Beyond the Pit [Pitboss Diplomacy Game] [Organization Thread]

[Pitboss Korea]

Of the sabre rattling?

I'm afraid I don't have enough sabres to rattle right now, maybe later.

[Pitboss Japan]

just don't wait too long cuz you might get involved weather you want to or not.

[Pitboss Vikings]

if the japanese take one more step clsoer t omy citys sabres will be rattling...




eventually everyone will be forced to take sides so all on the continent of Razolia choose sides well.

[Pitboss Japan]

please don't talk about it. be about it. i'mnot going to stop unless you try to stop me.

[Pitboss Vikings]

Originally posted by Pitboss Japan
please don't talk about it. be about it. i'mnot going to stop unless you try to stop me.

it is done... !!!!!

[Robert]

regarding Russia,
The 20h timer has been set so that people get 20 hours to finish their turn.
It's not there to give people 20 hours to do nothing. They can do nothing in 8 hours as well.

Of course, sometimes it's impossible to finish your turn in time, so once in a while people will miss their turn. Some may miss turns more often then others. That's fine.

But if you're going to miss 3 or 4 turns in a row: leave a message to us and retire from the game. Then the AI will take over (and follow your order-queues!) till you return and re-claim your civ

That way we won't have to wait several hours for someone who wno't play anyway.

There's no reason right now to yell at Russia. Most probably something is going on and he's not accountable for missing his turns.

But just for the record: those 20 hours aren't there to do nothing! Doing nothing can be done in 1 second as well. (by retiring and reclaiming when you return).

Maybe players who aren't sure if they can play within the next 20/21 hours should retire when they finish their turn. They can reclaim their civ when they return.

[Robert]

@Pinchak,
You're correct that in-game performance has not the biggest weight on the end-score. That's mostly because diplogames are more about role playing and story lines about in-game score.

Nevertheless does game-score have a huge impact on the end-score. 25% is a lot. It's not for nothing that even in the end-score I posted recently most top-civs are top-civs in-game as well. A 12th position player must gain a lot of votes to make up for those 11 points he's behind the top-player.

Not to mention that aspects like diplomacy and military strategy are hugely influenced by your position in the game as well. A strong civ will get diplomatic victories more easily then a weak civ. And a strong civ has more chances for military votes as well because it'll most probably have a bigger military presence anyway.

You are right that the voting conditions are open for interpretation.
I personally think that that's beautyfull. I still believe that however some individual votes may make no sence, the end result is quite fair.

When I look at the vote-results then I get the idea that the best role-players got the most votes in general.
Things will become even more and more accurate when we vote more and more.

I certainly believe that through such a voting system quality will prevail in the end.

The only thing I wonder about right now is if the leading civs will get less votes now because people may be reluctant to vote for leading civs. That's an interesting thing to observe.

Regarding the vote-categories:
- story vote
You vote for the stories that entertained you most. I think that that's a fair thing. Players who are able to post storiest that are most entertaining win here.

- Diplomacy votes
You're right that this is more a gray area.
It's up to players to keep their diplomacy in public or more behind the scenes. Behind the scenes may cost players votes but let them gain some in-game score.

Players can obviously also chose to make behind-the scenes stuff public later or hint at it.

Same with military strategy.
It's obvious that players who don't post about their achievements won't get many votes. Post screenshots, draw lines, explain your strategy!

In the end it's important to post about your stuff. Let people know why they should vote for you.

You're right, it's open to interpretation. I personally think that's the beauty of such a game. We're not captured by game-mechanics that decide on a winner.

Maybe we can compare it to the real world.
If the real world would be a normal MP game America would win.
But if the real world is a diplomacy game then I'm not so sure yet who's going to win.... who would get the votes?

I like the latter more. But you're free to have a different opinion of course.

[Robert]

Regarding the communication system.
I think that the beauty of the mailb-boxes is that we can keep all behind-the scenes stuff and reveal it later by publishing all passwords.

Then we can all open all mailboxes and read what really happened.....
Same with the PM messages.

I haven't registrated civstats id's. If players want to registrate they have to do that themselves.
I agree with whomever said that we should stick to 1 system as most as possible.

Of course everyone is free to use whatever system he wants, but don't expect all players to also register at civstats and read their msg there.

I have not much fun in openening gmail only to read that there's a msg for me on civstats. It makes things only more complicated, imho.

But once again, I can't forbid people to communicate in any way they want

Ps. if you use telephone calls, please record the calls and post them when the game has been finished

[Pitboss Vikings]

unfortunatly i have deleted all emails received at Gmail... they werent very secret anyway just greetings mainly from a few civs, but i will keep all emails from now on that may show someones vote castching stuff for later reveals.

As to how to get votes.

I agree with cyber, post well you will get score.

I dont reveal all my communications but hope those i communicating with value the communication and if necessary place a vote for me if no one else has communicsted with them

i dont think any of my gmail contacts asre vote worthy yet though.

[Pitboss Persia]

I wasn't the one who suggested multiplying the game score with the votes ranking.

I simply suggested the summing up month by month thing, which is i think a better way to handle things.

The only thing that i disagree with is the end-game score. Simply because the votes you get all over the game will be taken into account, but the score-category doesn't.

Plus, once you get a vote, you can't loose it. Once you get score, you can loose it.

My suggestion was made for the sake of balancing the four categorys.

[Robert]

The only thing that i disagree with is the end-game score. Simply because the votes you get all over the game will be taken into account, but the score-category doesn't.

?
There are two scores, the vote-score and the game-score. Based on the vote end-score you get vote-points and based on the end-game-score you get game-points.

It works in a simular way.

[Pinchak]

The only thing I wonder about right now is if the leading civs will get less votes now because people may be reluctant to vote for leading civs. That's an interesting thing to observe.

Might be a good idea not to post the running tallys. The concern mentioned above will affect voting to one degree or another.

[Robert]

Might be a good idea not to post the running tallys.

That was the original idea

[The Capo]

Why is everyone worried that people won't vote for leading civs?

If people do that they are douchebags. Assuming the leading civs deserve votes to begin with.

[Pitboss Japan]

HAhahahahahahahahahaha the vikings acually attacked me. do they not realize what they have just done? Hahahahahaha now the real fun begins. just a warning. if anyone tries to come to the aid of the vikings please be for warned the same fait which the vikings have brought against themselves will come to you as well.