19 Mar 07
Seeing how slow the site is becoming perhaps they should do what the guys down the road did and impose limits on games. Its too easy for people to start 1,000 games and then put the vacation flag. Wouldn't it take a day just to open and see what your opponent has moved if you had 1,000 games and the site was this slow?
19 Mar 07
1 edit
That is the problem of the guys with 1000 games, the site should not impose game limits on subscribers, that is what we pay the fee for. The people with a lot of games are not the reason the site is slow and they don't use that much more bandwidth, since they aren't displaying or playing all the games at once. Two people with 500 games would be much worse.
And as for moves per day, there are times when I've had 10 games in progress and been averaging far more moves/day than when I have 60-80 games in progress.
And if you have 1000 games, you don't move in all of the every day, it is a cycle usually. You'll notice people like galaxyshield play a lot of their games on a 7 day timeout or more.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by jsmithWhy would you open each game to see if someone moved, when it tells you right from your game page?
Seeing how slow the site is becoming perhaps they should do what the guys down the road did and impose limits on games. Its too easy for people to start 1,000 games and then put the vacation flag. Wouldn't it take a day just to open and see what your opponent has moved if you had 1,000 games and the site was this slow?
So what if someone makes 1000 games and goes on vacation, I'm not following that point.
P-
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitA site that started not long ago has a feature where for every x moves you make you get to start another game. Having moved enough moves one guy started 1000 games then when the load became too much went on vacation. Still moving in some games he continued to start more games but was on vacation in the others. Finally he started a new account and did the same thing. As that site has few members, it was agonising for his opponents.
Why would you open each game to see if someone moved, when it tells you right from your game page?
So what if someone makes 1000 games and goes on vacation, I'm not following that point.
P-
He finally started a 3rd account before the dozy admin noticed but you can tell how out of hand things can become if a site has few members/or is new.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by jsmithWell, that would be an ass thing to do... but what does it have to do with how slow the site is now?
A site that started not long ago has a feature where for every x moves you make you get to start another game. Having moved enough moves one guy started 1000 games then when the load became too much went on vacation. Still moving in some games he continued to start more games but was on vacation in the others. Finally he started a new account and did the same ...[text shortened]... noticed but you can tell how out of hand things can become if a site has few members/or is new.
We've had this user already, DustnRogers I think. He'd start tons of games, promise his services to a 'sucker clan'... people would warn the sucker not to take him on.... he'd swear he's changed... and next thing you know he's got hundreds of timed out games and vanishes again.
Anyone can be an ass, and there are hundreds of ways to be an ass.
P-
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitThe site's bandwidth is being eaten up so a limit on games would reduce this. Ever heard of the slashdot effect? How many users with high game loads do you think it would take to consume resources?
Well, that would be an ass thing to do... but what does it have to do with how slow the site is now?
.......
Anyone can be an ass, and there are hundreds of ways to be an ass.
P-
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by jsmithHow much server load does a subscription buy? How much server load have you paid for?
The site's bandwidth is being eaten up so a limit on games would reduce this. Ever heard of the slashdot effect? How many users with high game loads do you think it would take to consume resources?
19 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by jsmithDo you seriously think that the number of games has ANYTHING to do with the bandwidth being consumed?
The site's bandwidth is being eaten up so a limit on games would reduce this. Ever heard of the slashdot effect? How many users with high game loads do you think it would take to consume resources?
The number of HTTP requests to the server is what counts and that has nothing to do (at all) with how many games anyone has going at once.
[edit: Yeah ... what Xanthos said.]
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by jsmithI've got a better idea: Drop all non-subs who have used the site for more than 2 weeks.
The site's bandwidth is being eaten up so a limit on games would reduce this. Ever heard of the slashdot effect? How many users with high game loads do you think it would take to consume resources?
20 Mar 07
Originally posted by jsmithI take up as much bandwidth as a chess player when I'm bouncing around the forums. I click links into pages, read profiles, etc... all this while a guy with 1000 games goes into a game, and spends 50 or so seconds thinking... and clicks move.
The site's bandwidth is being eaten up so a limit on games would reduce this. Ever heard of the slashdot effect? How many users with high game loads do you think it would take to consume resources?
Should we limit total access to the site? Monitor how much bandwidth each user is sucking up? There are users with 6 games going that use up more bandwidth just perusing chess games and profiles... or the forums.
P-
