![]() usr/include/c++/7.2.1/bits/stl_iterator_base_funcs.h:197:5: note: candidate: void std::advance(_InputIterator&, _Distance) Īdvance(_InputIterator& _i, _Distance _n) ![]() /././include/qt4/QtCore/QVariant:1,įrom src/gui/qt/gametable/gametableimpl.h:38,įrom src/gui/qt/gametable/gametableimpl.cpp:31: Src/gui/qt/gametable/gametableimpl.cpp:3862:18: error: call of overloaded ‘advance(PlayerListIterator&, int&)’ is ambiguous Src/gui/qt/gametable/gametableimpl.cpp: In member function ‘void gameTableImpl::triggerVoteOnKick(int)’: The "reserved" field is referenced in src/net/common/netpacket.cpp (and maybe other places) so renaming it there too seemed a good plan.īuild was going fine till it hit the problem below which appears unrelated - is that an easy fix do you think? Do you need more info like a full log? i'll be very happy to participate in the new league.Doing that regenerated the proto files. Now image the rest.Īgain, everyone wants to fix the problem you describe, but it's easier said than done. You, yourself, have tried a small step with " TESTIMONIUM PRO" and have seen, first hand, the difficulty of filling a room that comes with simply increasing the hand delay by 2 seconds. Then you'll have my respect and admiration. But DO IT yourself and don't just "complaint" or "exchange ideas together and look for ways to improve ranked games". IMPLEMENT a tournament/league with your suggestions and get people to participate voluntarily. Want to prove your SKILLS to the community? Have you ever wondered why? If you haven't, let me give you a clue: talk is CHEAP. " Nobody wants to change anything about it". The new stuff you just introduced, about " partners" not " attacking nor kicking each other" is pure speculation and only weakens your argument. It's " honest cheating", as someone once put it, because it's allowed within the rules. Yes, BBC, but I was simply referring to the part about gaming the SW system by relying on old tickets. "Getting along", respect each other and differences are important. Sure, the overall number of players in the community is a concern.and ranking play provides some info on the players around your table (as do actual previous experiences.), at least for those who assume their ranks and stats (whatever they are). Keep calm, and enjoy every minute of your life as sooner or later life turns to be too short to waste it on complaining. As long as BBC, Monthly or WEC do not require members to play certain number of ranking games, I'll keep away from playing ranking - anyway I currently do not have much time to waste. I was annoyed by some players in ranking games enough I almost stopped playing them. In turn ranking games provide us with candidates we need so much. ![]() We, which mostly play BBC, Monthly or WEC, still need fresh blood to keep these (protected) games alive. Or believe here anyone.that "Agent X" (for example) had only bad luck, bad beats.or is just a weak player.?īy limiting play in ranking games either by a ban list, required minimal average after 40 games or any other way, may affect number of players at the platform. Then will players like BarbaB stay away.and the donkeys keep donking on. You can also change nothing and leave the ranking as it is. With this process (which takes a while) you can sort out the donks for League 1.Ī new player ("fresh blood") also needs more than 1 season.to collect enough "Step 2, Step 3 or Step 4 tickets".to even get a chance at the top.if he has one at all chance has.with this outdated ticket system. Players from League 2 with Ø Points 4 qualified for League 1. I see a solution in that too!Īll Players with minimum Ø Points: 4 are qualified.Īll Players + "fresh bloods" under Ø Points: 4 are qualified. Boehmi wrote: ↑ Thu 10:26 am Another suggestion which comes up from time to time is a 2 tier league style ranking.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |