218 ideas posted
Ability to have more than 1 name
Submitted by iamacarolinagirl 3 years ago
Submitted by sandbar 2 years ago
Submitted by sirena_stiletto 2 years ago
Submitted by fcjbmc 1 year ago
Submitted by Orange County Ca 2 years ago
I would like the ability to have more than one nic.
I am disappointed too that you can only have 1 nic. I had the "old" version but lost the key so I just purchased again.
If we can only have 1 nic, then how about an option to have the nic reset every X number of months?
I've pretty much stopped playing because my nic got low in the beginning. Once you are low no one will play and it is frustrating.
I am delighted that one can have only one nickname in Hearts anyway. We presently have ratings freaks in a game which is supposed to be a lowman game which means constantly changing alliances of three go after the current low scoring member at the table.
Next hand may bring a new low score and new alliances. But the ratings freaks are only after one thing - ratings - so you often have two sets of rules in play. Three people playing lowman and one playing by in effect no rules at all.
Then they get their ratings so high almost no one will allow them into a game so they get a new nickname and start all over again. Perhaps they're collecting high rated nicknames also. In any event I was delighted to hear that only one nickname will be allowed.
I believe that multiple nics do make the game more interesting.. However it also makes it easier for those wanting to misuse the site. Their must be a way to limit the nics and have them recycle after a period of time.
How do multiple nics make the game more interesting S.T?
Multiple nics are
1. Fun. You can have fun making clever names and avatars.
2. For different purposes. I like a serious nic I play with good players and a social nic I play with nice people who aren't competitive. With only one nic I would not play with the latter category or I would be locked out of the games I want to play because my rating would fall.
3. A chance to escape someone who is harassing or stalking you. Yes, having one nic handicaps stalkers some but it actually is more crippling to the defense against them! Much easier to just disappear and enjoy playing under another nic than find a guide to silence or discipline them.
4. The ability to have a stable of nics that allow you to take advantage of different games you want to play. If I have only one nic, and it falls, I have to pass up a great 1800 game with a pard I'd love to play with. On the other hand if my nic goes high, I really don't want to risk it in a 1500 room just because I see a friend there.
If people had only one nic, they would become even more type A about any game that doesn't go well. I personally would probably just leave from frustration. I would hate to be locked out of the games I want to play because the one nic I have is not at that moment at the right level!
As a new version player I am limited to just one (rated, talking) nic. I actually prefer just one nic, keeps things more simple, though I can appreciate why others prefer the multi nic option. Plus with multi nic players it creates the illusion that there are more or new players here, which keeps the site fresh.
My big problem is with the few players who abuse their multi nic privilege, using it to harass, stalk, or just plain ruin games.
Unfair. And a big negative for those of us who come here to play spades.
I see some ideas floating around here but so far I don't see any action to address the abuse.
Maybe limiting people to one nic or one rated and one social nic with the option to change nics only on the first day of every month would help to limit the problem players while still giving everyone enough freedom to change, express themselves, etc.
Whatever hw decides to ultimately do regarding the matter, I think it should be same rules for every version.
I immediately switched to the new version and am now paying money for the right to play here. When I switched I was under the impression that ALL players would at the end of one year be required to either switch, and pay, to version two or stay on as guests. As a guest you would be limited to social games with a ghost like Avatar and single nickname.
I thought this would be great as once a persons reputation got around people would quit playing with people who were not abiding by the rules of the game or society in general. I.e. not playing lowman in my game of hearts or swearing etc.
The "Dislike" function is working very well for me as long as I host a game. Otherwise it is impossible for someone to identify ones disliked fellow players until actually seated at a table. If I'm hosting they simply are not aware of my game as a joinable game. They can't sit down. Try it you'll like it. If you find a player to be so objectionable you don't want to play them in the future use the menu under their nickname. Hopefully in time Hardwood will apply the pay to play rule to everyone except guests and expand the dislike display as I've suggested elsewhere.
I agree that those dislike, ignore, invite only buttons are all useful.They allow me to keep track of and avoid nics I don't want at my table again. But these methods are totally ineffective against problem players who are allowed to and keep creating endless new nics in order to continue their bad behaviors.
We're in agreement C.M. I've written directly to Hardwood about this. I encourage you to do the same. Frankly this Forum seems to exist only as a place to blow off steam as I don't think anybody over there reads this stuff. At least I've never heard of an idea being implemented. Everyone should pay to join and have one nickname. Guests can play social games only for limited amount of time and again only one nickname. It's only 17 cents a day.
I am happy having one. Takes the guess work out of who is who :-x
Copyright © 2014
| Feedback Form