IRoll11s wrote:
Use these rules to determine if a game should be displayed:

1. Is if the oldest game?
2. Did the last game that was started have the same board, identical settings, and was started by the same person? If so.. then DO NOT display.
3. Are there already 3 games with the same board and identical settings (but started by different people because of rule 2) then DO NOT display.

So would I be able to see the 800 games that the player created?  I would maybe want to join all 800 since the person is obviously a moron :P.  (I assume I could get to them through the Player's profile>>Game List, but this is the flow that I would like to see not needed.)

I'm still not sure if I'm a fan of all the rest though, it just seems very elaborate when it doesn't need to be.

I do like the 48 hours thing though, and that seems like a good idea.

I like IRoll11s ideas although some sanity check type limits would be good to stop abuse / scripting attacks.

Automated deletion of games after 48 hours if noone else joins sounds good - maybe also a deletion of the game if it has not started after 5 days as well.

I think an option to filter out all games started by player X would be handy too.

Hugh wrote: I especially think that hiding games according to his listed criteria will go a long long way.

I've thought about this some more and this is still the biggest "blech" I have with this sort of system.  Knowing that there are potentially games waiting to be filled but that are "Hidden".  Very similar to Warfish, you could jump around the system to get to them, but that's annoying IMO.

I dunno, maybe it wouldn't occur all that often, or if you do join one then the next pops through (although then that almost seems like a different queue, if you get get further into the list than others).

Yertle, I did perceive it as allowing you to see the next identical hidden game. The point is that you wouldn't have to view all that repetition. You join, and then if you want you can join the next game of that repeated item. Certainly, there is more opportunity to join more diverse types of games with this type of system.

That said, I'm not opposed to what I perceive to be the Yertle ideal - show all games, scrolling past 15 being allowed, or Cram's hide the offenders to see the next items. I think it might be more of an eyesore, but it would be an improvement. I also like sorting by board type bringing up a list upon clicking the board type. These are all good ideas and each of them is a way forward.

Yertle wrote:

Hugh wrote: I especially think that hiding games according to his listed criteria will go a long long way.

I've thought about this some more and this is still the biggest "blech" I have with this sort of system.  Knowing that there are potentially games waiting to be filled but that are "Hidden".  Very similar to Warfish, you could jump around the system to get to them, but that's annoying IMO.

I dunno, maybe it wouldn't occur all that often, or if you do join one then the next pops through (although then that almost seems like a different queue, if you get get further into the list than others).

I was under the impression that under IRoll11's suggestion, it only hid if it was an identical map started by an identical user.  This would seem a good way to try and have the games actually fill up before people start joining an identical game with the same host.  The only drawback I see to this is if you don't want to play with somebody else in the game (other than the host, which would be the same across identical boards). 

This would actually seem to be beneficial to the host as well as it is more likely to produce the desired result of filling up the games and essentially allows them to queue up the number of games they want to play on this map.

It would also allow other people to start similar games if for some reason they don't want to play with the host but want to play that map.  If anything I would think the contention would be with point 3 around limiting the displayed number of identical boards.

I would also like to agree with the idea of further sortability (ie team, lightning, etc).  It would seem that the lightning games have the most difficulty filling unless they are two player.  I am leery personally about joining them because while I might want to play a quick game now, the game not fill up and start until I am asleep (probably well discussed elsewhere as I haven't been on this site long).  Basically I would like to filter those to the bottom or something.

i also agree that it should only be hidden if it was an identical map started by an identical user.

with the limit on the individual player, there shouldn't end up being 15 games on the same board out there, unless we find some phenom board and everyone is wanting to play it.

i like most of what has been said id like to offer a suggestion that could go along with it. as far as the home page goes rather then showing all the games on all the boards just have the board with a number that lets you know how many open games there are waiting for players and a icon that will take you to the list of all the games for that board. then that list could be sorted in a way like people have suggested already. that way the most you will see is 1 of every board and you can tell how many games on each board are waiting for players.

also it would be nice from the board tab when you click on a board (name) not only should you be able to create a game but you could join a game (just add a JOIN GAME button below the CREATE GAME button) that would link you to a list of the games waiting for players for that board.

With regard to hiding games started by the same person with identical rules:

1) People will game the system and start several games with minor variations and the system won't accomplish its stated goal.

2) I have seen that many of those games fill up when the same person(s) join all of the multiple copies of the same game. Often times the whole group of 10 identical games is off the queue before 1 of something more obscure.

As such, I think there simply needs to be a check to prevent gross abuse of the system, such as only allowing one person to add 10 (or some other arbitrary but reasonable number) games, whatever they may be, to the queue.

KrocK wrote:

also it would be nice from the board tab when you click on a board (name) not only should you be able to create a game but you could join a game (just add a JOIN GAME button below the CREATE GAME button) that would link you to a list of the games waiting for players for that board.

I do like this suggestion as well.

Cramchakle wrote: With regard to hiding games started by the same person with identical rules:

1) People will game the system and start several games with minor variations and the system won't accomplish its stated goal.

2) I have seen that many of those games fill up when the same person(s) join all of the multiple copies of the same game. Often times the whole group of 10 identical games is off the queue before 1 of something more obscure.

As such, I think there simply needs to be a check to prevent gross abuse of the system, such as only allowing one person to add 10 (or some other arbitrary but reasonable number) games, whatever they may be, to the queue.

Sure, add in a hard limit on games created by a single person as a fall-back check in addition to what I wrote earlier to take care of your #1.

The goal is never to prevent 100% of the possible abuse, because that is impossible.  It's to prevent 100% of the accidental abuse and to think up as many possible ways of deliberate abuse and counter that by making it unproductive.  Ultimate goal is to have any abuse that bypasses your efforts to be intermittent enough to take care of on a case by case basis. Warning, then ban.

Thanks everyone for your suggestions. The queue filtering system as proposed by IRoll11s has been implemented and is now live on the site.

We'll see how it goes over the next few weeks and I'll make any changes as needed.

A couple of bits extra are there, you can now hide games and view open games on each board using a drop down list. A couple of other pieces are needed like a hard limit on number of games open (probably around 50 I would think) plus the unfilled game cleanup scheduled task.

Doesn't look like the Hide button is doing anything.

Why the need for the Max there? Why not just read from Settings?

Visually the filtering system seems out of place, or just not as fluid. (Not a big deal and could just be me.)

How easy would it be for a preference to just see everything (like before the update) instead of with filters? :D

You might want to refresh your browser Yertle for the updated javascript and stylesheets. The maxes on the home page are independent of the main gamelist max as you might want a different number on your home page vs the game list tabs.

good call. i like 100 for my games list but that seems excessive on the home page.

tom wrote: You might want to refresh your browser Yertle for the updated javascript and stylesheets.

Hmmmm, I see the updates, but Hide does nothing (same when I refreshed/restarted browser).  I'll try again in a bit.

Literally nothing at all happens? What OS / browser / version are you running?

tom wrote: Literally nothing at all happens? What OS / browser / version are you running?

Windows Vista

Firefox 3.5.7

Internet Explorer 7

The page refreshes, but the game stays there. 

Ah should be good now if you refresh your home page.