@Demonolith At least that should be an option to choose from... If I am prepared to wait say 15 seconds instead of 5 seconds, then why not let me? (The alternative would be to just let me cancel games against people rated -500 than me without "punishment", so I can manually look for a player closer to my rating, but that does not seem like an option either.)
@Toadofsky Aaaaand it happened again. I get paired with two players rated almost 500 points below me, I abort the games and I now get timed out for 15 minutes.
I'm sure I'm not the only player at the "top end" of the rating range who sometimes aborts games when paired up with a much lower-rated player. And if lichess times out all these players, soon they might all switch to the enemy Chess.com...
(I mean the alternative is to make the system like the "5-minute pool" at the ICC: no choices in anyone's opponents, and you just have to play whoever you are matched with or resign your game. At least then you have the guarantee that everyone uses the exact same matchmaking system, and all ratings fairly reflect this same matchmaking process.
Now you are just punishing me for being too lazy to use the overly complicated custom search option -- either I get paired with many low-rated players, where I will inevitably draw/lose at some point and lose any rating gained; or I abort the games and I am more selective, like many other players here are, but I get banned in the process.)
Seriously? 35 minute ban now?
Even if I do matchmaking via "Custom game" and then after the game click "New opponent" I just get paired up with other 1900 players, even though I'm 2500+ and I set my custom filter to 2300+. And then when I abort these games I get timed out again and again...
@thibault You're about to lose a member here. I'm happy with the vision of lichess, and for many months I supported your project financially as well, but I'm tired of either getting paired up with way, way lower-rated players than myself, or getting banned for aborting those games. Please find a solution for this, or I will have to play my games elsewhere.
Complain about the system if you wish, but you clearly know how it works right now, so to keep coming back and posting a new incredulous comment every time you choose to keep aborting and get another ban in embarrassing. We get it, you abort lots of games even though you know the consequences.
At the time controls you are playing, you would have used less time simply by playing the lower-rated opponents than by aborting and choosing to sit in time-out.
@Chuck_Fess To me, his feeling is legitimate. If the pairing system is not optimal, it should be pointed out. It is also understandable that people prefer to play someone of their strength for enjoyment and for improving. But meanwhile I would simply suggest that @thijscom makes a list of opponents with similar rating and adds them as friends so that he can always find someone who is online to play with.
The complaint and suggestion are fine. At least twice though, in posts 12 and 14, they felt it necessary to point out that they got banned again when they kept aborting, having already established that they know precisely why they are being banned. The latter was particularly incredulous in its tone. That's the part I called embarrassing.
And it is worth repeating, in my opinion: The ban, which they chose to take by continuing to abort despite knowing the consequences, was almost certainly longer than playing the games would have taken.
I have filed an issue based upon my partial understanding of the problem:
https://github.com/ornicar/lila/issues/6049
My understanding is that the "Custom" button is supposed to respect user-supplied rating restrictions in most cases (the exception being if you're seeking far above or below your rating) so to me this sounds like a bug, although I can't imagine how this part of the code could break so I'm very confused, especially since I can't duplicate it.
This is amazing to me.
Person A explains a problem they are having. Person A then says they know that solution B exists. Person A still asks for a possible solution(??)
Regarding this: "And if lichess times out all these players, soon they might all switch to the enemy Chess.com..."
If you go, you won't be missed with that attitude
To be fair, it sounds like Person A tried solution B which might or might not have worked. I can understand people being rude when agitated; what I can't understand is what Person A did and whether or not it worked.
My understanding is that the "Custom" button is supposed to respect user-supplied rating restrictions in most cases (the exception being if you're seeking far above or below your rating) so to me this sounds like a bug, although I can't imagine how this part of the code could break so I'm very confused, especially since I can't duplicate it. Despite Person A writing a lot, it's actually kind of difficult to troubleshoot this sort of issue without enough information:
http://xyproblem.info/
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.