Change to Live Games procedures

[super_dipsy]

There was a suggestion made recently about making a change to the way live games are handled. The suggestion can be found here https://www.playdiplomacy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59556.

The original suggestion was to perhaps consider prioritizing full 7 player games or even ranked games over unranked or shorthanded games on the Home page where Live Games appear.

This did not seem the right way to go, because a player wanting to play an unranked live game or a shorthanded one has just as much right to put one up as players wanting a full game. However there do appear to be some issues with the Live Games handling procedures, because it is possible for people to more or less seize control of the live games queue by opening multiple live games, meaning that there is little opportunity for others to try their own games. The Home live game only stays on the home page for an hour anyway, so if it does not fill then another game can be picked up.

Based on discussion in the Suggestion, we are going to try a more equitable approach to Live games. Basically, if a player has a Live game open (waiting for players or active in its Live period) then that player cannot open any new live games. If the open game is killed or if an active live game moves out of its live period, then the player is now able to open a new one. This seems to be fair and equitable to all. It does mean a player can't play simultaneously in two live games in their own live periods, but frankly I don't see how you can give proper attention to one game playing live if you have another also playing live

We'll see how it works - we can always go back to the old way or try another if we feel that is better, but I feel pretty good that this is the fairest route for all.

[RcihardLion]

In my opionion 2 man games on the live page fill up much quicker than 7 man live games which have a small success of ever going live.

I and a few other players have played more than one live game.

Restricting live games to one seems a little draconian.

I do not see how a 2 man game apperaing on a live page, stops people joining a 7 man game , as the live page clearly shows if there is more than one live game.

I suspect because 2 man games fill up quuckly some palyers are a little envious , but that is the nature of the game it will always be easier for 2 man games to fill p quicker than 7 man games.

I know some people dont like 2 man games this shouldnt be a reason to restrict 2 man live games.

I think the old system worked perfectly well , until someone who doesnt like 2 man games got the system changed.

[super_dipsy]

Absolutely people should be allowed to play 2-player Live games. That was why I said at the start that I was not in favour of biasing any one game with any other.

However, I don't really understand the issue - 2-man Live games are not being restricted. You can start and play one, and when it finishes (quite likely to be even in an hour) you can start another. All the change does is mean you can't run more than one at a time in the live phase or queue another up. That hardly seems a severe restriction

[Penelope Pitstop]

I welcome this change. As only one live game is really visible on the homepage, when someone sets up four or five 2-player live games and keeps queueing them, it prevents any 7-player games from showing up on the homepage or it delays them for a long time.

This way, everyone has a fair chance to create the kind of live game they want to play.

[Woolgie]

This seems like a good implementation. I don’t think anyone should be stopped from playing the game style of their choice, so perhaps my suggestion of not showcasing 2pc games was over the top. I agree it seems difficult if not unfeasible to play more than one at once so therefore this change makes sense.