[fred]

runewell, on Apr 13 2010, 12:10 AM, said:

I think I've mentioned this elsewhere before, but the new software lacks chat and therefore a capability for unknowns to arrange and play team matches, requiring me to stay on the old version, which I would happily forgo except for this one item. 

It would be nice if there were a facility for seeing people interested in a random team game.  The current format is as follows:
1. One person shouts out to the lobby the intention to run a match.
2. Any number of people (from not enough to way too many) respond.
3. The director has to key in everyone's names, and in the minute it takes to do that, sometimes people go off and do something else.
4. Sometimes the director now has to ask again for more names.

Team matches are an important part of BBO culture, I think there should be an area where people sign up to play a match.  You could have options to match all experts, all advanced players, or combinations.  Or someone could arrange a specific match and people could see it and sign up to play themselves. 

This might be deserving of its own thread.  Any thoughts?  Or is this too small a subculture to worth the attention?

Doing something to improve the process of starting team matches in the web-client has been near the top of our list of things to do for at least a year.

Unfortunately it seems that every time we get close to attacking this problem, something else surfaces that requires our attention.

I can't make any predictions as to when we will actually do the necessary work in this area, but I am confident that, when the time comes, what we produce will be much better than what is available now in either client.

Thanks for your patience.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[babalu1997]

i still remain in the windows version.

the web version is ok if i have prearranged to meet a partner or opponents.

sometimes i log on to wait for a partner and want to play at the main club till the partner comes, or, sometimes i want to play in the main club when there is no partner available.


as the software is running, the only way to join a table is to use the help me find a game version, which invariably takes me on an acid trip of bids and play. the only other alternative are the 00 locked tables, but those people are on acid often too.

by the time i look up some profiles, and having no means to at least scan the skill level or system played the table is full.

with the windows version, after a few misses i can find somewhere to play.

[Ant590]

babalu1997, on May 8 2010, 03:11 PM, said:

the only way to join a table is to use the help me find a game version

Have you tried selecting "list all tables", rather than "help me find a game"?

[babalu1997]

y i sure did, but because the screen does not refresh the seat is is occupied byt the time i click

either the hmfg folsk beat me to it or it is no longer available when permission is required

the reason i says this is

a newcomer logging on for the fst time at bbo will likely run scared as they might not want to jump directly into a tournament

[0 carbon]

fred, on Mar 10 2010, 10:52 AM, said:

0 carbon, on Mar 10 2010, 04:05 AM, said:

14. For bidding tables, why not keep previous Deal Source for each player.

Can you please explain what you mean by this?

...

Most of the "why's" you ask have a answer. Some of them are good answers (like user interface consistency), but some of the answers have to do with either limitations imposed by Flash or the backend (server) architecture of BBO.

14 -- I always have to paste in my "Deal Source" every time I log on. Why not store it in a flash cookie and restore it in the Deal Source box when I set up a bidding table.

It would be nice to now which suggestions are "impossible" (=difficult).

As for UI consistency, I think all my suggestions are consistent with the current UI. Which aren't? And why? It seems to me half my suggestions enhance consistency!

For example, having the "substitutes" button work for one displayed tourney and not for the displayed list of (eg free) tourneys is inconsistent.

It is inconsistent for some columns to have extra space and others too small.

It is inconsistent to show a column resizing cursor which has no effect.

[0 carbon]

helene_t, on Mar 12 2010, 06:29 AM, said:

0 carbon, on Mar 10 2010, 05:05 AM, said:

13. Why is there a description column for tourneys or tables? It's always empty.

You can enter a description. For example "Se habla espanol" or "We play strong pass". To help prospective players decide whether to join this table.

It is indeed rarely used. Maybe it would be an idea once in a while to put the hint to use the description field more often on the daily news.

If I'm in a tourney, how do I enter a description?

Why not put the current board number there, eg, 2/12?

tOM

[0 carbon]

In the "Who's online", it would be nice to be able to sort by status. The default sort by name is tedious when you have hundreds of friends.

Why not show the full status, eg, "Playing Tournament(TDBluff 02/12)" which would be more useful when deciding tourney invites.

Why not another tab, "Available friends" (ie, not playing) to assist invite choosing.

Also, how can I find other players playing precision? Or from St. Lucia? Or speaking Esperanto? Why not a search function for profiles?

[fred]

A new version of the web-client has now been released so I am closing this thread.

There is a new comments thread here:

Link to new web-client comments thread

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com