Maybe this is buried in the other threads but I have a couple games that are 3 and 4 days old where my competitor has made no moves yet his timer has remained at 1 day since then....

Any suggestions?

depends on if you started these before or after we got the skip time implemented. if it was before they're prolly messed up and need tom's help. if after, well you'll prolly need tom's help too!

are they on vacation?

For more efficient service, please provide links to the games in question.

This is thread necrophilia for a reason...

I noticed the new Player# thing and that got me curious, so I started poking around the player list sorted by Date Joined.

The 6th of Nov. is when tom posted on ToS and moved WG out of I imagine a 'soft-launch' phase. Out of the players who registered before then, Cabrao is the oldest one still active, and he's listed as player #544. (Well there's Cartographer, but...no games played. I WONDER who that is?)

So tom, don't think we didn't notice the #1 under your name...

...any chance of a selective DB wipe to get rid of all the pre-hard-launch fluff so us early adopters can get a more righteous lower player number?

Was thinking along the lines of those non-premium non-you non-friend non-testing accounts that have 0 games played and haven't logged in for a year could go bye-bye.

Of course then there's accounts like this...:

http://www.wargear.net/players/info/FrostDuke

How very odd.

Actually nevermind, that player # is probably some sort of index where changing it would cause an immediate server implosion. I'll have to be content with my three digit number, even if it's not #111.

I'll see what I can do.

How do you see player number other than on the forum threads? (Seems like it could be a good stat for Profiles too).

Yeah, the player # thing seems lame to me since it's so far off.

Thinking more into the future, how about if any account that wasn't used in a year was "retired"? That is they were taken right out of all the board rankings and charts. If they ever came back they could be inserted back in. I would not like being a new person in the future trying to get above players that are no longer around.

Amidon37 wrote: Thinking more into the future, how about if any account that wasn't used in a year was "retired"? That is they were taken right out of all the board rankings and charts. If they ever came back they could be inserted back in. I would not like being a new person in the future trying to get above players that are no longer around.

I disagree with this.

It seems early in the life of WG to be thinking about this, but it is or will become a relevent topic eventually.

One thing that comes to mind for me is the slow but steady diminution of a players score after a certain amount of activity, but this messes with stats.  The other more reasonable solution is simply to have the Rankings page default to "Current" with a filter for "All Time".  "Current" could be defined as having had any activity for x months.  Current would also get rid of the noise of players that joined x or more months ago and played only 1 game.  It would also give everyone a size of the "current" community.

asm wrote: Yeah, the player # thing seems lame to me since it's so far off.

I propose the Player number is a stat on profile pages (since it's kinda neat), but that Ranking shows on the Forums info (display Unranked for players without a Ranking).

dunno if i want to see how bad my ranking is that often!

What WT said. Also, my player # is under 200 so I can't really complain :P.