Play Now button!

i think adding filters may be a little too complex but i wouldnt know.
Either way i like this idea, just a nice simple way of going straight into a duel without the hassle of whether the person is afk or not waiting to get in a duel etc.
I often find myself scrolling through seeing what my options are, so it would be nice to have a 'kick up the ass' button and just get in one lol.

@Zaiako,
This would not prevent people from being afk.

Although a nice idea, it would prevent people from being able to duel with friends or people they know.

If this is to be included as an alternative, then it could be something to include, but you can already implement your own "play now button" by trying to join a random person on the list, or pair yourself up with someone accordingly.

This option would be a good thing to include as an alternative.

Also, to prevent AFKers, BLS should make it that you only have 10-20 seconds to respond in the rock-paper-scissors dialog. If a user fails to respond in that time lapse, said user forfeits the duel.

This button also prevents people from making AFK lobbies.

Now that I think about it, these two methods abolish AFKing for good.

That's a good idea. I've seen that on other games and sites, like chesscube.com.

It'd certainly be better than having to put "Fast Accept!" in a duel note to try to attract people for having a duel.

I like the idea of randomly chosen opponents.
It'd remind me strongly of the TF Series.

I thought we had this suggestion before, and you guys rejected it?

Prevent people dueling with their friends?
If someone wanted to duel with their friend then they just wouldnt click the 'play now button' its simply a fast way for a random match up.
And i know it wouldnt prevent AFK's, i never said prevent. I simply meant that the odds are with a fast duel match up is that th eother person too has just clicked 'play now'. When i said avoiding the AFKs, i simply meant in the lobby, when you want to join a match but the person doesnt accept you in.
Agreed with void with the point of it being more fair in rated as people cant set up a match between friends and help their way to the top, but it should be a choice really like a toggle between rated and non, it would also benefit people wanting to test new deck structures and need to test it against random decks,

Key wrote:I thought we had this suggestion before, and you guys rejected it?

http://forum.duelingnetwork.com/t3039-got-a-suggestion-we-might-have-heard-it-before

- Random opponent duels No

they did this proves they can change their minds completly about a suggestion

The problem with this is that it wouldn't help AFK without annoying others.

I don't want to be the guy waiting for my friend to come over to my duel only to get some random "Play now" kid shoved in my face.

The way to fix that is to make it so people who clicked the play now button only face other people who clicked the play now button, but anyone who wants to go AFK won't click that button for obvious reasons.

And the filter sounds like it'll be annoying to code, but that's just me being bad at programming like usual.

you are right , people who clicked 'play now' should get to duel at random with any player who clicked on the 'play now' button

Personally I think this would be best as a Rated thing, I think it would be more fair if you dont choose your opponent in rated.

this should solve this too

Except I like to play my friends in rated as well :/

nobody is saying you cant have both !

the button hes asking is just another choice

I don't enjoy the "Do not pair up with players with [insert card name here]."
Otherwise, i like this, but not as replacing you chosing the duels. It'd be nice to have both options.

Chey, a filter like that would not be applicable to Rated anyway. That sort of 'filter' goes against the rules for trying to screen out opponents you do not want to play against based on their deck or choice of cards.

Tsunayoshi wrote:Chey, a filter like that would not be applicable to Rated anyway. That sort of 'filter' goes against the rules for trying to screen out opponents you do not want to play against based on their deck or choice of cards.

hence why no me gusta.

And I so misread that post before. Either way, my statement makes it clear why such a filter should not be put into effect.

If you pair up with someone that is AFK, the solution is simple:
Exit the room in the rock-paper-scissors dialog and click the "Play Now!" button again (You don't lose rating). Also, the AFKer will be AFK in the lobby and won't be able to "harm" others.

Also, the filters could maybe be ONLY available in the Unrated mode or Traditional mode "Play Now!" button.

How can this idea get more attention in order to hopefully make it a reality?

Lol that picture was just deleted..

CheyMcFly wrote:Lol that picture was just deleted..

cause he posted it in all threads with admins on what a troll

MK_ultra wrote:

CheyMcFly wrote:Lol that picture was just deleted..

cause he posted it in all threads with admins on what a troll

I believe it was all threads I posted in T_T
I thought this was done!

no it was in all i saw he posted it in the aseir warrior thread

Back on topic ...
It seems that quite a few people are for this idea...
So what's the next steps to getting this idea in game? How will this topic get BLS' attention?

Key is right, this has already be rejected before... Darn Admins are two-faced when it comes to suggestions then. Why bother with the list of rejects?

Hey man if politicians can change their minds on SOPA and PIPA admins should be allowed to change their minds too lol. I'm all for this suggestion. Works great in all the games I play that have such a feature. Though I'm opposed to too many filters. The only filter i'd be in favor for is if you want a "close" rating or "any" rating.

On another note as someone posted about, How do these suggestions get brought to the attention of BLS? As I understand it BLS is super busy and doesn't get paid to do all the grunt work to keep the site up and running. Also tons of things still on a wait list to be implemented (counter system being the one i want the most lol). So does he/she/it Get to great suggestions in the order proposed, order of importance, or easiest to program, or randomly? Also do mods get together and decide which suggestions are good or not or does BLS personally make the call? Also does BLS do all the coding alone? I'm sure there are quite a few people who play on DN with coding experience, anyway any of us could lend a hand? Just curious. Most of those questions were probably already answered somewhere so i'll get a nice Admin who'll just link me lol.

The Predator32 wrote:On another note as someone posted about, How do these suggestions get brought to the attention of BLS? As I understand it BLS is super busy and doesn't get paid to do all the grunt work to keep the site up and running. Also tons of things still on a wait list to be implemented (counter system being the one i want the most lol). So does he/she/it Get to great suggestions in the order proposed, order of importance, or easiest to program, or randomly? Also do mods get together and decide which suggestions are good or not or does BLS personally make the call? Just curious. Most of those questions were probably already answered somewhere so i'll get a nice Admin who'll just link me lol.

Well, I guess BLS looks at them, or Det or Tama sends him the link, cause we should don't have a group meeting, cause my voice is never heard and my existence has been denied so many times...

If their is a meeting, I'm not part of it...

Zero2Hero wrote:

The Predator32 wrote:On another note as someone posted about, How do these suggestions get brought to the attention of BLS? As I understand it BLS is super busy and doesn't get paid to do all the grunt work to keep the site up and running. Also tons of things still on a wait list to be implemented (counter system being the one i want the most lol). So does he/she/it Get to great suggestions in the order proposed, order of importance, or easiest to program, or randomly? Also do mods get together and decide which suggestions are good or not or does BLS personally make the call? Just curious. Most of those questions were probably already answered somewhere so i'll get a nice Admin who'll just link me lol.

Well, I guess BLS looks at them, or Det or Tama sends him the link, cause we should don't have a group meeting, cause my voice is never heard and my existence has been denied so many times...

Then try speaking up?

Miror B. wrote:Except I like to boost with my friends in rated as well :/

Fixed for you

Zero2Hero wrote:Key is right, this has already be rejected before... Darn Admins are two-faced when it comes to suggestions then. Why bother with the list of rejects?

This is exactly the point that I've been trying to drill into everybody's head from day one.

A suggestion never dies. There's always room for improvement - for more support - for the admins themselves to change their minds.

And the proof is in this very thread. Here we have a previously rejected suggestion, that is now receiving support from a Head Admin.

As you can see, I was right. No suggestion is to ever be counted out. There's always the chance that the higher-ups themselves will change their mind and think it's a good idea!

Admins?

I still don't see this idea being useful at all, what's the point? Random opponents? Why would anyone want to meet random opponents? And even if they wished I don't see how would this be any more random than Creating a room in Rated and accepting a random person that joins.

Badass_Bunny wrote:I still don't see this idea being useful at all, what's the point? Random opponents? Why would anyone want to meet random opponents? And even if they wished I don't see how would this be any more random than Creating a room in Rated and accepting a random person that joins.

Clicking Play Now -> if opponent is AFK, repeat.

Opposed to:

Creating a room, hoping your lobby will not end up on the bottom of the rated list -> wait for someone with a somewhat equal rank/reputation to click on your lobby -> if opponent is AFK, repeat.

The point of the button is to get straight into play WITH PEOPLE YOU WANT TO PLAY (thanks to filters based on rank, reputation, connectivity, etc).

This'd have to be implemented only for unrated games, deck restricting isn't allowed in rated, just like in tournaments real life(basing this on the filter that was suggested in the first post, to not pair up against players with a certain card etc).

This could be useful for faster play, but I don't think it's needed. Why fix something that isn't even (that) broken.

Okay sometimes it takes 2 minutes before you have a game, so what? You probably are on MSN too and have some chats on DN open to entertain you for the time being. Just wait for that minutes or re-host if you're impatient.

If it was for me I'd reject it, can be seen as: Why fix something that isn't broken?

Why WOULDN'T you accept this? It's an alternative and doesn't replace the traditional method of making a lobby.

Also, this is the suggestions section, not the bug section. Nothing needs to be broken to add this idea to the game.

TeamHersheyCookies wrote:Why WOULDN'T you accept this? It's an alternative and doesn't replace the traditional method of making a lobby.

Also, this is the suggestions section, not the bug section. Nothing needs to be broken to add this idea to the game.

it's not needed and doesn't seem to do anything beneficial

Filters out Rescue Rabbit*
(No Players Show)

Zero2Hero wrote:Filters out Rescue Rabbit*
(No Players Show)

*filters out Tour Guide*
*awkward silence*

The filter can't even be used in ranked if it does cards, so what's the point T_T.

Badass_Bunny wrote:Random opponents? Why would anyone want to meet random opponents?

Why wouldnt you more like.
Sure duelign with friends is always a blast, but at the same time becomes redundant sooner or later cause you learn how they play, you learn their deck set, its fun, but quickly becomes boring.
If i remember right the whole point of this site was to 'simulae' as close to real life as you can get, now im no torny expert, but i dont know any official match where you got to choose your opponent.
And no doubt people when searchign for a room subconciously look at the 'filters' to choose their own preference. I hink this play now thing, will be more effician in finding completely random, and random decks then looking for one hat generally your used to.

Zaiako wrote:

Badass_Bunny wrote:Random opponents? Why would anyone want to meet random opponents?

Why wouldnt you more like.
Sure duelign with friends is always a blast, but at the same time becomes redundant sooner or later cause you learn how they play, you learn their deck set, its fun, but quickly becomes boring.
If i remember right the whole point of this site was to 'simulae' as close to real life as you can get, now im no torny expert, but i dont know any official match where you got to choose your opponent.
And no doubt people when searchign for a room subconciously look at the 'filters' to choose their own preference. I hink this play now thing, will be more effician in finding completely random, and random decks then looking for one hat generally your used to.

you can always host a duel or try to find a duel with someone you don't know...
and in tourneys you don't get filters either..
and if this is in rated filters don't matter. You don't get to pick and chose what you play in rated >_>

CheyMcFly wrote:The filter can't even be used in ranked if it does cards, so what's the point T_T.

Tried to tell people this, but I can't explain things in short...

So yeah...no use as updates should mainly improve rated, not the unrated games.

3E-hero neos wrote:

CheyMcFly wrote:The filter can't even be used in ranked if it does cards, so what's the point T_T.

Tried to tell people this, but I can't explain things in short...

So yeah...no use as updates should mainly improve rated, not the unrated games.

this idea in general doesn't improve anything. to find a random person host a duel or click one..

Lol, nice bump.

I did like to have this as an extra option, without the filter.

Don't Necrobump topics unless you have a very good reason to.