So, on the reappearance of Seabee's bot:

When Seabee first put up his bot, it did not say in the rules that bots are not allowed here, but it's kind of an assumption in any game. It gives an advantage to a very small group of people. For instance, assuming AlfonZ is a separate person from Seabee, that means 2 out of 33 players (going by unique-sounding names, so it may be less than 33) know how to do that. And it doesn't look like the people who put up the bots are actually playing anyway. On top of that, with as few people playing as there are (and spread out over all the boards), drawing is sometimes the more entertaining course of action, and with a bot that searches out tax-holes, that kind of limits that.

I'm not sure how people feel on the other boards, but at the very least, removing it from board 16 would be enormously appreciated.

Tony, it's your game, what's your opinion?

How does everyone else feel about bots on the boards?

I agree with you, and I would even go further:
player-bots should be removed from ALL boards, except specifically designated boards (Board 15 and 4, where you already have redbot and HAL, plus maybe another small board).

I very much dislike the fact, that AlfonZ and Seabee do not play themselves additionally to their bots, which is another reason why we should forbid the use of bots.

AlfonZ even goes against the rules by using that bot on A4Q-Kingdom, where the use of bots is not allowed.


Also: the traffic they cause can not be in the interest of tony, because for bots you get paid nothing in ads.

If the use of bots does not get restricted to certain boards, I will leave after the current round of board 14. This fighting against non-players is simply far too annoying and not what I came for and liked in MMOSBG.
Also: redbot on board 15 is easy to win against, since his placing gets very slow once he reaches 1600 tiles. I don't know if that's intentional or a side effect of the placing routine, but it does make playing against redbot a lot more acceptable than playing against Seascript. Furthermore: Seascript is not recognisable as a bot on the first sight, only through observation. tony intended us to not use bots and add bots himself. We were not allowed to submit animated gifs as customs because he wanted to use animated gifs for bots.

I would propose the creation of a new rule: Bots only allowed on certain boards (B4, B15, and one normal small board?) and they must have a "blinking" custom. Otherwise, the accounts using bots should be deleted.


Edit: I created a poll on this subject. Alas, I could not do it in this thread, since on this phpBB-board, polls must be in the opening post.

On the subject of rules regarding the use of bots: on A4Q-MMOSBG there are non, but there is on A4Q-Kingdom:

(Link)

So, this indirectly allows the use of bots on A4Q-MMOSBG.

What if the "take" rules changed to increase the strategy involved. Like a small set of say 7 simple rules which summed up to a complex way in which a move could be made (based on the pattern of squares around the placement). This might make the game more strategic (possibly beyond the ability of a bot to play well like in the board game go).

Would be possible as well, but still. As long as there are tax-holes. players permanently online (like bots) will have a tremendous advantage. In the casse of real players - no problem. They will have to tend to private stuff sometime. in the case of bots - a problem for the rest.

Or you introduce a chance of a new tile being placed inside a tax-hole being converted (if at least half of the 5x5-grid is held by player B. he get's a chance of the newly placed tile becoming his before any other chances are calculated).

Might reduce the attractivity of tax-holes.

Tony: That sounds like a great idea and would solve most of the problems, as well as in the long run, I think you'd keep players interested (and around) for longer.

It still wouldn't allow drawing except on the boards where the bot isn't present (the first three boards, as far as I can tell).

The other thing is, I'm not sure if the appeal would remain for current players if the very basis of the game is changed. I don't know if this is already what you're thinking, but maybe trying it on one or two boards before changing the whole game would be a good way to start?

Thanks for all the time and energy you put into this, by the way. It's great that this game exists in the first place!

I was thinking about what Krulle said and I don't really like the idea of losing tax-holes (or making them less attractive). I've played on board 14 a few times, but it doesn't seem as dynamic a game as on the other boards.

Tax-holes mean that it's possible to catch up to players who get way ahead of everybody else. On board 14 there is a limit to available surface area, so there's a limit to how much damage you can do. On other boards tax-holes mean that time will provide openings/new surface area. I like having a chance at catching up. It gives motivation to continuing to play the board after someone does get ahead.

Anyway, what I mean is that I don't think removing that part of the game is resolving much. Especially since on board 14, where there are no tax-holes, the bot still wins because all the strategy it needs is to place tiles as soon as it has them. A problem that new rules could deal with.

You don't loose them, there jsut would be a (very) small chance, that you loose the tile placed.

Anyway, currently it seems like Seascript stopped playing again....