An option to have "private games" which can be joined by anyone with the link is a simpler and better solution than the password concept. I like that!

It should also be really easy to implement, since Fizzer already has a way of hiding open games that haven't filled.

Excellent. How does that work?

I think Master Jz refers to Games that have been open for too long - "was not filled in timely fashion" - the game goes passive status, although everyone can join after the Open-room-advert time runs out. Either via invite or link.

And copying the same function to Template Customization Tick box : Make This template by default Private (aka "was not filled in timely fashion").

I totally support - as I always need to make my games 1% boot rate, played 20 000 games till end to be private or some other absurd stat! At moment this is a workaround, but why not direct approach. Also referring it is not hard to make.

so M. Poireau change the Uservoice and you have my +3 Votes!

Wait a minute... if you create a game and set ridiculously high prerequisites, how can people join at all? I assume they have to contact you, and then you have to invite them manually. Is that right?

Exactly :) Prerequisites work as external prevention. Everyone can see, but hardly anyone can join. Sometimes I make games and add people one-by-one or I am still asking players around who is interested - no intention to even invite people I do not know. So basically some of my games are just worthlessly advertised in Open-Room. As how many players have boot rate under 1-2% and 10 000 games finished with 70% win ratio. The trick is that you can still invite-add players who has lower stats that prerequisites require, but they cant join themselves.

I use this method mostly If I want fixed game, but the problem is when unwanted player joins I can´t eliminate him, so its best to add high barriers, because once you play with 30 people - its rather annoying to delete game just because someone joined who was not supposed to be there.

And Private Games would make it so much easier! although described absurd prerequisites work just as fine.

I see, that's not so different from just inviting people manually. A "private game" setting would be much better, because a) you wouldn't need to invite people, and b) it wouldn't take up space in the Open Games category (which could be frustrating for people browsing).

Excellent, I've posted a new uservoice:

https://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/11270655-private-games-allows-open-seats-without-being-adv

...Read all this stuff a couple of times. Like a few others, I just don't think it seems practical.

It's easier just to
1) invite everyone you want
and
2) set the game to start when the host hits the start button.

Then people who want to join, do. Everyone else, no sweat. The game will still start.
If "it's too much work" to invite everyone, and you'd rather just post a "password", you're simply not going to get as many players.

If it's too much work to invite people, then don't host. Let an enthusiastic player host and do the "work".


---Yeah, there were too many "quoted" words in "this post"...

@Mr Tranq. - you could probably make a pm that includes a bunch of players, and just reply to that each time, so you only have to post a game link there. that being said, you can't add players to a pm chain once started, i think.

it might be worthwhile posting games to a chat game instead?

Scotty,

You're missing the point. I'd like to be able to make an "open invitation" to a certain game, so that *people I haven't played with before* can join it.

The new "private games" option accomplishes that just as well as the password system did, so I recommend voting for that uservoice instead.

Seems like just a regular game then.
Nothing new needed.

^ afaik you can remove/shift players already before games.