Toribash
Original Post
Playing this game is too much of a commitment
This is not much of a suggestion, more of a critique.

I believe that the main reason this game hasn't attracted more people is that you have to be unemployed or a kid to enjoy it. Any time you want to play Toribash, you can't click a button and start playing. You have to get in a server and wait. Let's say it has 5 players which sounds about average: you have to wait 5-10+ minutes every time you want to play. If you lose, which is more likely for a new player, back you go to the queue.
Playing a couple of <5m games could take you half an hour for no good reason.

I don't have any suggestion but I think this is by far the worst aspect of the game and should be given consideration.
Last edited by Dinis; Dec 11, 2019 at 09:16 PM.
Originally Posted by DrGonz View Post
Yeah man you just described QA

No he didn't. Even in a QA lobby, you have to wait a couple minutes between games if you lose; that's not what he said at all. He's suggesting that you shouldn't have to wait at all between games and, considering the length of a Toribash game, it seems like a fair suggestion. Even in QA, the queue system is flawed.
Last edited by ruby; 4 Days Ago at 09:38 PM.
Originally Posted by ruby View Post
No he didn't. Even in a QA lobby, you have to wait a couple minutes between games if you lose; that's not what he said at all. He's suggesting that you shouldn't have to wait at all between games and, considering the length of a Toribash game, it seems like a fair suggestion. Even in QA, the queue system is flawed.

Word you're right. Potentially have to wait at most 2 minutes in QA, given that it's very accelerated and regular dojo size. Doesn't seem like much of a "flaw" to me, but...

Unfortunately the criticism gives the impression that it come from a place of entitlement.
Additionally all that needs to be done is to ask a room if anyone wants to 1v1, and more often than not someone will.
They might claim that it's not a solution, but an alternative - at least I have an idea of what to do about impatience.
It isn't much of a fair suggestion, considering they don't offer any suggestion and there is a way to avoid waiting, but it's refused.
Just makes anyone taking that stance sound... unpleasant.

Unless someone can offer a suggestion it doesn't seem like much more than whining that they have to wait. Not trying to be rude, it just feels fairly obvious. Yes, you have to wait, it's a queue based system. Come up with a solution or an alternative, or grin and bear it.
Last edited by DrGonz; 4 Days Ago at 11:38 AM. Reason: new line bug
GrampaGonz

just like daddy. Thanks Tasaki.
Fair point, there haven't really been any suggestions so far--but that doesn't undermine the fact that the queue system does need to be changed (and, by the way, calling people unpleasant for recognising that something's wrong is an unreasonable stance to take).

Example: hosting an ETourney can be a bit of a hassle since, especially with a lot of players in the room, it can take a long time, which means two things:
-
  1. Staff's job is harder (more time spent, more moderation needed etc.)
  2. Players sit around for longer, which is boring
This sort of thing is fine in a bet server for example, since players at least have something to do. But in other servers, like public ABD or a tournament, it's a grand waste of time and I often see people leave for (I assume) that reason alone.

My suggestion would be that there needs to be some sort of option to run multiple games at once (probably more viable in TB Next, but still). In doing so, 4 players could play at once, which is a win-win for everyone.

Thoughts?

Edit: waiting for QA is of course an improvement on normal games, but waiting 2 minutes for a game that will also last two minutes isn't a great ratio. Compare it to, for example, League of Legends, where you queue for 5-10 minutes to play for 30+.

That, and sitting in a room with 3 other players sort of sacrifices the community vibe of sitting in a 20+ room.
Last edited by ruby; 4 Days Ago at 12:18 PM.
Originally Posted by ruby View Post
Fair point, there haven't really been any suggestions so far--but that doesn't undermine the fact that the queue system does need to be changed (and, by the way, calling people unpleasant for recognising that something's wrong is an unreasonable stance to take).

I understand and apologise for any rudeness; what I was saying is that it makes people sound unpleasant (entitled) to take such a stance without offering any suggestions, not that anyone who thinks it's a problem is unpleasant.

Originally Posted by ruby View Post
Example: hosting an ETourney can be a bit of a hassle since, especially with a lot of players in the room, it can take a long time, which means two things:
-
  1. Staff's job is harder (more time spent, more moderation needed etc.)
  2. Players sit around for longer, which is boring
This sort of thing is fine in a bet server for example, since players at least have something to do. But in other servers, like public ABD or a tournament, it's a grand waste of time and I often see people leave for (I assume) that reason alone.

My suggestion would be that there needs to be some sort of option to run multiple games at once (probably more viable in TB Next, but still). In doing so, 4 players could play at once, which is a win-win for everyone.

Thoughts?

I don't know about its feasibility in TBN or current TB, but I think if there are multiple games at once that would ultimately split staff's attention, making their job harder. Either there are two queues, or one queue, two matches at a time, but if anything off happens in the matches (op rt pls), it's more likely the staff would miss it.

Originally Posted by ruby View Post
Edit: waiting for QA is of course an improvement on normal games, but waiting 2 minutes for a game that will also last two minutes isn't a great ratio. Compare it to, for example, League of Legends, where you queue for 5-10 minutes to play for 30+.

That, and sitting in a room with 3 other players sort of sacrifices the community vibe of sitting in a 20+ room.

wanting to have faster queues and 20+ seems like a "can't have your cake and eat it too" situation.
Last edited by DrGonz; 4 Days Ago at 12:31 PM.
GrampaGonz

just like daddy. Thanks Tasaki.
Originally Posted by DrGonz View Post
wanting to have faster queues and 20+ seems like a "can't have your cake and eat it too" situation.

Imagine if the TB chat was like an MMOs. You have a server chat tab, you have a global chat tab, and then you can register friends and have a friends chat tab (friend could be in any server and still chat). Wouldn't that be awesome?

Maybe in TB next...
Originally Posted by DrGonz View Post
Word you're right. Potentially have to wait at most 2 minutes in QA, given that it's very accelerated and regular dojo size. Doesn't seem like much of a "flaw" to me, but...

Unfortunately the criticism gives the impression that it come from a place of entitlement.
Additionally all that needs to be done is to ask a room if anyone wants to 1v1, and more often than not someone will.
They might claim that it's not a solution, but an alternative - at least I have an idea of what to do about impatience.
It isn't much of a fair suggestion, considering they don't offer any suggestion and there is a way to avoid waiting, but it's refused.
Just makes anyone taking that stance sound... unpleasant.

Unless someone can offer a suggestion it doesn't seem like much more than whining that they have to wait. Not trying to be rude, it just feels fairly obvious. Yes, you have to wait, it's a queue based system. Come up with a solution or an alternative, or grin and bear it.

I frequently ask people to 1v1 in big rooms to skip the queue and I rarely have anyone join me. Only works with people you already know. Plus, that's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard. How can you draw entitlement from my post? "Word, you're right!", "at least I have an idea of what to do about impatience". It all sounds like projecting to me.
I'm saying we have the tools to cease waiting 10-20 minutes in a room. Lastly, I did make a suggestion you imbecile, re-read the thread. Post #5. Also, kindly suck my dick you bulletin board larper.


To anyone saying QA-ization is a solution: playing on a shorter timer is a different experience. I support the creation of quick::everything rooms, but I'm saying we can do more than just that.


Can you imagine if any other 1v1 game required you to be in a queue waiting out everyone else's match? Picture the idiocy.
The extreme solution would be to throw the current system in the trash and just force everyone into ranked and casual matchmaking. This also makes for fairer matches because of the elo system.

I only didn't say that suggestion initially because I know of the community's typical appeal to tradition met with watery excuses. The other suggestion, which is in the interest of keeping the current system, sounds reasonable to me:
1. user joins, for example, Public:Boxshu
2. there is a room chat
3. players get matched 1v1, collaterally, using a random seed in public rooms and, in tourneys, winners with winners.


You lose nothing.
Last edited by Dinis; 3 Days Ago at 08:20 PM.
Originally Posted by Dinis View Post
The extreme solution would be to throw the current system in the trash and just force everyone into ranked and casual matchmaking. This also makes for fairer matches because of the elo system.

Actually that sounds like a very good solution, there tend to be a good number of people in ranked. There would still be very short waits now and then, but compared to the current system it would be way better. I don't see why it's extreme, not like anyone would be forced into it.
-----
And I mean I'll suck your dick if you really want I guess, 1kk tc for torisex head? .5? .1??
Last edited by DrGonz; 3 Days Ago at 09:20 PM. Reason: <24 hour edit/bump
GrampaGonz

just like daddy. Thanks Tasaki.
I guess making "Quick" servers for all hot mods will be a solution. Yeah you will have to wait if this is lenshu, for example, but it's nothing compared to 8 ppl boxshu queue