KungFuDuet
Kung Fu Master
CentCom
Awesome Player
AADOMM
M.C. Play Testers
The Wiki Bar
M.C. Youtubers
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2010
- Messages
- 1,664
The title says it all. Why?
1 - NEW PLAYERS - Players who created an account on or after Oct 15 2023 are not able to log into the forum
2 - AWOL - We do not have an AWOL button under the ACTIVE tab yet. Please check each game to see if you are AWOL.
3 - STUCK GAMES - Some games will not load properly. If you encounter this, please post stuck games
HERE
Thanks.
3, 5, 7, 11 ...singles.
Again, what fills the niche. If we eliminated 3p games there would be an outcry, but 7p games have already been gone for over a month and nobody has noticed.3, 5, 7, 11 ...singles.
Again, what fills the niche. If we eliminated 3p games there would be an outcry, but 7p games have already been gone for over a month and nobody has noticed.
Ah ha! My point exactly - you had to go to the Start A Game tab to confirm that the option still existed.I just successfully created and left a 7-player game... ???
What is the reason for this ? While not many would notice, it seems to me that it would limit various turny structures.Again, what fills the niche. If we eliminated 3p games there would be an outcry, but 7p games have already been gone for over a month and nobody has noticed.
Ha! I got two people with the same joke!What is the reason for this ? While not many would notice, it seems to me that it would limit various turny structures.
Ha! I got two people with the same joke!
I think that with any feature one has to consider what the value added is to the site. Adding 24p games adds more value than adding 11p games.
SHEPHERD said:If we did eliminate 7p, I bet it would take weeks for somebody to notice. It doesn't fill a need.
I get it Shep. I was only playing the Devils advocate. My question still stands. What is the reason for not having 11 player games. Is it a "room" issue ? It seems to me that the more options, the better for turnys. Without 11 player games there may need to be "buys" to work in the math. So, unless there is a Good reason not to have them, I would be for 11 player games.Ha! I got two people with the same joke!
I think that with any feature one has to consider what the value added is to the site. Adding 24p games adds more value than adding 11p games.
It is NOT a very big deal to me either, but I still do not think that you are getting exactly what I am saying. In a turny it may just happen that 11 player games is what is called for in a certain round. Without it you may need to give out a buy or two for that round. So, unless there is a Good reason for not having 11 player games, I would be for them. ...No biggie, just sayin.Well, mapguy, I honestly don't know why it wasn't originally coded into the site, so I won't try to answer definitively. And I'm not trying to be an apologist for the site either, I just don't think this is a big deal. The structure of an 11 player game would not be significantly different enough from that of a 10 or 12 player game to warrant putting this near the top of the to-do list. If we're going to add game sizes I'd rather see 15p (5x3) or 16p (4x4) instead of cluttering up the games page with 11, 13, 17, etc. Just say no to primes.
I get what you're saying, I just think its bad logic. The only way a tournament would "call for" 11 players in a certain round is if the tournament organizer sets up the tournament that way, which given what we now know would be pretty stupid. This is like saying that a tournament may require 29 players in a certain round, and thus we should have 29 player games.I still do not think that you are getting exactly what I am saying. In a turny it may just happen that 11 player games is what is called for in a certain round. Without it you may need to give out a buy or two for that round.
haha, Shep you are still not quit getting what I am trying to say. I want to know the reason "WHY" there is not 11 player games. If there IS a reason, then I could understand (maybe), just why they have been omitted from play. On the other hand if there is "NOT" a good reason, then maybe they should be added. I really do not care one way or the other myself, just curious is all.I get what you're saying, I just think its bad logic. The only way a tournament would "call for" 11 players in a certain round is if the tournament organizer sets up the tournament that way, which given what we now know would be pretty stupid. This is like saying that a tournament may require 29 players in a certain round, and thus we should have 29 player games.
Say i go to the donut shop and I see that they don't sell blue donuts. Then I go home and promise my five year old that I'll bring him a blue donut. Then when I go back to the donut shop they still don't have blue donuts - is it my fault or the donut shop's fault that my kid is disappointed?
Now that we are all aware that there is, at present, no option for 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, or any-other-prime-number-above-seven player games, I would suggest that tournament directors not set up their tourneys so that such a game is required. If they do, they shouldn't blame the donut shop.