koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Oct 29, 2014 - 23:52 |
 
|
| Garion wrote: | Sorry, it just does my head in people constantly complaining about things on the site, which is free, created by one person and if I were him it would annoy me even more, especially when there isn't really anything wrong. It just seems like nit picking at its worst. But if you are building your own all power to you and I can't wait to see it finished. 
I would hate to see the old game finder return though. |
If no one says anything how would Christer figure out where to put his effort? Telepathy?
What is stupid is thinking that everyone should use the site in the same way.
I have only ever found one game using the new gamefinder. I really don't need it. Just as you have no use for the old gamefinder view. It would be something different. Not a replacement for the current one. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:02 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | xnoelx wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | I have to say I do not like the current game finder. I have the following problems.
1. I like to see the team I choose to play against before I click yes. This means I have to open another window and type in the coach name or the team name. Sometimes these are difficult and frustrating.
|
You don't have to do that at all. You can click that 'i' symbol, then when the big yellow box appears, the team name is a link. So just click your mouse wheel on the team name (at least you can in Firefox). Alternatively, right click and choose open in new tab. |
I use chrome and I've never seen anything clickable. Either it isn't in chrome or I'm missing out. If this is the case it isn't that intuitive.
|
In the nicest possible, not attacking sort of way; I think that is just you then. Do you mean you've never seen the 'i' symbol to click? That's a blue round symbol at each end of each row of the gamefinder, and clicking on it brings up a big yellow pop-up box which summarises the team in question. An 'i' for information symbol is pretty damned intuitive. See any tourist information site in countless countries and on maps, for one example.
On the other hand, if you mean you've seen the big yellow pop-up box, but nothing to click in it, well, right at the top of that box is the team's name. In large text. It is the only text in the box which is underlined, and underlining is the standard way to indicate that text is a link. See almost any website ever, pretty much, including this one.
Edit: just to confirm, I did check that this is all the same in Chrome, and you can indeed use all the same methods, including a mouse-wheel click to open the link in a new tab. One click, no typing. I hope that proves useful to you in future. |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:09 |
|
Oh sure of course I know about the yellow box. However it's a summary and just that. All this time, I had no idea that the name was a link. I also am totally unaware this was the case or where that was stated.
A team name is also a title, and title is more often than not underlined. So I didn't think it to be a link. I think it needs to be highlighted or in italics (as it's a title). |
|
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:14 |
|
Well, titles can also be highlighted or in italics, neither of those would indicate a link any more clearly. So short of having 'This is a link' next to the team name, I don't see how the gamefinder could be changed to make that any clearer.
A note to explain it could be added to the Help page about the gf though. I was about to do that myself, but that page currently describes the old gf, and a complete rewrite is a little more effort than I had in mind at the moment. |
_________________
Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:21 |
|
You can click through to see the team, sure. Not that this is common practice on a gamefinder loaded with a confusing array of teams that keep appearing and disappearing: by the time you look up a team and go back, the whole terrain has changed.
And yeah, Garion, I get games just fine. Takes 2-7 minutes at a busy time and 5-20 minutes when it's quiet. I just often find myself annoyed and frustrated by the time I do. And I'm trying to improve the site through the limited means available to me. Don't gimme that "more work for Christer" argument: he'll see my post or not and agree or not and somebody (Christer or not) will do something or not. But it starts by identifying a problem (and this is a real problem for any Ranked junkie) and proposing a solution (like this simple one). |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:28 |
|
With any of these site changes 'somebody'=Christer. I, like Garion find it frustrating when coaches ask for petty little changes that yeah might make the place a gnats willy better, but requires a weekend or so of Christer's time. Especially as (if I am honest) we've been waiting and hoping for the big League changes for so long.
However Christer is Christer and what interests Christer is what Christer likes. I don't know what it will be, nor does anyone else. He likes fiddling with things. He likes solving problems. He loves using new data or a new way of programming or trying out some experimental software to make his site better. So for every 50 dumb requests, there will be one that catches his eye.
This all said, I honestly do feel for me Gamefinder was better before. Not massively, but to some extent. Especially in Stunty and League (open game finding). The new Gamefinder I suspect is costing those 2 formats a lot games. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:34 |
|
I never find a League or Stunty game. Nobody's ever on for open play except in R and B. (And when I'm on, mostly just R.) I usually activate a Stunty team in with the R teams, and just about never do I see another one now. Eight months ago, that was a different story.
Definitely, I'm not proposing this as a desperately needed fix or the site will die. But among all the various projects Christer could do, this is one that might have a positive effect on three divisions. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 00:47 |
|
I think that asking for changes is positive and constructive.
Nobody is pointing a gun to Christer ordering him to change things or waste his free time tinkering with new (useful or less useful) features.
FUMMBL users throw ideas, suggestions, impressions and requests, if Christer doesn't think they are good or worth the effort and the time he can ignore them, where is the problem?
I honestly don't understand this kind of hostile attitude towards people asking changes, tweaks, etc.
Without ideas there is no progress, you know. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Let me explain a bit why the new gamefinder works as it does:
The reason I felt the old gamefinder wasn't up to par anymore was twofold. First off, IRC traffic was declining as a lot of people can't be bothered figuring it out (and I don't blame them, IRC clients are a complete mess). This meant that in order to offer games, they were sending PMs to people at a very high rate. Loads of "Up for a game?" type PMs were being sent. This wasn't ideal, as the private messaging system is not designed for real-time communication and it was very slow to do it this way.
So, instead of forcing people to use IRC (not reasonable) I needed to come up with something that did away with the requirement for a direct real-time chat. So, I designed the new LFG system to be as simple as possible and at the same time not require other channels of communication.
The current system has two parts:
1. The back-end, which figures out pairings
2. The front-end, the page on the site that acts as a view of the back-end data
Now, there are some parts I am not happy with (some of them touched in this thread), but as a general principle, this new LFG system is much more suited to the current FUMBBL user base.
If someone has a comprehensive idea of how to make a new front-end for the system, I'm all ears. But "Go back to the old way" simply isn't an option as there are inherent problems with that (which triggered the need for the new system as explained above).
If someone who knows front-end development is interested in taking a shot at the problem and coming up with a better system, please do get in touch. I really don't have the time to work on the LFG system within at least 3 months, and there are plenty of things on my todo list even after that. Basically, I need to focus on the FFB update modifications and the NAFC tournament for now (and possibly run some trials of some blackbox scheduler changes). Obvously in addition to keeping up to speed on threads like this where people discuss improvements to the site.
I would possibly be able to redesign the front-end if someone spent the time and created a comprehensive design document with something that is decidedly better than the current layout. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Also, for those who are interested, there are a couple of things you can look at to get an idea of how it works:
1. My blogs on the design process:
- LFG development
- New LFG system progress report
- Building a game finder
2. LFG Javascript code
3. Matches XML document, used by the LFG system to see possible matches and their states. Note that you need to have active teams on the LFG for this to actually have content.
This set of stuff actually might give you an idea of how much effort it is to develop new subsystems on the site, even things as "easy" as the gamefinder. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 12:07 |
|
Cool! 
Are we able to pull that XML from javascript originating from another server or does it all have to run from Fumbbl?
Is there an easy way to pull all the teams/coaches currently in the gamefinder?
If I have have to chuck in all my teams just to see who is in there then I am clogging it up with teams that don't actually intend to play.
Mainly what I want to know is: Are any of my league opponents currently LFG? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
It requires you to be logged in, and it will only show potential matches with your currently activated teams.
It doesn't expose much extra information that you don't already see in the gamefinder system (although the front-end does cap the number of showing matches for performance reasons).
The XML runs in the FUMBBL context, and does not support external access. It's designed to be an internal API. |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 13:43 |
|
I think it's great that you have this open attitude towards improvement. The current system is great for anyone who puts 1-2 teams up, or for times when there are 1-3 coaches on. As soon as you get >5 matchups for each of your own >5 teams, a view of teams, rather than matchups, would be highly preferable. I really hope to see someone (Chainsaw?) come up with something that shows the teams. |
_________________
Content: Twitch / Youtube ; Updates: Facebook / Twitter
(because big banners are compensating) |
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
The only issue I have with showing who's actually LFG directly, is that it encourages direct communication, which is something that isn't readily available at the moment. PMs are really bad for instant communication. I have, however, been doing some tech trials on a way to allow web based instant chat which would allow me to show a list of coaches and the teams they have.
I imagine some system with three separate panels: One panel showing offered games, one panel for suggested matches and a third panel for coaches and their teams. Possibly with a tooltip quick-inspect of the team itself as well (the most minimal roster you could imagine with only the info that's required) to replace the current info panel.
I am fully aware that mass-activating teams makes for a less than great experience, but I honestly don't have the time to fix it at this time (as it would require me adding a pretty extensive subsystem to the site in addition to improving the UI). |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 30, 2014 - 14:41 |
|
| Christer wrote: |
I imagine some system with three separate panels: One panel showing offered games, one panel for suggested matches and a third panel for coaches and their teams. Possibly with a tooltip quick-inspect of the team itself as well (the most minimal roster you could imagine with only the info that's required) to replace the current info panel. |
This is what I imagine too. The routine would go something like this:
1. You click on the teams you wish to look for a game with.
2. The first panel shows ALL opposing teams on gamefinder looking for a game.
3. You greenlight an opposing team and then go to your list of teams. You then tick all of your teams that you would be willing to play with. A neat function here would be that you could choose teams that you didn't originally pick for gamefinder.
4. Once you have a list of suggested match up by you and possible opponents a 3rd panel opens up and shows these suggested match ups. Maybe panels could be tabs.
5. The confirmation screen now works fine, so that would stay the same. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Elf Draft Coach
Search
