i for one will listen to our ai overlords good info kallisti

@waffle, I think you're right, playing only 1 or 2 games simul causes no harm to anyone else. The worst thing you could possibly do is can a high rating & take #1 spot, and then play 1 game at a time super slowly to minimize chance of lowering the rating. But who cares? Playing (and winning) often in the ladder is rewarded, so 2 equal players (same WR), with 1 player who plays 5 games simul and finishes them quickly will rise beyond a player who plays 1 game at a time slowly

@Rento, I'm aware that the settings I suggested don't exist in the game - but I think they would solve the issue of disabling stallers while enabling real players from having extra time every now and then when they need it

@Tacky, he does care, but unfortunately he defaults to his own preference in lieu of clear & substantial evidence of a unified community, and often it only takes 1 or 2 voices of dissent to nullify the community opinion (no longer unified) being put forward; and here we have many of us saying "more time please" but then you have people like Xeno saying "no, shorter is better", so his 1 voice will likely nullify our opinions on this beyond what he's already done with the additional 12h on the main timer

Tbh, that +12h was unexpected before even the poll happens, interested to see how much of a difference that makes

Sorry, sorry, it didn't understand the banked time and changed the response:

1v1 ladder:
Time per turn: 24-36 hours
Initial banked time: 48-72 hours

2v2 ladder:
Time per turn: 36-48 hours
Initial banked time: 72-96 hours

3v3 ladder:
Time per turn: 48-72 hours
Initial banked time: 96-144 hours

@Rento

The current choice is: 0, 3, 4 or 5. I don't get the logic here

▶ Now there are rewards that being distributed weekly. Fizzer doesn't want people to sit at the top for a week and stall games as much as possible (to guarantee top rewards for that week). More games mean more frequent adjustment in ratings. If top player deserves to stay at the top, they'll get next week's reward, if they don't deserve, they'll not be able to sit for that week's reward.

▶ Even though I understand Fizzer's perspective on this issue, I would prefer to be able to play 1 ladder game at a time even with being fully aware that some random guy can take my spot for 1/2 weeks.

---

@καλλιστηι

The scientifically optimal values for timers

▶ I know this is meant as a joke but just because ChatGPT says, it doesn't mean its scientific. Science is about methodologies / observations that provides observable, justifiable & consistent results which are objective and preferably having a strong causality.

I don't see the observations (experiments) ChatGPT has done, I don't see how his observations justifies that result and I don't see if his results are consistent with experiments made by other people

You do know that jokes are not to be taken seriously don't you?

Good point

Edited 6/8/2023 11:49:05

@3.1415926535
- Jokes are not written to be accurate. But that doesn't mean we can't put them in a realistic setting. When I see an inaccurate joke, I like to make it more accurate

I wouldn't trust a letter uttered by a bot.
Speaking of game length, I personally prefer playing with 2 days boot time and no banked. I think it's a nice compromise.