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

[Robert]

This is what America voted (by responding to my PM)

Pitboss America:
America votes:

A. (after all combatants agree to turn order - if they can't you make that decision for them)

1. (if we allow everyone to make up rules and change them there are no rules)

Vote results so far:

A. 4
B. 0
C. 0
D. 0

1. 4
2. 0

[St Jon]

I vote A and 1.


BTW. Even though America has voted A his description of it does not match:~ 'The double-move turn has been reloaded and we continue from there'

[Pitboss Japan]

double move before the war?

I think we all agree in the principles about no double move during war, so we should finalize the rule to avoid any further problems.

I'm thinking about an addition that we should consider. Every rule we have is active only in war time however there is a move which is not a violation of any rule, but still unfair. I think we should consider to rule it out after all.
That is: making a double move during the declaration of the war.
Shortly: you wait untill your future enemy move, then in your turn move your army to his border (no war yet), you start the next turn and move your army next to his cities-even more powerfull if you want to make an amphibious attack: even if the enemy is spying on you, you can still suprise him:
1st round: move your army to your coastal cities, load the transports move the transports next to your future enemy's border
2nd round: declare war, move in the transports, capture/raze the cities.

What I'm suggesting is:
You cannot make a double move if you are going to declare war in one of those.

Probably it's evident to everyone, but still better to put it in the rules, i think.

[St Jon]

It's not illegal to declare War and move on the same Turn. The Rules don't state that and how you move next to Cities and then wait? You have de facto declared war by crossing closed borders anyway. You must have surprise! Please refer to my earlier post giving Ming's interpretation of the wording of our Rules. I could never have invaded Piercia and captured 2 Cities without loss and only minimal damage with your amended rule in place.

The Turn before only becomes a Double Move IF you moved AFTER your opponent - there is no prohibition on declaring war, moving and engaging in combat all in one Turn. It would make the whole stratagy of war a total farce. How then could a small nation wage war, with any hope of success, against a larger? You must be able to catch them off-guard and if someone is not protecting their borders then more fool them and they deserve to get hammered!

I think we all agree in the principles about no double move during war, so we should finalize the rule to avoid any further problems.

I'm thinking about an addition that we should consider. Every rule we have is active only in war time however there is a move which is not a violation of any rule, but still unfair. I think we should consider to rule it out after all.
That is: making a double move during the declaration of the war.
Shortly: you wait untill your future enemy move, then in your turn move your army to his border (no war yet), you start the next turn and move your army next to his cities-even more powerfull if you want to make an amphibious attack: even if the enemy is spying on you, you can still suprise him:
1st round: move your army to your coastal cities, load the transports move the transports next to your future enemy's border
2nd round: declare war, move in the transports, capture/raze the cities.

What I'm suggesting is:
You cannot make a double move if you are going to declare war in one of those.

Probably it's evident to everyone, but still better to put it in the rules, i think.

[Pitboss Japan]

It's not illegal to declare War and move on the same Turn.
....
You must be able to catch them off-guard and if someone is not protecting their borders then more fool them and they deserve to get hammered!

You don't get my point. I don't say that you shouldnt move in the same turn when you declare war. I'm saying that you shouldnt double move if you are going to declare war.
So the attacker should adapt the turn order before he actually declares war. It's just about being fair and not abusing the game mechanics. (basically during war we make the pitboss game as it was a normal turn based one. So if it takes a turn for your enemy to move his army next to your border you should be able to see this and react- under the pitboss game mechanic it's possible to miss this chance)

[Robert]

Japan: that is covered in the current ruleset.

All: Let's first deal with the current problems, and then when things are ok again finally all give input in a good ruleset.

Snoopy369 advised us before this game started: double moves are the bane of pitboss games.

Let it not become our bane.
If everyone is cooperative and sane we must be able to deal with things.

After all this game has been started as a tryout, an experiment.
We've learned a lot by experience (the hard way).
When I start a new game I'll defenitely not include people who are not cooperative.
Hot headed is no problem, we all get emotional, but when time passes people must be able to apologize and get back on track again.
If people can't admit their mistakes then there's little base for a 1,5 year long game with multiple people and we all'd better move back to SP gaming.

Vote count:
A: 5
B: 0
C: 0
D: 0

1: 5
2: 0

if 3 more people have voted for A the game can continue immediately (majority vote)

[OzzyKP]

Ozzy;
I did not apply my rule change proposition (eventough some players did indeed support it) because you said that you didn't agree. I expect you, and everybody else to do the same.

4. Your comment that 'several changes were never agreed upon' are false (not to mention that you don't offer support for this statement).

Here are the rules we started the game with on May 28, 2008 (though the post was edited October 1, so you may have changed them at that point, we don't know):

- 6 hours time between moving during war-time
Civilizations that are at war have to wait 6 hours between their moves. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can move as again well.

Thus, a civ at war can move after:
- 6 hours have passed since his last move
- all his opponents have moved after his last move

--------------------------
If any civilization violetes these rules the game will be paused and the concequences will be decided.
If damage has been done then the game will be reloaded back to the last available save on the Pitboss Server. The Pitboss Server saves every turn and keeps all saves till the game has finished.

Possible penalties, besides loading the last save are:
- removing all or a % of the votes the violator receives in a certain month or all months in a certain category or all categories
- The loss of tech vouchers (a few or all)
- removed from the game
- a warning

This depends on the seriousness of the violation, which is not only determined by the damage being done but also by the reasons and attitude of the violater.'

Here are the rules from August 8 (post also edited October 1):

- 6 hours time between moving during war-time
Civilizations that are at war have to wait 6 hours between their moves. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can move as again well.

Thus, a civ at war can move after:
- 6 hours have passed since his last move
- all his opponents have moved after his last move

--------------------------
If any civilization violetes these rules the game will be paused and the concequences will be decided.
If damage has been done then the game will be reloaded back to the last available save on the Pitboss Server. The Pitboss Server saves every turn and keeps all saves till the game has finished.

Possible penalties, besides loading the last save are:
- removing all or a % of the votes the violator receives in a certain month or all months in a certain category or all categories
- The loss of tech vouchers (a few or all)
- removed from the game
- a warning

This depends on the seriousness of the violation, which is not only determined by the damage being done but also by the reasons and attitude of the violater.'

Here is the rule from a post made September 20 (and edited December 8):

- 6 hours time between moving during war-time
Civilizations that are at war have to wait 6 hours after the new turn started after their last move. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can move as again well.

Thus, a civ at war can move after:
- 6 hours have passed since the new turn started after his last move
- all his opponents have moved after his last move

--------------------------
If any civilization violetes these rules the game will be paused and the concequences will be decided.
If damage has been done then the game will be reloaded back to the last available save on the Pitboss Server. The Pitboss Server saves every turn and keeps all saves till the game has finished.

Possible penalties, besides loading the last save are:
- removing all or a % of the votes the violator receives in a certain month or all months in a certain category or all categories
- The loss of tech vouchers (a few or all)
- removed from the game
- a warning

This depends on the seriousness of the violation, which is not only determined by the damage being done but also by the reasons and attitude of the violater.'

And now your new rules from this thread:

- 6 hours time between moving during (pre) war-time
Civilizations that are at war or want to declare war have to wait 6 hours after the turn started if they were the last of their opponent(s) to play their turn during the last turn. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can play as well.

Thus, a civ at war or intending to declare war in the current turn can play their turn when:
- His opponent(s) played their last turn after he has played his last turn
- 6 hours have passed since the new turn started
- all his opponents have moved during this turn

The spirit of this rule is more important then the letter of the rule.
Key is: if a player in a (pre) war situation gets advantage because of non-turn-based gaming (where turn-based means: all players move in the same order every turn) then this will fall under the "No double move during (pre) war time" rule.

At the other side: if no damage has been done despite a double-move has been played then we will just continue playing without any corrections.
Damage is done when the player against whom a double move has been played is being disadvantaged in a (pre) war situation.

--------------------------
If any civilization violetes these rules the game will be paused and the concequences will be decided.
If damage has been done then the game will be reloaded back to the last available save on the Pitboss Server. The Pitboss Server saves every turn and keeps all saves till the game has finished.

Possible penalties, besides loading the last save are:
- removing all or a % of the votes the violator receives in a certain month or all months in a certain category or all categories
- The loss of tech vouchers (a few or all)
- removed from the game
- a warning (a player can only receive 1 warning)

This depends on the seriousness of the violation, which is not only determined by the damage being done but also by the reasons and attitude of the violater.'

Key changes that you made that were never agreed to by anyone:
- Extending the rule to cover the turn before war is declared.
- Saying that the spirit of the rule is more important than the letter.

It seems that after you lost the previous argument over your double move you changed the rules to read the way you wanted. We did not vote on these changes, we did not agree to these changes, there was SIGNIFICANT disagreement to these changes and you made them anyway. So, since these changes were not agreed to I reverted them and put up a phrasing of the rule that people seemed to actually agree to.

You note yourself that it was discussed in the thread. So why are you claiming my intention was to sneak this by without anyone noticing? We discussed it and you said you were the only one who disagreed. So since you were the only one who disagreed you assumed that your opinion was more important and you changed the rule single-handedly?

Like you did before?

[Robert]

First of all:
- Even if I did it very wrong then that's no excuse for you to do it wrong as well.
- if you think that I changed the rules illegally you should have made a post about that, which you didn't.
- I have not illegally or without notification change the rules.

Here's the post where the latest installment of the rules was announced.

If you would have disagreed back then you should have spoken up back then, which you did not. Not to mention that that rule installment is not MY ruleset but just what we discussed during the setup of the game.
If you think that the ruleset does not reflect the initial rules we discussed then I ask you to clarify youself and point out the differences.

[OzzyKP]

First of all:
- Even if I did it very wrong then that's no excuse for you to do it wrong as well.

I was fixing your mistake and bringing the rule-set closer to what we had all discussed and wanted.

- if you think that I changed the rules illegally you should have made a post about that, which you didn't.

I did, but I was ignored.

If you would have disagreed back then you should have spoken up back then, which you did not. Not to mention that that rule installment is not MY ruleset but just what we discussed during the setup of the game.
If you think that the ruleset does not reflect the initial rules we discussed then I ask you to clarify youself and point out the differences.

Ok, then why is it ok for you to add in rules that were discussed, but not me? My changes were all discussed.

[Robert]

Ozzy, your ruleset did not even include the 6 hour rule, how can you claim that it reflected the original setup-agreement?

And for the record, when I did it the game was completely down.
I restarted it and pointed out my conditions (And also accepted if I would not be a part of the game anymore, for which case I had handed over all information, saves and passwords to MMC).

The rephrase of the ruleset was a part of get the game going again (After being down for 3 days!).
It was my last attempt. Back then everybody (including Korea) agreed and we continued (with that ruleset).
I am not claiming that we had the best situation back then, but it worked to get things going again.

Like I said before, I am willing to accept your suggestions (With some additions/changes) and we can suggest these to the rest of the group again.
But we can't just change rules. That counts both for you and for me and for everyody else.

The simple fact that we are now in the current situation says enough!
Please accept that and vote so that we can get on again. Things are already that complicated.

I did, but I was ignored.

Show it

[St Jon]

You don't get my point. I don't say that you shouldnt move in the same turn when you declare war. I'm saying that you shouldnt double move if you are going to declare war.
So the attacker should adapt the turn order before he actually declares war. It's just about being fair and not abusing the game mechanics. (basically during war we make the pitboss game as it was a normal turn based one. So if it takes a turn for your enemy to move his army next to your border you should be able to see this and react- under the pitboss game mechanic it's possible to miss this chance)

You are correct but if the Player A moves 1st up to the Border and Player B fails to notice a big Stack sitting there then that is down to bad play on the part of Player B not a Rule Infringement. Next Turn Player A can still legally move 1st and attack because no Double Move has occured. You cannot have Rules in place to compensate for lack of care on the part of Player B in failing to observe potentially hostile forces suddenly right next to them. The Story Thread should, if the Game has been played in the right spiirit, have given Player B a pretty good idea that Player A was pissed at them and likely to attack anyway.

You also have the issue of multiple War's. Remember, in BtP, you are at War with Maya just as much as Sparta is! What if I look and decide that Sparta cannot have troops everywhere and though Rome will be annoyed they are too committed to the Mayan War to do anything I decide to attack you. I am now at War with you and Sparta but not Maya and Rome. I've managed to get my move in BEFORE Sparts's so under the Turn based solution they will be unable to move the following Turn until I have moved. Rome and Maya are also dependent on my move even though I am at War with neither. Time Zones now really hit as three of us are in Europe and one in USA! If Khmer do arrive with their Tanks and join up with Maya it throws the whole thing into chaos as I get the feeling that they, and Portugal, are actually on yet another Continent.

How do you disentangle that lot without someone getting a freebie Double Move? What if it is decided that Maya should move first? The clock will already have advanced a fair way, Maya usually plays around 2100 BST but could, if they wished wait without too much harm to their sleep cycle, until 0100 BST. You then have 4 Players, still sticking to Turn Order, with about 90mins to play before Turn end and Maya can move once more! I'm off work at the moment so I could do it but not when I have to get up at 0500 BST to catch a train to work! Remember we have also disallowed simultaneous movement so there is no way everyone can play their Turns!

[Robert]

repost to keep things running:

Can all players vote for the following:

A. The double-move turn has been reloaded and we continue from there
B. The double-move turn has to be reloaded again
C. Reload from the moment Sparta declared war on Maya, 2 turns before the double move
D. There was no double move at all, just continue from the last possible safe

Also an additional vote here:
1. Ozzy's rule change was illegal (no matter if I do or do not support his ruleset)
2. Ozzy's rule change was valid (no matter if I do or do not support his ruleset)

All players get 24 hours to vote on this, after that the game will continue as the majority voted.

Another way to deal with this issue sooner is if both Rome and Maya agree on the A,B,C or D option above

Vote update:
A: 5
B: 0
C: 0
D: 0

1: 5
2: 0

[Pitboss Celts]

I vote for A. I care not if people think Ozzy's rule change was illegal. Whether it is or isn't is of no consequence except to fan a flame against Ozzy. The question should be Do you support Ozzy's rule change?

[Robert]

The question should be Do you support Ozzy's rule change?

that'll be the next question. (after this has been handled)
It is important, not as a flame, but we must make clear if his action is the way to change rules or not. (to avoid a precedent that'll be repeated in the future by anyone)

Vote update:
A: 6
B: 0
C: 0
D: 0

1: 5
2: 0
abstain: 1

16 hours left for voting, or 2 votes for A. (or 8 for B, C or D)

[Pitboss Celts]

Why does it matter if people thought he did so illegally? This should not be a public vote about personal opinion. The fact is that the rules were changed. And if the majority vote that he changed the rules illegally, what happens then? Is he kicked out of the game?