I second this. To elaborate: Highlight the current players turn. I often find myself cycling through the games just to get an overview of when it's gonna be my turn. For this to work the order of the factions listed on the overview would also have to match the current turn order in that game. Also another suggestion: If it is your turn, show the timer on the overview so you know which games needs your immediate attention. I feel this is really nice when you have alot of games going. I accidentally dropped out of mine cause i didn't realize i was running low on time (exclusively my own fault, i know), but this would assist the players to prioritize.

Thx for reply. The current 'timers' are OK... rather I worry about the risk of canceling the whole game, e.g. before its end. I understand that the game currently must be over due to one player inactivity, so that others do not score points in 'elo system' - but this solution is also punishing those who wanted to play. My sugestion for example: others can finish the game (like it was a few days ago). As a normal game (with elo), or: they can finish but the match is no longer classified (elo). or the system asks the others if they also want to quit the game

Yeah we were talking about this in a game the other day. I wouldn't mind a "see how that looks" button or something.

@baldoo You're quite right about this. I think most players in here have had a bad experience in trying to host a live game (including myself). It's hard to find people who are commited to a live game when the platform does not fully support it yet. Some changes would need to be made. Probably the most important one is not auto-starting the game when a room is full. Instead make every player check a checkbox once the room is full to indiciate everyone is ready for a live game. Even then, it's still difficult due to the simple fact there are not that many players on here yet. So even finding the players would take some time in itself. The most efficient way right now is to organize it directly with the players. There is place for it in the forums, but it's not very active or even a good platform for arranging live games. As @Babbuc49 mentioned discord is more suited. If anyone wants to join here the link to my discord server: https://discord.gg/SVVeAkY

I would play live too. I think its easier to achieve it with 2 player at first time. When would you play? I can get to it near anytime. Thanks

I support Gyuri's idea about blitz timers. I know some players would like to play real-time games, which is hypothetically not even impossible - however not enforceable - with the current settings on the site. Even with the strictest settings what all we can hope for is other players' willingness to play real-time, which hardly leads to the desired outcome, so games stuck, get frustrating and last several days as opposed to ~2 hrs.

It should be mostly fixed now. Yes it was due to a big update (testing 6nimmt), we had to make some changes in regard to game/site interaction. And it worked on chrome! ... ^^' Anyway it should be alright now.

@coyotte508 Thank you very much - no drops since early games where didn´t realize on launch the timer settings meant days per game not days per round ;). No more drops for me - haven´t dropped a Snelman game in 155 finished matches :P

Ok thank you, it's fixed now.

@coyotte508 said in Auction, Player Status, other changes & Plans: @trojanrabbit Do you have a more generic formula, for games with 5, 6, ... 10 players? Maybe something like K = K * 3 / (N + 1), where N is the number of players? That would give the winner a global K of K * 3 * (N - 1) / (N + 1), tending towards a max of 3 times the elo gain. (It fits with your example: 60 for 2p -> 45 for 3p -> 36 for 4p). Yes, that is the formula I use. It's a pretty good fit up to 5 players. Haven't done experiments with more than that.

I second this! ( I think i have a total of 5 or 6 qic lost with baltaks on this site...) and i would add as well warning o f overshoot income ( gaining power more than you can cycle or more k than the max etc. etc.) to remind people of converting if they can and maybe more importantly a confirm button after choosing passing booster, since it's the only step in the game were it doesn't ask you to confirm and although it's rare misclicks happen, esp when playing from mobile.

When you take this action, immediately take a “Build a Mine” action. You get the shown number of free terraforming steps to make a planet habitable. If you take the two-step action, but need only one step, the second step is lost. You can pay ore for additional terraforming steps, but you cannot combine this action with another action. Technically, it's a legal move. He wasted his power, but he probably used the QIC needed for the gaiaforming. (Can easily be checked in the advanced log). I agree, maybe a warning would have prevented him from wasting the action.

Thanks for the quick fix!

To be entirely fair there are actually situations of which you'd want more buildings in your federation than necessary which is the 'Buildings in federations' final scoring... But given how situational that is i'd say rather assist players in making an optimal federation instead. Personally i don't see any issues with the satelites FS. For me it only offers another level of planning since you want your last federation to be as 'long' as possible, which forces you to focus more on getting additional power tokens and even expanding further away. These just adds to the variability of the game since you now need to approach the game another way to score optimally.

Came to the forums to address this issue specifically. Colow wheel when choosing factions is so useful. Only just noticed this minor inconvenience in the game so far as i have only gotten as far as placing initial mines.. Otherwise seems like a great implementation of the game.

@cneessen I remember reading somewhere that the conversion could be done at the very end of the game, so charging power does matter in Gaia Project, even after the final pass.

@Pandevmonium Thank you, fixed!