SpielByWeb

[bockman]

It would be nice to allow a game to take on a replacement player if one (or more) player does not take a move for a specified amount of time (2 months?).

What does everyone think? Would that work in some instances? I know I would be willing to step into a game to help finish it off for others.

I'd like to hear other's thoughts.

[HappyProle]

We've been bouncing some ideas around about the best way to implement this.

I think the key question is how do you determine when a player is dead; two options we've discussed:

1) After a set time period of inactivity, players are eligible to be replaced.

2) On a case by case basis, admins or other moderators could handle requests to kick players from games.

In either case the games would then show up on a "Games Needing Replacements" page.

[mastapoohba]

I think after 2 weeks of inactivity the player should automatically be able to be replaced. (move the game to the games needing replacements page)

[striking_cobra]

[Kanga]

[scirub]

How about allowing setting a time limit at the initialization of each game, so that everybody agrees to a specific wait period. No surprises then.

[HappyProle]

Whatever the time limit, it would have to ignore "on vacation" time in its calculations. I realize this wouldn't get rid of those cases where someone uses the vacation feature to sit idle in some games while playing in others... but if we implement an automatic 2-week timeout (for example), that makes it very easy to step in and manually inactivate someone.

I think 2 weeks of non-vacation time would be entirely reasonable. I'm trying to imagine a case where someone would feel terribly put out if they got replaced in a game they hadn't bothered to look at it in two weeks.

Next question: should the active players in the game have any say in approving the replacement player?

[Kanga]

[Kanga]

The other problem about saying 2 weeks of non vacation time is that is assuming a player 1) knows about vacation time and 2) had a chance to use it. There are times when you get unexpectedly cut off from internet access; it would be nice not to be kicked out of games in 2 weeks in these circumstances. By 1 month, the chances are much higher the player is never coming back.

[freduk]

[gische]

[stargate]

most important is to have a system for replacement players
and I think we would all like it sooner rather than later

you could start with a longer time --say 6 weeks
see how the systems works, make any needed tweaks

as time goes on squeeze the "no turn taken" window down to
4 weeks and if required a shorter time

a 6 week window for a replacement player is much better
than the 3-4 month delay to get an abandoned game off your
current games list

[shizzane]

I prefer the shorter window. 2 weeks is plenty for the losers. But anything is better than waiting months for it to be cleaned out.

I think the method for determining the replacement player should be either:
A) Decided by the game creator or
B) Automatically set to be an open game if it was created that way or a passworded game it was created that way. If it's a passworded game, most likely the creator wants someone he/she knows or is familiar with.

Just my 2 pennies...

[HappyProle]

[Bkruppa]

Would this guarantee me getting vacation time from my job?