Insane : hundreds of simultaneously played turn based games

[Hagardunor]

...

Your post then went on to suggest:



Which I, and obviously several others here, strongly disagree with. You do you, but let others do as suits them too.

This is something I regret now, that I wrote in anger after a very bad experience with a 200+ turn based games player.

Obviously everyone is entitled to play as much game as they want as long as it does not impact negatively other players' games. What I think is not the case for such demanding games as Decrypto with which deep reflexion is required that does not match with speeding through hundreds of games (in my opinion)

Decrypto is not nearly as demanding of a game as you seem to think. If you were to drop me into a game state of decrypto that I was not even playing in, the way the clues are shown under their numbers, past fail on sheet showing another close relationship if any, and simply having a deep background in clue giving games I could make a good guess (possibly far better than someone with only one game they have been deeply absorbed in thinking about continueously) from that tactical snapshot of the game and in very little time.

....

I am impressed by your mastery of this game, but to act as you say don't you need at least 3 or 4 clues to guess one word as you describe ? And you have 3 words to guess (at least the general idea) before you make an interception.

Well, you know, in the Decrypto game I'm just playing now we made an interception just at second round. To make an interception that early, we had of course a good piece of chance. But we also discussed very thoroughly before and that may have helped too.

In another game, we were intercepted very early. We were at bay at that time, believing that we would be defeated well before the 8th turn. We managed to turn it the other way around, but for that we had to pay extreme attention to our clues, and again had long discussions within the team to narrow our hypothesis on opponent's words to the good ones.

My feeling is that I couldn't afford giving that much time in discussions if I was playing at the same time many simultaneous games where interaction is so important as in Decrypto. "Many" stays to be defined, but I think I do not have time to waist for that.

[Hagardunor]

There's one for 100 simultaneous games, I haven't gone much beyond that myself. I wouldn't say it necessarily encourages you to play more games, as the achievements don't really do anything for you (no more than you get achievements for each level each season in Arena, but I would debate whether that's an enticement to anyone after they've got a couple already), more just marking what you do on BGA.

I agree with that

[buu441]

There's one for 100 simultaneous games, I haven't gone much beyond that myself. I wouldn't say it necessarily encourages you to play more games, as the achievements don't really do anything for you (no more than you get achievements for each level each season in Arena, but I would debate whether that's an enticement to anyone after they've got a couple already), more just marking what you do on BGA.

Even if it isn't an enticement, it is definitely not something the creators of the site see as a negative. And people engaging in it should not be punished, as the OP is suggesting.

[Hagardunor]

There's one for 100 simultaneous games, I haven't gone much beyond that myself. I wouldn't say it necessarily encourages you to play more games, as the achievements don't really do anything for you (no more than you get achievements for each level each season in Arena, but I would debate whether that's an enticement to anyone after they've got a couple already), more just marking what you do on BGA.

Even if it isn't an enticement, it is definitely not something the creators of the site see as a negative. And people engaging in it should not be punished, as the OP is suggesting.

I suppose that OP refers to me, but I don't understand what it means.

Whatever, I have said somewhere above that I apologize for these words that I wrote in anger after a bad experience with a 200+ games player.

This is no more the subject of the discussion and I would like to focus on "do megamultiplayers jeopardize other players in cooperative games or not ", first thing to settle (and perhaps close the discussion afterwards).

[buu441]

Ah sorry about that, OP is short for original poster, so that would indeed be you.

I would suggest opening a new forum thread for the new discussion topic. And I probably won't have anything to add to that topic other than I don't think playing co-op or team games with random people on the internet is a fun experience. Just a peek at the Hanabi forums is enough signs to stay away.

[ShassDow]

I think I've had over 60 games simultaneously but it hasn't hindered my ability to play at decrypto, most of the other games I'm playing are quick games (can't stop, Incan gold, similo), and even when I'm playing more "demanding" games I mean I take maybe two hours total a day to play all my turns. I have never ran out of time on any of my tables. It's not about the number of games IMO but about the players themselves.

[thx1139]

Can you seriously believe that a player can properly manage hundreds of turn based games ?

I'm currently playing against someone who is playing 456 games... (1/2 small, 1/2 big or medium like Barrage, Great Western...)
Results are what you can hope.

It's not really interesting to play against someone which is not in the game.

[nik592]

Results are what you can hope.

It's not really interesting to play against someone which is not in the game.

I'm assuming you refer to their quality of play, rather than their timing, and quality may or may not have to do with their number of games. Maybe they haven't played much of it (obviously you can tell that). Maybe it's not their game. Maybe they like it but just aren't great at it. Maybe they're trying to get better.

I've had not so great games against players who were only playing 1-2 games simultaneously as well. I've even seen what I would consider poor games from players with good ELO - but everyone is entitled to an off day (and I know the same can be said of me). If good play really matters to you, consider restricting by ELO or playing level in Arena (assuming you're at a reasonable rank yourself).

Or is your issue with the time taken, rather than the quality of play? Although that should be solved by using appropriate time limits and booting people if you think they're abusing them (according to your own definition of such abuse, kick immediately when over time, or give a little grace, as suits your preference).

[Hagardunor]

Results are what you can hope.

It's not really interesting to play against someone which is not in the game.

I'm assuming you refer to their quality of play, rather than their timing, and quality may or may not have to do with their number of games. Maybe they haven't played much of it (obviously you can tell that). Maybe it's not their game. Maybe they like it but just aren't great at it. Maybe they're trying to get better.

I've had not so great games against players who were only playing 1-2 games simultaneously as well. I've even seen what I would consider poor games from players with good ELO - but everyone is entitled to an off day (and I know the same can be said of me). If good play really matters to you, consider restricting by ELO or playing level in Arena (assuming you're at a reasonable rank yourself).

Or is your issue with the time taken, rather than the quality of play? Although that should be solved by using appropriate time limits and booting people if you think they're abusing them (according to your own definition of such abuse, kick immediately when over time, or give a little grace, as suits your preference).

I am smiling behind my screen, because I would never have imagined that such a question would raise so much controversy. Indeed, it seems to share BGA players in two irreconcilable groups.

So I do not see any reason to feed the controversy anymore, neither group will admit that the other may be right on some points.

As long as I am concerned I will do my best effort, with or without BGA help, to stay away from multi-hundreds games players. Beyond the fact that I do not doubt that most of them cannot play well on demanding games such as Decrypto, I consider moreover that they are comparable to somebody feeding on great cuisine as if it were junk food.

[Suoivax]

Results are what you can hope.

It's not really interesting to play against someone which is not in the game.

I'm assuming you refer to their quality of play, rather than their timing, and quality may or may not have to do with their number of games. Maybe they haven't played much of it (obviously you can tell that). Maybe it's not their game. Maybe they like it but just aren't great at it. Maybe they're trying to get better.

I've had not so great games against players who were only playing 1-2 games simultaneously as well. I've even seen what I would consider poor games from players with good ELO - but everyone is entitled to an off day (and I know the same can be said of me). If good play really matters to you, consider restricting by ELO or playing level in Arena (assuming you're at a reasonable rank yourself).

Or is your issue with the time taken, rather than the quality of play? Although that should be solved by using appropriate time limits and booting people if you think they're abusing them (according to your own definition of such abuse, kick immediately when over time, or give a little grace, as suits your preference).

I am smiling behind my screen, because I would never have imagined that such a question would raise so much controversy. Indeed, it seems to share BGA players in two irreconcilable groups.

So I do not see any reason to feed the controversy anymore, neither group will admit that the other may be right on some points.

As long as I am concerned I will do my best effort, with or without BGA help, to stay away from multi-hundreds games players. Beyond the fact that I do not doubt that most of them cannot play well on demanding games such as Decrypto, I consider moreover that they are comparable to somebody feeding on great cuisine as if it were junk food.

Lol, I would say tossing out insults counts as feeding the controversy...