have to click on politics. why is it some people think the have the right to be a moral judge of other people?
sorry i know this off topic for the feature request board but i had to post back on this.
one more thing! everything in life you get what u pay for. you pay nothing so i dont know where u get off complaining about someone having a bigger piece than u.

If you ask Fencer to change the chess pieces, your asking him to change his whole game site....its called Brainking...the background is a chess board...It's his site so he can call it what he wants..
You wouldn't ask IYT, or Goldtoken to change their names...
at goldtoken you have Gold, silver, and guest,
IYT has an icon by your name...
This is just Fencer's choice...

The hundreds of checker players here would be just as happy if the chess pieces on the checker boards were replaced by checker pieces. An old request..but a goodie.

So, jeff, how would you deal with a problem like what manifested on the Politics board at IYT? I'm just curious.

Again, I'd like to point out, it was just a little idea to possibly further better the site. Fencer can just ignore the thought and I shall willingly continue to play here for free and enjoy everything else that is cool here. It matters not either way :·)

Compared to IYT, this site is like a dream. Never have I seen so many diff variations and the unlimited moves is definitely a breath of fresh air! I'm all for the support of this lovely game place! By all means, Keep up the good work!

Spencer, could you fill me in on what are IYT's names? Membershiply speaking of course.

Itsyourturn...
If your a member they have an icon by your user I.D. name...

See? My point exactly! They don't get names.
Just a small icon to show their support.

But ya know I think it's useless to continue discussing about it. I say let's allow Fencer to decide. It's his site afterall. And in that way, we're all pawns ;·)

Personally I think the chess icons for membership level are a great idea. Even IYT has the red symbol vrs no symbol to distinguish paid members from non paid. Membership does have its perks. :) No matter the symbol used, people would know the difference. Most, I'm guessing, don't think much about it.

This site is well worth supporting. It's a player's site. If the members want it, and Fencer can impliment it, it's a done deal.

I don't mean to presume anyone's financial situation. But, for just ten bucks you can have 6-months and give membership a try. 18 bucks a year gives you a Knight level for an entire year. Save up, beg, borrow, (don't steal) give hints for birthday presents and of course Santa could leave you something in the form of a BK membership this year too (if you're good).

Now maybe Fencer could add a Brain Bishop account and charge $14 for six months (13 is an unlucky number) and $22 for a year. These numbers are halfway in between the Knight and Rook fees. There could be a limit of 100 started games and maybe 3-5 tournaments. This type of membership might be good but it may have drawbacks. I don't use the full benefits of a Rook membership but the Knight membership is not enough. The Bishop membership would meet my needs (except that I am currently in 14 tournaments...so...). The drawback is that if Rooks downgrade to the Bishop membership....well, you get the idea. I'll bet Fencer thought of this already?

Just trying to stay on forum theme. :)

Well it is important to know who is at which level for many different reasons - and having it as a pawn-knight-rook makes it really simple to know who each person is.

Some examples of how I use these different levels:

1. When I'm inviting people to my fellowships, I know to only invite knights and rooks and not to invite pawns.

2. When I'm starting my tournaments, if it is a limited "5 person" tournament - I now know to look at all pawns and rooks to make sure they have enough games open before starting the tournament - so they don't get removed and the tournament does not get deleted.

... this is a couple of quick reasons why the current system works well for me - I find it very handy to know what lever a person is really quickly..... and to change it would be a pain to me, and I'm sure to many others also.

How about making it possible for any player to create their own variation using the same graphics for pieces (Chess, Checkers, Lines, etc.)?

It would save time in having to make requests for new variations or for Fencer to include such games. Of course I have no idea what that would cost. And money does seem to be the big deal 'round... But it is a pretty good idea, don't you think?

Just a thought :·)

Would it be possible to display the average BKR of all players (both established and provisional) at the top of the ratings page for each game?
If this has already been requested, please excuse me, as I don't read this board except when I come up with a lowly suggestion.

Magenta Spiral: How do you think it should work? Just to enable players to define their own start positions of already implemented games? Or to create completely new games/variants?<br>
Stinger: It is not hard to implement but I am afraid that this value would show nothing because every game has both high-rated and low-rated players. So the averages would be very similar. Or am I not right?

I just think it would be an interesting stat for comparison purposes. I consider myself an average player in most games, however, what IS average? If I could see what the actual average is of all players on the site, I can see over time whether I am improving or not. And since the site average would increase and decrease constantly, I think it would be of interest to many people to see where they stand themselves.

lots of us would like to see scrabble here!!!

Scrabble is difficult for legal reasons.

Re: Average rating. The average should be 1300. Since every game includes someone adding and someone subtracting the same amount, the average should never change. Average of established players only will vary of course, indicating the relative strength of new players (the lower the average the better the newbies).

I would like to see the BKR of each player that I (or others) have played when I list the games played for a particular variation om the profile page.

Can I suggest that tournaments automatically start the later rounds, rather than waiting indefinitely for the organizer to click a button?

In one tournament the creator hasn't logged in since march, and he isn't in the final anyway! Meanwhile we could be playing the deciding games.

Can anyone argue for the status quo?

This has come up before. I'm sure if you write to Fencer, he will start the next round himself.

Fencer: Hmmm, that's a tough call! I would imagine it would be less of a hassle to enable players to choose their own start positions on the games already going. Although, the possibility of having players create their own variants would be super cool.

But I think it matters the cost of it. And if both setups cost about the same, then I'd choose the creation of variants.

It would certainly be something no other game site has!