Clear finished/inactive tables

Previous topic - Next topic

Joseph2302

Once a game is finished or if the table hasn't had any activity for say 30 minutes, can the table be removed from the matching screen.

Or otherwise create the ability to search/filter for just new tables.

Currently finding a new table is really frustrating.

Mick

A better table picking interface really needs to be high priority. It's almost impossible to find a table I'd want with the lack of any filtering or sorting. I know there are the find match buttons, but I don't like 2 player games (3 player is really Dominion's sweet spot).

ffejselur

#2
Quote from: Mick on 23 January 2017, 06:33:21 PM
3 player is really Dominion's sweet spot
I totally agree with you, Mick. I was first exposed to Dominion IRL as a 3-4 player game, and playing with only 2 seemed like a letdown. However, at least among the powers that be here we are in the minority at best (considered 2nd class citizens at worst). First, the graphic set up is oriented toward the 2 player game, showing the opponent's hand cards face down fanned out 1 by 1 where you can't even see the number of cards in their hand for >2 players (like you could with MF). Second, the buttons Quick, Good and Bot Match assume a 2 player game. They don't say "2 player Quick Match" etc., do they? And finally, consider this post by Stef on f.ds:

Re: The Dominion online 2017 thread
« Reply #289 on: January 08, 2017, 11:47:30 am »
Quote from: SirPeebles on January 08, 2017, 11:42:29 am

    How do I change the number of players for quick/good match?

You don't, and it isn't planned either (at least not short term).
Our plan is to improve the usefulness of the 'tables' to make it easier to find 3+ player matches.
(link: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14685.msg668213#msg668213)

Si is run by championship level tournament players, and it seems like they prefer what they know best. I've suggested a 2nd row of Quick/Good/Bot Match buttons for 3 players but got no response. Maybe if enough people ask for it it might happen someday but for now I'm not holding my breath.   

LibraryAdventurer

Yes, it'd really help if there were a way to sort the tables. IMO, by default it should be sorted by New games first, then completed games (where one of the original players may be waiting for a new opponent), then ongoing games last. And probably, there should be a button on the scorecard screen to mark the table as waiting for a new player (rather than just looking at the scorecard or leaving it on the scorecard screen for whatever reason).

I don't understand why there are so many tables that appear to be waiting for a player, then I join, and the host never starts the game. Why do people create a table and then go AWOL? (It does notify them if a player joins their table doesn't it?)

ffejselur

Quote from: LibraryAdventurer on 24 January 2017, 01:52:45 AMI don't understand why there are so many tables that appear to be waiting for a player, then I join, and the host never starts the game. Why do people create a table and then go AWOL? (It does notify them if a player joins their table doesn't it?)
I don't know if this accounts for all scenarios but consider this: someone (who maybe only wants to play bots) creates a table. They decide to take a break. From their perspective, why close the table when it's easier to come back whenever they want and pickup from wherever they left off? Why wouldn't they create a table then go AWOL? Most of the time, how would they even know if someone tried to join their table (if they even wanted someone to) if they're away from their device or have the sound muted while doing something else? I'm sure better sorting and labeling will improve this over time.

LibraryAdventurer

I'm talking about games marked as 'new' not just post-game.

Ingix

The problem is that there are many reasons to create a table where you do not want some "random stranger" to join, but which are still public (because there is no concept of a "private table" that is not seen by anyone yet).

Maybe you want to play with a bot, but want to try out specific cards or want to play with a mix of random Alchemy and Empire cards. Maybe you are waiting for some friends to join the table, but they are late.


sprocket science

I think the option to mark a table as private should be fairly simple to implement, but would eliminate all the tables intended for bot games, play with friends, or otherwise just sitting around.

Alternatively, make all tables private by default, and give the host a button to publish it.

Similar to the way you join as a spectator and have to press 'play', you could also give the host a 'play' button to go from setting up the table to play mode, that would at least eliminate the problem of creating a table and then going away.