lidraughts.org

Bullet is maybe too fast

For now, I still agree with my earlier statement about the one-click captures.

About the numbers:
Some people are for and against the idea of one-click captures. It would be very interesting when 500, or rather 2000 players would tell their thoughts. But just looking at numbers, the opinions are not significant.

@Roitelet
To be honest, the notion of listening seems odd to me and unnecessary. Listening is not the same as doing what someone wants.

Auto-captures
I think it would be very funny to make positions with 12 forced captures in a row. You should than build in a delay or something to not get freaked out. But no, I think we all agree on this one so far.

It seems everybody is in agreement on autocaptures being a bad idea, at least that's something :)

It is a design choice to add one-click captures or not, this is by no means a necessity. We have made the choice not to do that early on, and almost everybody seems happy with that. As far as I'm concerned, the most important reason is still the layer of skill that is removed from the game. It is true that everybody gets the same advantage as Tim noted, but that is also the problem: if everyone becomes equally fast, being able to play fast is less of an edge, while it should be an edge in faster games.

Also consider that if nobody wants the confusion of half the board disappearing at once, the one-click moves would still require one click per captured piece. This is actually not very different from the situation now, as you only have to drag the first capture, after which you can just click the remaining target squares one by one. But the way things are now it is more fluent and consistent, for example in time trouble: the same way of capturing works in all situations, while clicks would not (after which you'd have to drag the piece anyway).

@RoepStoep

Your most important reason is, I think, not valid. Your main argument is about dexterity. Well, we are talking about the game of draughts, right. Draughts has not been invented as a dexterity game, it is a game of skill.

I am absolutely fine with people enjoying bullet games and even that dexterity can be a skill in that context, but it should never trump arguments closer to the essence of the game. So the dexterity argument should always come second to any other argument like the ease of use, fairness, refereeing issues, correct rules, up-to-date practice (+0 is not used by FMJD), endgame playability...

Again, your main argument makes it look like you want to build bulletdraughts.com not lidraughts.com.

@BumperBalloonCars
I am obviously being provocative here by saying you don't listen. It just saddens me so much to see the ugly old-style time control make a comeback. It's so outdated, I am angry that you guys are promoting it on an otherwise very modern platform.

DRAUGHTS IS NOT A DEXTERITY GAME. :)

That argument only applies to bullet and faster, which is for a large(r) part a dexterity game. With longer timecontrols there is no need for dexterity, and things are more or less the same either way. I guess we'll just have to disagree on this...

"That argument only applies to bullet and faster, which is for a large(r) part a dexterity game. With longer timecontrols there is no need for dexterity, and things are more or less the same either way."

I can't really relate to this. While it's true that in slower games (as well as training/study/analysis) I have plenty of time to fully perform a move, it's still an inconvenience and I'd rather not have to do it.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.

Reconnecting