the rule atm is if you leave during season you can't play for half of it

and no worries

thats the way it should be!

yeah, was a stupid idea but without feedback none of these ideas (whole clan league) would be existent

Wasn't stupid. It's a legitimate concern. And my point number 1 earlier may have been wrong. I will probably rephrase the rules again and define a "free agent" as someone who started the season without a clan/ someone who is without a clan due to the clan going under. Free agent is not defined anywhere.

The idea is that if you start with a clan, you can only play for another clan after the transfer window.

Yeah thats what my understading of the rule was but well you lot are the experts so I wanted to see

also add seb, If an individual has not played a cup match for another clan that person is eligible for the cup providing they add them to clan league team (if eligible for league or not)

just 2 captains asked us and thought we should state it in the rules, i know it says no transfer window for cup but to explain better

To state for the record, I am quite happy with the way the fixtures/results are done on the website. I am waiting now for a "done" so i can copy and paste into my thread without having to do any editing or otherwise.

yeah ill update fixtures shortly, ill do teamlists first then results

Answer:


You are however allowed to sub a player out of one game type and into another game type. So an orig player and an arc player can swap for each other.
However, one arc player can not swap fixtures with the other arc player, unless there is a time zone issue and both captains agree.

need a ruling on time limits didn't think it was needed but now it clearly does

what i propose is 20-40 seconds < 20 seconds too fast > 40 seconds too slow.

would help if players can agree beforehand however

by the way i don't want to force a certain time limit but if it stops the disagreements i will.

Edited at 12:29 Fri 25/03/11 (GMT)

hi dgen,

I think in clan league/cup matches, the default (without exception) should be 20secs (no more and no less). When players setup matches, the person being invited is accepting the terms of the game (i.e. 15 secs, 20 secs etc) when they click 'yes' to accept the invite. The main problem with not having this requirement in place leaves ppl open to losing players contesting the result of a given game (saying the duration was either too short or too long), which isn't fair as things stand.

Laters m8e

well if you decide to replay you accept that previous frame is negated at all costs (e.g time, how far in frame, breaks, lag, disconnect etc).

Pathetic to agree to a set time limit..As long as players agree it should be 20 minimum.

Don't have time to discuss it all right now.
For this specific case, the rules clearly state that games must be between 20 and 40 seconds. That is what the rules say right now, so anything outside of those limits should really be void.
We can change the rules for the future so that players can explicitly (meaning by pm, not just by clicking yes) agree to a time limit outside of those areas.
For the specific case coolwater vs shooter, I would have to say shooter gets the frame, since the rules are clearly in his favor (however unfair that may seem to some).

Ah see thats where us Poolers fail because i though it was a 20 sec limit not 20-40 seconds haha but i think the 20-40 second rule is a good one

As it is now, games must be between 20 and 40 seconds! If people want the rule changed, we can discuss it here, but as of now, you should go by the rules.

A question for the defaults team.....

As logging into the game window is rated more highly than browsing in terms of defaults.....

what is the difference between browsing waiting for your opponent to come online and sitting in the game room waiting?

I didnt do any of the defaults...But I have always said what good is it being online if your doing nothing to get the game played or organise a time to play.

if you mean because of crazy_daves default, he browsed 15 times which got him 1 point, and tim had 100+ on both game times and browsing time so what would you do?

immense time, vs not bad time who wins

also not many messages was sent between the 2 players.

we always favoured in game time over browsing, not sure the exact reason but we counted browsing which if we didn't dave wouldn't have got any points at all.

Messages are clearly the most important factor.
If we don't have messages, all we can go by is in-game and browsing time.
The defaults team obviously has no idea what you're actually doing when you are browsing. You could have the page open and be watching a video. Anyone can keep the page open while at work, so browsing is less valuable than actually playing the game.
It's not an exact science, but it is the only factor we have to differentiate between players.

On another somewhat related note, I judge the defaults by looking for signs that someone made less of an effort than another player to get it played.
There was a discussion on one of the games, where one player had 50-odd hours in-game time, the other player about 13 hours. I said 4-2 in that case. I felt 13 hours is not a terrible effort and any more punishment than -1 would've been harsh.
If there was a case of 1 player at 150 hours and another at 75, I would say 3-3, because you can't punish someone for being online loads.
I agree with mooney. The problem however is that game time is the only thing we have to go on.