You know how we’ll pull cards down from cells when we move a card from one stack to another?
Sometimes I’m bugged by how many individual clicks it takes to move a string up and back down. What if moving a card down caused all possible cards from cells to follow? Any down side?
MrFixit
I'm not sure if there would be unintended consequences. For now when I'm playing for speed I move a card down and then (if possible) move it over to an adjacent empty column to trigger the other cards playing down.
None, if it's not going to interfere with trying to swap suits.
I _think_ you'd be able to undo anything it did. But the common case of moving a black 8 down and wanting the cells red 7 and black 6 to follow it would speed things along. And since I've been playing 6x7, I sometimes get pretty long strings moved temporarily up to cells.
Thoughts?
A potential down side is the unwanted "stickiness" experienced sometimes when playing a zero-freecell variant would be introduced to variants with freecells. Sometimes you want to move a single card only between columns and usually that needs to be done via a freecell. In that case you don't want other cards in the freecell tagging along.
Hope that makes sense.
I'm not familiar with this "stickiness." Please describe the failure mode in more detail cuz I'm not figuring out what you mean.
Yes, there'd be times this would do something do didn't intend, especially if there were 2 black 4's in the string and it had to pick one. It might pick the one you wanted to not get covered.
I've got two main questions:
First, is there something you fundamentally couldn't undo by moving single cards back to freecells?
Second, is there a scenario that's common enough that this wouldn't be an overall win in terms of player effort?
I guess you could also say this automated move might help a you a bit cuz I've certainly had cards sitting in cells and only after pondering for a bit realized they were part of a string and had columns they could go down to. But I tend to think those are pretty obvious and it's definitely a small minority of times that I miss one.
MrFixit
I'll try. You're playing a 13x0 and there are two clear columns. In one column there are two cards only which are "attached" to each other by color and number (ie 3C, 2D) and you want to send the 3C home. If you move the 2D to a vacant column the 3C goes with it. ie it sticks to it.
I discover only recently the way out is to move an unconnected card to a vacant column first, then the 2D can be moved to the other vacant column and the 3C sent home. However, you have to make sure the unconnected card can be returned to where it came from or the game might be lost.
I might add that in these situations the game can be invariably won by forgetting that move and doing something else.
That's a good subtle tricky bit and that's what I want to avoid. But in your scenario, I think you could just move the 2D to the remaining open column and then put the 3C up. But if you've got 3 open columns, then it will still stick. What happens then? It seems like usually if you have that much open you're in good shape anyhow, and as you say there's probably a different move you can make. But in 25 years no one has given me a situation you couldn't finesse.
MrFixit
OK play a few games with a nick you don't care about here:
https://www.freecell.net/f/c/dgame_dbg.html
LitheYetBusty aka MrFixit aka Denny
I played as me with a variant I'm unlikely to mess up (10x6).
Once I understood the issue - this only applies when you *start* from a free cell - I could see what you want to fix. Seems to be an improvement. Perhaps I need to play some tournaments with it to cover all scenarios.
With streaking, for now I'll stick with the usual version.
Pardon my obtuseness............but I can't seem to grasp the issue. I just played about 6 games, and couldn't notice any difference. Not sure what I'm supposed to be looking for.......
In a variant with lots of free cells, put in these cells a few cards which would be joined to each other in a column. Then move the highest of them to an empty column and watch the others follow. That doesn't happen normally.
Ok, that helps, but doesn't happen for me. I just set up that situation, and it didn't do that.
Or another way of stating it...........normally, all the "connected" cards *will* follow if a play is made ONTO a column with pre-existing cards, but it didn't happen with an empty column? Do I have that right? If so...........then no, still not happening for me.
As someone who's never been concerned with times games take, this wouldn't be a concern.............but would it have the effect of lowering game times, even if only a little? If that's the case, wouldn't that disrupt all those awesome performances in tournaments? I.e., disturb the historical tournament database?
You're playing from the link in this discussion thread?
Pick a variant with a bunch of cells, e.g. 10x6. Put a string of four cards of alternating colors ascending ranks into cells. Then move the highest one down to a column. All the cards in the string will follow.
MrFixit
Yeah, that's what I've been trying, in your 6x7. If I move the highest card down into the empty column, nothing else follows/happens.
Yes, playing from the link in this thread. However.................I also still have another tab open in the regular format. Could that be overriding this new one??
So I logged out, logged back in from this thread, and still, no action.
Even switched to an alternate browser, logging in fresh, and still same thing, i.e., nothing.
Ah! Got it to work the second attempt on the alternate browser! Seems to me it *would* speed up games ever-so-slightly....
If you would like to do anything for speeding up, you could introduce a rule , making the endplay automatic if there are enough free cells.
Of course this breaks statistics on time played, but as that plays no role since elorating (which makes it really a non-elorating) that probably doesn't matter.
Automatic following as you suggest will almost certainly have problematic consequeces changing suits.
If you only wanted to bring down one or two cards, then move a card that's on the table to that pile, you wouldn't be able to do it if all the cards possible came down with the first card.
My vote for.a change I'd like to see would be an "undo" button.
There *is* an 'undo' button - but only if one plays anonymously. That's because many/most here use the competitive aspect of the site, so..........wins/losses matter.
I'm glad someone brought up Anonymous mode. I often forget that exists. The new move doesn't work with Undo. Also there's another problem with Anonymous mode that cellmate pointed out a while ago.
I often wonder what percentage of games are played in Anonymous mode. But since it doesn't talk to the server at all I get no metrics. And I can't ask folks to post here because I require a logged in identity to post of the discussion board.
MrFixit
OK I think I fixed Undo for Anonymous mode. You might need to hold Ctrl and his F5 (or click the reload button) to get the latest code.
MrFixit
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Been playing for 20 years. Too old to adapt to changes.
One of my pet peeves (and this applies to all kinds of software I use) is that sometimes developers make changes just for the sake of change. They take a product that works just fine and "improve" it with so many changes I have to take lessons to learn how to use it.
Are you listening, Adobe?
I really dislike ANY game where moves are made automatically. I like to be able to make mistakes!
I agree with clickadeecleck. I've also been playing on this site for over 20 years and I like the way it is. Change for changes sake is usually just a mistake.
I like the change...then more would play winnable baker's dozen ;)
Pocantico - you're aware of the very large number of automatic moves this site makes for you? Column-to-column moves or auto move up to aces?
clickadecleck - me too. I think of Microsoft as being most guilty. And then when I go try to figure out where something moved to I find tons of docs on the web telling how to do the thing but that don't match the version I've got in front of me.
Have any of you tried it? I makes no changes in how you fundamentally play the game. Just reduces clicks for one common mechanical operation.
MrFixit
It's good but I would prefer you fix the bug that doesn't do as super a move as it could when there are free columns. This would be particularly helpful in 13x0. For example, if I have two free columns I should be able to super-move 4 cards to another column but I can't, I have to do it in two steps.
The change seems reasonable to me. It won't take any retraining to learn it. Time will tell if there are "unintended consequences."
(As an aside: I am with clickadeecleck about Adobe. They took a piece of software that was semi-intuitive and turned it upside down. I found it unusable. I was pleased that they allowed reversion to the old version with a single click.)
Anything to speed up game-play I'm all for it! Undo for just one move would be great too.
Nice, that's working beautifully. I'm surprised at how often it comes up, at least once in every game I've played so far (6x7).
Yeah I wanted it for the longer strings but it's nice when there's even just one more card to put down. I gotta get used to not trying to execute that extra move now. But other than that, no adjustments.
MrFixit
I don't like it. Several times I had a play planned and the cards jump in front of my play. Of course, I also complain about how many clicks it takes to get back to my game after a pause in playing... you know, like when the boss comes in and says I need X done right now so an hour later you get back to your game and have to click through four different things... after you've already started playing where you left off, and now can't remember what you just played. Hmm, maybe I'm getting too old for this.
I still get surprised when all the cards jump down.
I haven't come across it yet but I am wondering if it will be a problem if, when you have 2 reds (or blacks) of the same number, and you are trying to put a specific suite down into play, how will the autoplay decide which one to pick? I imagine it can be switched manually if it picks the wrong one. Like I said, just wondering, but so far I like it.
So far I don't like the change. That could be because I am old and crotchety and less appreciative of change. I also remember that many years ago you didn't want to make other changes to improve the speed like for instance when there aren't very many free cells but you want to move a large stack it often takes multiple moves when there's clearly enough empty slots to hold them all. I have an additional mild issue in that the standard game is playing with the new feature. I logged out log back on make sure I had the minimal URL but to no avail I still have this new feature but I prefer not to have. I can probably adapt given enough time.
I've seen enough to make the comment that in a few days everyone will be wondering how did we manage without it! Sure there is the odd unnerving move in the middle of a game but it's great for clearing out the riff-raff at the end!
Still, I'm wondering if it's possible to have a choice of version much like a choice in cards?
I take back my if it ain't broke don't fix it comment.
I tried it -- I like it!
Hats off to Mr. Fixit!
I have a feeling that this will improve scores timing wise. Check out my Potluck score of today's (I need to check but it may be my fastest so far).
How will it affect streaking scores in terms of "average timing"? We need to record the current ones and check regularly.
So we need to thank Mr.Fixit for giving us more free time. How will we use it? Maybe playing more games?
It's good! Nice fix. No problems seen here. Yes, Mr.Fixit (AKA Denny?) more free time.
The main problem I've seen so far is it makes me try to play faster than I'm able to. Even my fastest is way slower than some of you folks.
Oh jeesh, I didn't sign outta my test nick. Anyhow I'm:
MrFixit aka Denny