Good job guys!

[averell]

To be honest actually I only play automatch on KGS because I'm lazy. But it's still very simple.

Some kind of confirmation before the game starts is a good thing: Removing this does not make the game start faster. If one player isn't there to click, all that happens is that he starts with less time.

With that being said, once the confirmation button is there, if you only have "OK" and no "Cancel", then that does not represent greater freedom of choice.

[Oceandrop]

I think averell tries to say, that if for example Player X 5k sets a game up, but there is just Player Y 5k who could play with him because of Player X set the hc on 0 each way, and all other 5k's are offline, that if Player Y 5k doesn't like the time settings, he can't click on Play to negotiate them and make a counter offer but has to do it in the Chat. Ofc thats a bit exaggerated, but I think that is the point, or am I on the wrong track?

[shapenaji]

My biggest issue is selecting someone of a particular rank. I like the option, in KGS, of putting up a game and when someone challenges, getting to decide "Hmm, do I want to play a 4 stone game?"

There is a little increased time in starting a game (pretty minimal, on KGS I usually get a challenger in under 30 seconds), but that is vastly better than having to play a game that I don't want to play.

That risk associated with just having a game offer up and having to play whomever shows up first makes it untenable as a place for me to play right now. (I recognize I haven't been there in a while, but this is the big reason, I'm not going to log in if I'm not going to play)

A blacklist doesn't solve my problem, because it may very well be that I would like to play a 4 stone game with that person later, but I'm not really in the mood right then.

Also, the type of game I want to play may depend on the quantity of people at a certain rank online. I may put up a game for a few minutes and have no takers at my rank, and at that point, I'll start playing handicap games. But that doesn't mean I want to play a handicap game right out of the gate.

Automatch and Direct challenges are both great features, and if people want to play that way, it should be there for them. But the default should be a game where each person gets to say whether they want to play with the other person.

[shapenaji]

I think averell tries to say, that if for example Player X 5k sets a game up, but there is just Player Y 5k who could play with him because of Player X set the hc on 0 each way, and all other 5k's are offline, that if Player Y 5k doesn't like the time settings, he can't click on Play to negotiate them and make a counter offer but has to do it in the Chat. Ofc thats a bit exaggerated, but I think that is the point, or am I on the wrong track?

Yeah, this is another reason for a negotiating step, it gives some wiggle room between players who want to play at different time controls, without the negotiating step, they won't play at all, but it's possible that there's a time control that they both might agree on.

[Xa17u]

My biggest issue is selecting someone of a particular rank. I like the option, in KGS, of putting up a game and when someone challenges, getting to decide "Hmm, do I want to play a 4 stone game?"

You have a very decent level of control over who you play. You can pick the specific time settings and handicap of the game that is going to be played.

[shapenaji]

My biggest issue is selecting someone of a particular rank. I like the option, in KGS, of putting up a game and when someone challenges, getting to decide "Hmm, do I want to play a 4 stone game?"

You have a very decent level of control over who you play. You can pick the specific time settings and handicap of the game that is going to be played.

But see, I get to decide if that's actually what I want, WHEN they challenge. I don't want to decide that before I start the game. Who knows who's on,

Maybe there are 40 5d's with itchy trigger fingers and there's no problem. On the other hand,

Maybe there's 1 septuagenarian 5d that doesn't react quickly, and 39 1d's itching for some handicap go.

Or Maybe there just aren't many players of any kind on there, and after waiting a bit I realize I'll just have to take what I can get.

In all of those cases, I'd rather be able to decide, and the rank slider won't help me.


I want the possibility of having a game with whomever is on, but I want to be able to agree to it.
Hell, I might play a 6 stone handicap game, it really depends on who challenges.

Taking away my ability to accept my challenger is a non-starter.

[Kaya.gs]

My biggest issue is selecting someone of a particular rank. I like the option, in KGS, of putting up a game and when someone challenges, getting to decide "Hmm, do I want to play a 4 stone game?"

You have a very decent level of control over who you play. You can pick the specific time settings and handicap of the game that is going to be played.

But see, I get to decide if that's actually what I want, WHEN they challenge. I don't want to decide that before I start the game. Who knows who's on,

Maybe there are 40 5d's with itchy trigger fingers and there's no problem. On the other hand,

Maybe there's 1 septuagenarian 5d that doesn't react quickly, and 39 1d's itching for some handicap go.

Or Maybe there just aren't many players of any kind on there, and after waiting a bit I realize I'll just have to take what I can get.

In all of those cases, I'd rather be able to decide, and the rank slider won't help me.


I want the possibility of having a game with whomever is on, but I want to be able to agree to it.
Hell, I might play a 6 stone handicap game, it really depends on who challenges.

Taking away my ability to accept my challenger is a non-starter.

Yes, thats an advantage the typical game offerer has on a negotiation system.
Of course, it is a dis-service to the challengers, that have to wait for him to make a decision.
The negative waiting is multiplied by the number of challengers that wait for a decision.

You can get exactly what you describe here if you just look at the game list. You can pick exactly who you play at your very liking that way at the moment of your choosing.

Its a benefit-balance: the game offerer doesnt get to pick the challenger exactly, but gets to pick the time settings or rules. The game challenger gets to pick the game offerer but doesnt get to pick the exact time settings he wants.

The negotiation system clearly gives the game offerer a higher advantage: maybe it would induce more players to play games, but maybe not. The certainty is that it slows and complicates the process for both offerers and challengers.

Long time ago I worked on doing the negotiation step, I've spent a lot of time building it and getting it functional, and as soon as i tried it, I felt immediately that negotiable games would be set aside. The game challenger has a lot less friction on non-negotiable games and those with the extra step would get easily neglected.
Knowing you click and play makes you avoid negotiable games that require you to wait for a possibly negative response.

Hence i looked for an alternative.

I think your concern over getting the exact game you want will dissipate as the player base grows and you have a wealth of challengers of your own rank. Negotiation will be reconsidered if after having a larger player base, the need for it is still felt.


That said, there are definite features in the works to make playing more fun and engaging.

[Splatted]

@Kaya.gs.: Like averall said, isn't that basically the same as the automatch function? (Except slightly slower because it removes the automation.) The whole point of a custom game is the customisability. Personally, I do prefer to start playing as quickly as possible, but it seems to me that when both automatch and custom game options already exist, making one more like the other is just removing functionality.

[Tami]

While Gabriel`s reasoning for not allowing the picking of challengers is understandable, maybe he has overlooked a major loophole: people can still reject unwanted challengers manually. If a 5d sets up a game, and an unwanted opponent takes it, all the 5d has to do is resign without playing, as such a game won`t have any value in the ranking system (or am I mistaken?). That would cause annoyance to the challenger, who thought she or he had a game, and would take the 5d a longer time to execute than simply being able to reject a challenge straight away.

[badukJr]

The negotiation system clearly gives the game offerer a higher advantage: maybe it would induce more players to play games, but maybe not. The certainty is that it slows and complicates the process for both offerers and challengers.

Long time ago I worked on doing the negotiation step, I've spent a lot of time building it and getting it functional, and as soon as i tried it, I felt immediately that negotiable games would be set aside. The game challenger has a lot less friction on non-negotiable games and those with the extra step would get easily neglected.
Knowing you click and play makes you avoid negotiable games that require you to wait for a possibly negative response.

If I am going to dedicate an hour, two hours to a game, I don't mind spending a few minutes getting it right. It seems like you are making a big issue out of waiting for a negative response. My solution is to let someone challenge multiple game offerers at the same time - when someone accepts the negotiation the game starts and all other challenges are automatically cancelled. This gives the best worlds of being able to negotiate and not wasting time. Why not implement it?

While Gabriel`s reasoning for not allowing the picking of challengers is understandable, maybe he has overlooked a major loophole: people can still reject unwanted challengers manually. If a 5d sets up a game, and an unwanted opponent takes it, all the 5d has to do is resign without playing, as such a game won`t have any value in the ranking system (or am I mistaken?). That would cause annoyance to the challenger, who thought she or he had a game, and would take the 5d a longer time to execute than simply being able to reject a challenge straight away.

This can even become worse: The challenger is annoyed so much, that when the 5d relists the game, the previous challenger immediately forces the 5d back into the game.

To be honest, I care more about WHO I play than the rules I choose. Of course if I put up a 30m main with 30s byo, I don't want a 0m main with 10s byo, but if someone suggests 20m main I will accept it. But on KGS, I always, always look at the challenger's game history to see if they have something suspicious going on. The 'no negotiation' will work as long as the beta accounts are limited and people will forgive playing whoever because they want the server to succeed. After that it will be a mess when the abusers show up.

[Xa17u]

If a 5d sets up a game, and an unwanted opponent takes it,

When you say that, what kind of situation are you thinking about? What would make the 5d reject the challenger? I refuse to believe names and pictures have anything to do with the game you're about to play.

[speedchase]

I refuse to believe names and pictures have anything to do with the game you're about to play.

How long you've been waiting might have an impact on who you want to play.

[quantumf]

After that it will be a mess when the abusers show up.

Neither Oro or Tygem have a KGS-style negotiation system. I would not describe them as a "mess"

[Tami]

Suppose BigRon has just finished a game with Vern, and wants to play somebody else. BigRon puts up a game offer, and Vern accepts it; without accept/decline, BigRon can`t avoid playing with Vern again except by resigning the unstarted game. BigRon could blacklist Vern, but Vern is his chum, so he doesn`t want to do that either.

Now, BigRon could challenge one of his pals Trevor or Nev or HairyDave to a game individually, but that means a lot of challenging. Why can`t he just put up a game, wait for Trevor, Nev or HairyDave to join, and decline Vern`s offer of a rematch, instead of either having to keep walking out on Vern, blacklisting Vern (which he doesn`t want to do), or sending out individual offers?

[shapenaji]

After that it will be a mess when the abusers show up.

Neither Oro or Tygem have a KGS-style negotiation system. I would not describe them as a "mess"

Both Oro and Tygem use a room system, Someone starts a room, you enter the room, and your opponent can decide whether or not they want to play you.

(I get rejected a fair amount... silly American flag)

But the step is still there. It's not exactly KGS, but it's super close.