Beyond the Pit [Pitboss Diplomacy Thread] [Warfare-Turn Timer Issue Discussion]

[Pitboss Japan]

i think we should make a scale and each leavel should have a punishment to fit it. then we let everyone know so for the futere we don't have to think it up just follow what we already decided.

[Robert]

Maybe you can make a suggestion?

[Pitboss Vikings]

Originally posted by CyberShy

no amount of argument is ever going to persuade either of us to change opinions. so will leave it there. you know i believe it was a cheat. you feel it wasnt.

You can persuade me with good arguments.
"Korea paniced" is not a good argument.

I really can't see how my "it didn't benefit the Mayans" argument is not a good argument.

I get the idea that you don't base your opinion on facts but on a feeling. You just want that the Mayans have exploited the game. If I'm incorrect then just tell me your opinion on the arguments I gave and tell me why the "Korea paniced" argument is a good one.

The faxcts are without the double move occuring none of the following events would have occured. the koreans wouldnt have panicked the mayans wouldnt have got the worker.

it is simply a logical progression from one event to another.

the double move created the whole mayan advantage

[Pitboss Vikings]

any double move made either during or jsut before the outbreak of was should require a restart, no ifs no buts. this way all other players wil lbe peeved at the person doing it.

that person is then warned.

if he does it again he is remvoed from the game.


now there is some teeth


no arguing over did it give benifit or not. JUST DONT DO IT

[The Capo]

I think this is a good point to be at right now; we've come to agreement on certain things, and on others there is obviously going to be no agreement. But it appears that a penalty (it shouldnt' be called a punishment, but a penalty) should be in order. Here's what I think;

First of all, I don't think it should be based on how "bad" it is. There is no real objective way to establish that, plus the fact that it will require us to make decisions and probably argue which will lead to more problems. So I think that if we give weight to the result we are doing a disservice to the game. The point is to make sure it doesn't happen, not to let it happen and give penalties based on the outcome. That isn't really going to fix anything. So because I think punishing the person based on how severe it is, or what gains/losses were caused by it is not right. Now what I think we SHOULD do is decide whether it is worthy of punishment. Some people may do it on accident, others may HAVE to play at that time lest they miss their turn, or if the other player (that they are at war with) moves then you should be allowed to move within the 1/3rd limit. That being said I think the punishment should be tech vouchers.

- If the player MUST move within the 1/3rd limit, he/she should try their best to refrain from attacking a unit. If a player does "have to" move within the 1/3rd limit they are not allowed to attack the other player, this must be strict and without exception. This is just to make sure there are no further arguments about it. If all of these things occur, and it is truly for the sake of finishing the turn before the timer runs out, we should probably ignore it. That way we aren't punishing people who are just trying to get the game moving.

- If the player makes his move to destroy a unit, remove a resource (ie pilliage), take a unit, or any other activity that is detrimental to another player, REGARDLESS OF HOW BAD PEOPLE THINK IT IS, they lose five tech vouchers.

- If it is a gross abuse (the same as above but in multiple cases), in other words rampant, or obvious, (this would be the only situation where the group decides how severe it is) they lose ten tech vouchers and peace must be declared at once if the offended player so chooses.

This way nobody will do it, and nobody will have to worry about arguments anymore. Now this may seem extreme, but it really isn't extreme if nobody breaks the rule. So anyway that is my plan, feel free to debate it though.

[Pitboss Vikings]

and what about the person attacked capo how are they reimbursed for any losses and setbacks caused by the double move.

[Pitboss Japan]

i like the idea but what if the person who did the double move which took out a unit, pilliage, take unit or city, etc. had no tech vouchers? then what? i has if the person kills a unit because of the double move 4 or theirs should be killed. if they pilliage, they must hand over two workers. if they take a city or unit, they must give the unit or city back plus give then a city or unit as well. this is more of a fitting penalty rather then taking away tech vouchers.

[Pitboss Vikings]

i guess tech vouchers may be worth sometinhg if winning in game was all that this gmae was about.

with 3/4 of the score for winning this game decided by voting the tech voucehrs are worth less.

personally i think the fact that all my votes be taken off me may be more of a punishment.


So you lose all the Story, DIPLO and Military votes you have recieved so far.

no matteer hoe big you get in game the measly 18 pts for wiining in game is not going to make much differnece


so i have changed my opinion

The penalty to be loss of all votes recieved so far.

with the fact tht it occured psoted so we all know not to vote for the DOUBLE MOVER>

this will impact more. because doesnt matter how many nations you crush, it does not give you a win in this DIPLO game.

[The Capo]

I guess I didn't really think of that. I don't think you should lose all of your votes necessarily.

How about this for the five tech voucher thing you lose both five tech vouchers and 25% of all of your votes. For the ten tech vouchers you lose both ten vouchers and 50% of your votes. How about that?

The reason I say this is because some people will not care about the voting (wow imagine that!) and still consider it a victory if they get to AC anyway. So make it double bad.

I don't care what the punishment is, as long as it is harsh enough to prevent it. That's the idea right?

[Pitboss Vikings]

defiantly some merit in that capo, some are still playing as if the psace launch is a win...

ok how doe get others to vote on this...


I fear making a ounishment poll

perhpas get cyber to ask the others if they feel a penalty is needed.

i am jsut over arguing with people when those that are arguing agaisnt me (except CS and Ozzy) are mostly people who are here to win it with launch to Space....

[Pitboss Japan]

the majority probably won't care either way and again what if someone doesn't care about winning or losing points or tech vouchers. then what? something more need to be done in my oppinion.

[Pitboss Vikings]

i dont see the point, if they dont care about winning then why would they make the double move in first place...

[Pitboss Japan]

maybe they just want to gain more land. there are many reasons why someone would use a double move that don't involve winning the game.

[Pitboss Vikings]

what is the point of more land.?

not i n refernce to civ game , but in this game where if you lose all your points.

what is the point of the land?

[Pitboss Japan]

who knows. i'm just trying to cover all angles.