Jump to content


Photo

lost games due to cutoff


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 ICanMakeUFamous

ICanMakeUFamous

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 10 November 2013 - 03:42 AM

I was in the beginning of 2 games and lost due to cutoff. This place is beginning to be a joke!!!!



#2 Deschacht

Deschacht

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Sergeant

Posted 16 November 2013 - 12:27 AM

Same thing happened to me.  I was leading the game(player Admiral Ûtzefüts and player Marshalluis). While I fortunally was winning it seamed someone refreshed my browser.  It's like you put on F5-function button.  I went back to the starting screen of stratego.com.  I lost two games like this.  Too bad!



#3 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 16 November 2013 - 12:50 AM

Same thing happened to me.  I was leading the game(player Admiral Ûtzefüts and player Marshalluis). While I fortunally was winning it seamed someone refreshed my browser.  It's like you put on F5-function button.  I went back to the starting screen of stratego.com.  I lost two games like this.  Too bad!

 

That sounds like you might have had a bad connection. 


How can I help you?

#4 craypletter

craypletter

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 16 November 2013 - 10:17 PM

Just a note to refer to my postings in the topic 'Are you kidding me', under 'Feature requests'.

 

I think those postings are more suitable as bug report.

(I didn't see this topic 'lost games due to cutoff' before.)

 

See: http://forum.strateg...you-kidding-me/



#5 Deschacht

Deschacht

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Sergeant

Posted 18 November 2013 - 01:02 AM

I'm sure there was connection.  Every time I play i'am connected wireless and with cable. I always check my connection immediatly when sth happens. When It happens next time i will post again.

Thank you for your quick answer.



#6 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:20 AM

Sometimes when I am on a bad connection, I see that "refresh" like flash and experience. Though I eventually remain connected, the latency/lag goes up so high that the interface just disconnects you (given how poor the connection quality is). This could be one explanation for the loss - and seeming experience of still being connected after.


How can I help you?

#7 cron16

cron16

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Captain

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:30 AM

My internet is fine on other sites but I keep getting kicked out of games.



#8 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,649 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Marshal

Posted 19 November 2013 - 07:21 AM

I was in the beginning of 2 games and lost due to cutoff. This place is beginning to be a joke!!!!

 

ICMUF, I have heard conflicting things from various people on the site.  But I understand the system will let you back in once you've been disconnected, and that you can then resume your same game without penalty, as long as you return within the 2:30 time frame.  Did it not work like this for you?  

 

Do you think It would be nice if the system only docked and rewarded players, say, quarter points if a disconnect happens in the first five minutes of a game and the one party, or both, were unable to return?  Pretty much a simple time into the game filter is the idea.  Perhaps make it half points to seven minutes, or ten, and full thereafter?  This would at least benefit the early disconnected players.  

 

It's a thought.

 

GLS



i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#9 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 19 November 2013 - 04:34 PM

ICMUF, I have heard conflicting things from various people on the site.  But I understand the system will let you back in once you've been disconnected, and that you can then resume your same game without penalty, as long as you return within the 2:30 time frame.  Did it not work like this for you?  

 

Do you think It would be nice if the system only docked and rewarded players, say, quarter points if a disconnect happens in the first five minutes of a game and the one party, or both, were unable to return?  Pretty much a simple time into the game filter is the idea.  Perhaps make it half points to seven minutes, or ten, and full thereafter?  This would at least benefit the early disconnected players.  

 

It's a thought.

 

GLS

 

This will incentivize very aggressive lottoing and then disconnections if the marshal dies early on.


How can I help you?

#10 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,649 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Marshal

Posted 20 November 2013 - 06:02 PM

This will incentivize very aggressive lottoing and then disconnections if the marshal dies early on.

 

LTG, you make a decent point in saying this will "incentivize aggressive lottoing", as I could see that occurring.  If the computer could tell a purposeful disconnect from an accidental one, that would be the true answer.  (In any case of purposeful disconnect, I would ding the offender TWICE his ELO point loss.)  But short of this ability being available to us, I would restate that under my proposal that the ELO effects of winning and losing any particular match would be only partial and because of the TIME CONSTRAINTS perhaps the lottoing wouldn't be as bad as you say.  We're only talking 5-10 minutes at the beginning of the match, maximum, and it could be made shorter to any number decided upon.  But I have to agree that things would tend to increase as you say.  

 

I was trying to come up with an answer for the accidental disconnect problem that ICMUF brought up, so let's see...

 

What if we augment my initial proposal in this way.  We take away the incentive for the inferior-ranked player.  We make it so that if the inferior player is disconnected, he will gain nothing and lose full points, just as now.  But if the SUPERIOR ranked player is disconnected in the 5-10 minute maximum time frame he will receive the benefit of only the Quarter Point, then later Half Point dings for losing the match if it were completed fully.  

 

I would even offer that we should stipulate that the rank difference be 100 points or more before this "benefit" to the higher ranked person were allowed.  And even so, it is only a benefit for the first few minutes of the game.  If ICMUF is disconnected from a game 30 minutes long that he is destined to win, then this idea does not address that.  Perhaps, therefore, it is simply more trouble than it is worth.  As I said, the real answer is for the computer to be able to discern an accidental from a purposeful disconnect.  Are we anywhere near being able to do that?

 

LTG, what do you think?

 

GLS



i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#11 ICanMakeUFamous

ICanMakeUFamous

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 20 November 2013 - 07:42 PM

I was booted the log in screen and i logged back in immediately, so i was definitely under the 2:30 window. The only problem i would have with the quarter point system is, that someone will do that intentionally just to lose a fraction of the points instead.



#12 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 21 November 2013 - 05:16 PM

LTG, you make a decent point in saying this will "incentivize aggressive lottoing", as I could see that occurring.  If the computer could tell a purposeful disconnect from an accidental one, that would be the true answer.  (In any case of purposeful disconnect, I would ding the offender TWICE his ELO point loss.)  But short of this ability being available to us, I would restate that under my proposal that the ELO effects of winning and losing any particular match would be only partial and because of the TIME CONSTRAINTS perhaps the lottoing wouldn't be as bad as you say.  We're only talking 5-10 minutes at the beginning of the match, maximum, and it could be made shorter to any number decided upon.  But I have to agree that things would tend to increase as you say.  

 

I was trying to come up with an answer for the accidental disconnect problem that ICMUF brought up, so let's see...

 

What if we augment my initial proposal in this way.  We take away the incentive for the inferior-ranked player.  We make it so that if the inferior player is disconnected, he will gain nothing and lose full points, just as now.  But if the SUPERIOR ranked player is disconnected in the 5-10 minute maximum time frame he will receive the benefit of only the Quarter Point, then later Half Point dings for losing the match if it were completed fully.  

 

I would even offer that we should stipulate that the rank difference be 100 points or more before this "benefit" to the higher ranked person were allowed.  And even so, it is only a benefit for the first few minutes of the game.  If ICMUF is disconnected from a game 30 minutes long that he is destined to win, then this idea does not address that.  Perhaps, therefore, it is simply more trouble than it is worth.  As I said, the real answer is for the computer to be able to discern an accidental from a purposeful disconnect.  Are we anywhere near being able to do that?

 

LTG, what do you think?

 

GLS

 

It is a creative idea. My concern is that some average-plus players at our level (i.e., colonel and higher) still love to lotto indiscriminately. It's not the complete newbie lottoer that concerns me, but rather the experienced lottoer who may still be the superior ranked player - but willing to lotto aggressively for a big win and a discounted loss if early on their lotto fails. This, in my opinion, disincentivizes good quality play where lottoing is done intelligently - if ever. 

 

In other words, I am not sure the lotto concern applies only to lower ranked players; in fact, I suspect it is the medium ranked players that are most dangerous with any system that awards a discounted / reduced penalty for an early disconnection.


How can I help you?

#13 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 22 November 2013 - 03:19 PM

It is a creative idea. My concern is that some average-plus players at our level (i.e., colonel and higher) still love to lotto indiscriminately. It's not the complete newbie lottoer that concerns me, but rather the experienced lottoer who may still be the superior ranked player - but willing to lotto aggressively for a big win and a discounted loss if early on their lotto fails. This, in my opinion, disincentivizes good quality play where lottoing is done intelligently - if ever. 

 

In other words, I am not sure the lotto concern applies only to lower ranked players; in fact, I suspect it is the medium ranked players that are most dangerous with any system that awards a discounted / reduced penalty for an early disconnection.

 

Personally, I'd be more inclined to have a review committee put in place (or leverage the existing Justice Committee). If enough screenshot evidence is collected over time to demonstrate that a player is repeatedly abusing the disconnect option, then a progression from warnings to bans might be in order. Even though this requires more effort, I feel this might allow for a more nuanced understanding of situations than a computer may be able to recognize - and avoid the perverse incentives generated by a tiered disconnection penalty structure.


How can I help you?

#14 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,649 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Marshal

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:12 AM

Personally, I'd be more inclined to have a review committee put in place (or leverage the existing Justice Committee). If enough screenshot evidence is collected over time to demonstrate that a player is repeatedly abusing the disconnect option, then a progression from warnings to bans might be in order. Even though this requires more effort, I feel this might allow for a more nuanced understanding of situations than a computer may be able to recognize - and avoid the perverse incentives generated by a tiered disconnection penalty structure.

 

LTG, I guess the only problem with that is people usually aren't taking screenshots of disconnecting opponents, but rather cheaters.  Is there any way that it is possible to tell the difference between a purposeful disconnect and an accidental one?  I mean, it may not be possible on this site at this time, but is it possible?

 

Thanks,

 

GLS



i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#15 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 24 November 2013 - 07:31 AM

LTG, I guess the only problem with that is people usually aren't taking screenshots of disconnecting opponents, but rather cheaters.  Is there any way that it is possible to tell the difference between a purposeful disconnect and an accidental one?  I mean, it may not be possible on this site at this time, but is it possible?

 

Thanks,

 

GLS

Gary,

 

It would be practically impossible to judge if someone quit on purpose or not if it was a near even game.  If the game is near beginning or middle of game and suddenly the guy who left the game because he was suddenly a scout down, can we assume he quit because he was mad he lost a scout?  Of course not and perhaps he did have a legit disconnection problem.  

 

Like Learning said, the quantity of quits would be an easier indicator to judge than quality of the screen shot showing a quit.  Still this is a very touchy situation and one we'd have to be extra careful to even to consider judging. 



#16 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 24 November 2013 - 04:59 PM

LTG, I guess the only problem with that is people usually aren't taking screenshots of disconnecting opponents, but rather cheaters.  Is there any way that it is possible to tell the difference between a purposeful disconnect and an accidental one?  I mean, it may not be possible on this site at this time, but is it possible?

 

Thanks,

 

GLS

 

Sometimes a degree of inference is required. Some of the best screenshot examples we have received show a clear time series in which an individual disconnects then reconnects and reiterates requests for ties and pauses. That is almost certainly an intentional disconnect, especially if the pattern persists.

 

The context on the board also influences how a disconnection may be perceived.


How can I help you?

#17 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,649 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Marshal

Posted 25 November 2013 - 01:02 AM

Sometimes a degree of inference is required. Some of the best screenshot examples we have received show a clear time series in which an individual disconnects then reconnects and reiterates requests for ties and pauses. That is almost certainly an intentional disconnect, especially if the pattern persists.

 

The context on the board also influences how a disconnection may be perceived.

 

LTG, thanks.  I can see this would be a touchy area to judge as M.G. puts it.  But my question was if it is possible through the computer to discern whether someone was cutting out on purpose or if it were a server issue for one or the other players?

 

I appreciate the fact you can look at a series of screen shots and perhaps make a determination as to the nature of the disconnection, but I guess I am trying to see if there is some way of  this being made 100% not subjective through the computer somehow.  I don't know how these things actually work.  Is there a check that can be quickly done at the point of someone's ISP which would determine the nature of the communication break?   Is this possible, do you think?

 

Thank you.

 

GLS



i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#18 LearningThisGame

LearningThisGame

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 25 November 2013 - 03:44 PM

LTG, thanks.  I can see this would be a touchy area to judge as M.G. puts it.  But my question was if it is possible through the computer to discern whether someone was cutting out on purpose or if it were a server issue for one or the other players?

 

I appreciate the fact you can look at a series of screen shots and perhaps make a determination as to the nature of the disconnection, but I guess I am trying to see if there is some way of  this being made 100% not subjective through the computer somehow.  I don't know how these things actually work.  Is there a check that can be quickly done at the point of someone's ISP which would determine the nature of the communication break?   Is this possible, do you think?

 

Thank you.

 

GLS

 

Great question. 

 

In theory, from a technical perspective, one - with the right tools and knowledge - should be able to track and see if there were a game server-side problem resulting in the disconnection.

 

The bigger challenge, though, is dealing with those who intentionally close their browser window vs. those whose ISP is unstable and results in them getting disconnected (while the game server remains fine). From my IT experience (granted limited, but more than the average corporate super-user/IT admin), I would say there isn't an obvious or easy way to distinguish between these two examples. In that event, I think we need to bring in the human judgement factor and minimize mistakes or biases by having a robust group of independent evaluators/judges. (I suppose in theory the site could immediately pick up an IP address upon a game start and then try to run a continuous ping to that IP after a disconnection to see if there are still replies. This might suggest an intentional disconnect if hits are maintained, but there are some other issues that arise from this approach.)

 

If anyone feels differently or has a better idea on how (technically or non-technically) to distinguish between my two examples, above, I am all ears (eyes?)!


How can I help you?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users