Hi there! I just thought of a solution that could work in many cases according to runners during an end. Most of the players that run during an end do so before the player with the hammer can finish his last shot. In that case the end could be finished normally because the runner already has played all his rocks. Even if the running player leaves the game early his opponent could do his last shot. Today I had an example where my opponent told me about problems with his connection. He left (or lost connection, i couldnt figure out)before I could play my last shot. I got 3 points on the scoreboard. The situation was as follows: He had one rock nearest to the middle. Then I had 4 of my rocks next best. My rock was on the way to get my opponent's rock out of the house. I could have scored 4 or 5. If I missed my shot he would have scored 1. The probability to score 3 with a normally played last shot was not very high. So with a normally finished end you can 1) avoid the anger about runners that leave the game before the last rock is played. 2) protect players who lose connection from losing points if they are up to steal 1 or more. In my view that only makes sense when the running player (or player who lost connection) has already played all his rocks.
suggestion for programming the game
Posted in
Curling
suggestion for programming the game
the only way to solve this agonizing problem is to put a minimum of 4 ends any body leaving before 4 ends looses game points plus 4 = 8 .I think the problem with game freezing is your routre I disconected my router and went direct tn internet hooh up and now have no problem with freezing or any problem at all with game play
Why 4 ends? Help me to understand your way of thinking. In my opinion it doesnt matter how many ends are played, as long as both players have had the hammer. An exception should be for games, where a good player is able to steal in every end and the player with the hammer is not able to score a point. When you set the minimum number of ends to 4 and a player loses connection in the first end then he loses the one end that he started and could not finsh plus the 3 ends he never had a chance to play. Therefore I think it's very good that the possibility to set the number of ends is voluntary. So a player with a bad connection has the possibility not to play opponents with a mimimum of 10 ends. My suggestion was meant for a single end, which could be finished normally. It is only for situations before the last shot of an end. The running player has done all his shots and the player with the hammer cannot do his last shot any more. I think we should give him the possibility to play his last rock. It doesn't matter if the other player is still here or not.
Your suggestion makes a lot of sense Dennis. It could apply to
any
end where one player leaves, for whatever reason, before the last stone can be thrown; 1st end, 2nd...10th or extra! I would imagine this might be easy to program, since already if one player runs out of time the other continues until all his/her stones have been delivered. I don't follow the suggestion of a minimum game length set to 4; 2 would be my choice, and subscribers and many non-subscribers can do this themselves. It is possible to select the minimum as 1, but I don't understand why.
Thanks for your constructive suggestion Dennis27. Unfortunately this is not as easy to implement as it seems, since an end is technically finished and the result is reported to the server when one of the player quits in the current system. Anyway, hopefully it can be implemented sooner or later. OP
Dennis27 you sound like this game means everything to you. Calm down dude:) Its just a game