More options when creating a table?

[LazyFerret]

Hello everyone, I really would like to have more options when creating a table.
I like playing fast turn-based games but not real-time ones, the problem is that I often get joined by people form the other side of the world, this slows the game pace a lot. Often people join a "fast" game and make maybe 1 move a day and then I notice that they are playing about 40 games at the same time.
I like playing long games such as Gaia Project, people lose interest in a 1 or 2 weeks long game!
People DO NOT care about the game speed settings when they join a lobby, they just wanna play.

The fixes would be simple and optional:
1) Possibility to region lock our lobbies (Maybe I wanna play only with people in my time zone or continent)
2) Possibility to limit the access to people that are playing less than X games or max. 1-2 of the same game

What do you think?

[Jellby]

I think that you would achieve nothing.

1) People in your time zone or continent can still play and be active at wildly different times during the day or night.
2) People playing many simultaneous games can keep their time easily, people playing just one or two games can time out easily.

There's no technical solution for a people problem. Your issue is simply that people do not pay attention to table settings before joining, and even if they do, sometimes the do not care. My suggestion is simply to use the expel button shamelessly.

[tbhp]

The second suggestion sounds wonky, as it could normalize a sort of stigma against people who play a lot of games. So those people would have it harder finding games even though they may be perfectly capable of handling them all.

[LazyFerret]

I think that you would achieve nothing.

1) People in your time zone or continent can still play and be active at wildly different times during the day or night.
2) People playing many simultaneous games can keep their time easily, people playing just one or two games can time out easily.

There's no technical solution for a people problem. Your issue is simply that people do not pay attention to table settings before joining, and even if they do, sometimes the do not care. My suggestion is simply to use the expel button shamelessly.

1) yes, but I still would have a statistical better chance to find someone that plays in my active hours.
2) In my experience it's more common to have a slow player with 40 ongoing games than one with a couple of games.

[LazyFerret]

The second suggestion sounds wonky, as it could normalize a sort of stigma against people who play a lot of games. So those people would have it harder finding games even though they may be perfectly capable of handling them all.

It's really not that. It's common sense, if I have 1 game I can pay more attention to it, if I have 20, maybe not.
Again, this does not need to become a standard but at least give us the option to do so.
If someone has a problem with this he can go premium and host his own table? I don't see a problem here.

[tbhp]

The second suggestion sounds wonky, as it could normalize a sort of stigma against people who play a lot of games. So those people would have it harder finding games even though they may be perfectly capable of handling them all.

It's really not that. It's common sense, if I have 1 game I can pay more attention to it, if I have 20, maybe not.
Again, this does not need to become a standard but at least give us the option to do so.
If someone has a problem with this he can go premium and host his own table? I don't see a problem here.

It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you, you are still judging people and their ability to keep up with their games, even though you know nothing about them. You don't actually know if they are more likely to timeout than someone who only has a couple of games going.

It's no good to accuse people without any way to back up what they are doing wrong.

[LazyFerret]

The second suggestion sounds wonky, as it could normalize a sort of stigma against people who play a lot of games. So those people would have it harder finding games even though they may be perfectly capable of handling them all.

It's really not that. It's common sense, if I have 1 game I can pay more attention to it, if I have 20, maybe not.
Again, this does not need to become a standard but at least give us the option to do so.
If someone has a problem with this he can go premium and host his own table? I don't see a problem here.

It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you, you are still judging people and their ability to keep up with their games, even though you know nothing about them. You don't actually know if they are more likely to timeout than someone who only has a couple of games going.

It's no good to accuse people without any way to back up what they are doing wrong.

I am not judging them!?!?!? I am simply stating that I would like to have the ability to play fast games and have a lobby with people that play as fast as I do.

[tbhp]

I am not judging them!?!?!? I am simply stating that I would like to have the ability to play fast games and have a lobby with people that play as fast as I do.

You can do that by picking the speed option. But that's not what you are doing. You are judging an individual's ability to play fast based on your general ideas about the group they belong to. That's the definition of discrimination.

All the other offered options are based on something factual. Your suggestion is not. It makes an assumption about them that may or may not be correct. They don't deserve to be limited in their options when they haven't even been proven guilty of the behavior you want to avoid. That's what karma is for.

[nik592]

It's really not that. It's common sense, if I have 1 game I can pay more attention to it, if I have 20, maybe not.

If someone has one game currently playing, maybe they're not all that interested in BGA and not likely to check in as often? But someone who has 20 (or 40 as you originally said) may be very interested in playing their games and check in more regularly. I speak as someone who DOES play around 40 (or even up to about 60) games at a time, and part of why I do this is because I check in the BGA multiple times per day, and like to increase the chances of there actually being turns for me to play when I do. Among my IRL friends I'm rarely one who times out (on BGA) , despite playing the most simultaneous games.

What you want to filter by is how often and when people turn up online relative to how often and when you turn up online. I can't say I've studied it, but I suspect that neither geographic region, nor number of games currently running would correlate reliably to that. Either find some reliable opponents and make friends with them, or accept that you're going to have games that don't run as quickly as you'd like sometimes (another good reason to play many games, as the quicker ones tend to make me not notice the slow ones).