EnixNeo wrote:

weathertop wrote: 100 players in ONE game. NUTS!

Set a turn limit of 1 hr (with email notification)  and it sounds like fun!

Lol a 1 hour turn limit just hurts the idea, doesn't help it :P No sleeping for you!

Y'know, the more I think about it, the less I like the idea of a hard limit on seats or open games. What might make a bit more sense would be to make queue spamming less rewarding, and the easiest way to do that would be to just randomize the game order on the front page. That way we don't get stuck with a wall of Antastic games unless they're the only ones on the Open Game list (in which case we should be thankful somebody is spamming!) and older games that haven't filled yet get a chance to go back on top (or bottom).

Requires comparatively little effort to implement and doesn't step on anybody's toes. What do you think?

Oatworm wrote: That way we don't get stuck with a wall of Antastic games

But you're never stuck with anything -- you can always hide any games you know you don't want to join by clicking the 'x'. I still don't see what the big deal is.

nah, not a fan.

i'm not opposed to finding a way to make it less rewarding, but i don't think randomizing is the right way to do that. not only would that complicate things (ie. would constantly have to look thru games i've already decided i didn't want. and to prevent the obvious 'use the hide button' - well thats the whole point of this debate: to eliminate the need for doing that) but it could keep some games from ever seeing the light of the front page.

Kjeld wrote:

But you're never stuck with anything -- you can always hide any games you know you don't want to join by clicking the 'x'. I still don't see what the big deal is.

It isn't just the appearance of a game you don't want to join that is the problem.  Clicking 'x' does not show the other games in the queue (at least as of yesterday).  

You can see the other games by using the board filter drop-down box, but you have to know to look there.  If you start a new game, people have to know to look there if your game is to have a chance of starting in a reasonable amount of time.

Hugh wrote:

 Clicking 'x' does not show the other games in the queue (at least as of yesterday).  

You have to refresh the page, the other games in the queue don't automatically pop up into those places.  tom knows, think he said it would be nice if they did auto show, but dunno how soon that will happen.

Yertle's correct, you just have to click 'update' next to the filter.

But you wouldn't have to do that either if we could stop them from making so many in the first place! That saves us an extra click and 3-5 seconds of reload time! :P

It is definitely not ideal yet. It is nice to know what to do when this sort of thing happens though. I thought I had tried update - I'll take your word that it works.

You should just have to refresh the page to get the next set of games if you've hidden them all - no need to click on update buttons.

Morbo had a good suggestion on the queue: if there was an 'expand' option to see what was behind the front runner, for instance you didn't want to join the top game cus it had an enemy in it; you still have the option of expanding to show what's underneath, but default is they're all hidden (and a refresh would hide them again).

I was wondering if Beaubody would ever find this place. :P