Total number of teams & minimum members limit

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Locutus


As I said, snoopy decided to finish that game on his own. And on top of that, as I said, I don't particularly enjoy being accused of not playing fast enough by people like you: I play DGs to have fun, not to have a third unpaid job.

If you have a real problem with that then take it up with snoopy, but then also be consistent and take it up with the 8 or 9 other teams that are down to a single player, and have your own team show some more signs that it consists of more than you as well. You're lashing out awfully harshly at others for abandoning the game for someone who supposedly has 20 people behind him even though he only has his own word to back that up. Doth protest an awful lot...

I am pretty sure I stated there is only 4 -5 of us in the warlords game, and similar numbers in this one so far...

and if you not believe how many we have in the others, well good for you, but they are there, and doing their thing

as to using the forums, civ groups, discussing issues etc:

- I do not recall anything that has ever been stated that you must use a private forum to keep team information flowing, especially in this day and age of digital communication

- I thought it was mandatory that all players of a team join the civ group, so all could see who was in which team etc?

- and as to my protesting, struth lad, you have an abundance of posts here on many issues, and seem to be laying the "this is an apolyton demo game law" down etc, yet you are one who has abandoned another of these very games. so what if snoop wanted to play with himself, you all started as a team in a team demo game, what gives him the right to ban/block you all from still being there? what really stops you from setting a great example to others in the othger teams by coming back and getting involved?

- and as to taking these matters up with you openly here and now, I would have thought you are the perfect person to discuss them with, 1. you are a part owner of this site, 2. you are a member of civ groups in both games, 3. you are actively posting your opinions here in these threads...

[ChrisiusMaximus]

4 hes a hypocrite

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Paddy
- I do not recall anything that has ever been stated that you must use a private forum to keep team information flowing, especially in this day and age of digital communication

No, it's not required by any means but you look very shady by hiding yourself. If you do that that's fine, but you must do that with the understanding that people may start to question you at some point -- you of all people should know that.

- and as to my protesting, struth lad, you have an abundance of posts here on many issues, and seem to be laying the "this is an apolyton demo game law" down etc, yet you are one who has abandoned another of these very games. so what if snoop wanted to play with himself, you all started as a team in a team demo game, what gives him the right to ban/block you all from still being there? what really stops you from setting a great example to others in the othger teams by coming back and getting involved?

I'm not laying down any law, but I am entitled to give my opinions as much as you are, and you're not exactly shy about it either.

I don't have a copy of Warlords, what do you expect me to do? Sabotage snoopy so he can't play either? Go public and demand that he be kicked out? What does anyone gain from that? He's good guy, a very capable player and generally very reliable, surely you'll agree the game's better off with him than with another AI team?

And remember, this has happened for 8 teams, not just the staff team -- we have nothing but your word that it's not happened to yours. At least I'm completely open and honest about what's going on, rather than trying to hide behind smoke and mirrors and lobbing accusations at others.

- and as to taking these matters up with you openly here and now, I would have thought you are the perfect person to discuss them with, 1. you are a part owner of this site, 2. you are a member of civ groups in both games, 3. you are actively posting your opinions here in these threads...

*I* am being open, I don't see any openness from you. You merely accuse others of doing wrong with an holier-than-thou attitude, without providing any constructive answers.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by ChrisiusMaximus
4 hes a hypocrite

If you're talking about Paddy, I would agree. If you're talking about me, I'd suggest reading a dictionary some time (heck, I'd suggest that anyway, you need it )

[Paddy]

get over it, if you have an accusation to make against me, then make it

[Locutus]

Contrary to you, I don't make baseless accusations.

[Paddy]

what accusations have I made that are baseless?

did you or did you not leave the warlords pitboss game?

[Locutus]

You regularly accuse people (not just me, which is the least of my concerns) of not playing their turns in time, of 'abandoning' the game. You're slighting people without caring if they had good reasons for their actions. You're telling them they aren't entitled to discuss ways to improve this game if they ever dropped out of a previous one.

Let's a repeat some of the nice things you said in this very thread alone:

yeah, I agree, any team who after all this chat fails within the 1st four months needs to be drawn and quartered

if they already fail in a current pitboss game with this "one turn player" style, then what right do they have to come here and start with that?

so yes, stuff em, they had their chance, openly and publicly....

you abandoned the game

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Originally posted by Locutus


If you're talking about Paddy, I would agree. If you're talking about me, I'd suggest reading a dictionary some time (heck, I'd suggest that anyway, you need it )

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Locutus
You regularly accuse people (not just me, which is the least of my concerns) of not playing their turns in time, of 'abandoning' the game. You're slighting people without caring if they had good reasons for their actions. You're telling them they aren't entitled to discuss ways to improve this game if they ever dropped out of a previous one.

Let's a repeat some of the nice things you said in this very thread alone:

yeah, I agree, any team who after all this chat fails within the 1st four months needs to be drawn and quartered

if they already fail in a current pitboss game with this "one turn player" style, then what right do they have to come here and start with that?

so yes, stuff em, they had their chance, openly and publicly....

you abandoned the game

and you have issues with those statements?

we are trying to get a solution to an important issue

and as con rightly pointed out, some of the teams here now stating they can get along with only one turn player have proven they can not do this in the warlords pitboss game

if I am too harsh for you, then best you not visit my pub, young dutchies like you are cannon fodder for the barstaff

go enjoy your site, your games, and your words

and if you not able to put things in context, then that is not my issue

I come here to play a game called civ, not get caught up in a squabble with you

good luck to you and your games

please accept this post as my sign of you are far superior in all these matters, and I will now step back and allow you to stand tall in your supperiority

be well locutus, and may the people flock to your banner and your site in this day of enlightenment

/me heads back to the pub for some fun

[ChrisiusMaximus]

I would not worry to much about Locutus mate, hes doing his usual telling everyone how its gonna be then he will vanish as before when he actually has to commit to something. he was just the same in one of the SPDG's remember, blah blah blah blah then when we all stopped listening he shut up and vanished.

suppose its not for me to say as i aint in a team in this thing anyhow

but for the record im a member of paddy's team in the warlords game as are plato and BKWM and some more i think, Paddy does post screens and reports which i do look at !!!

same with the c4dg

same with the civ4 isdg but there wer both on team CGN

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Paddy
and you have issues with those statements?

we are trying to get a solution to an important issue

Yes, as a matter of fact I do. As you say, we're looking for a solution to an important issue and all you're doing is accusing other people of being failures and abandoning the game. You've not made a single constructive suggestion to fix this, unlike many others in this thread, myself included.

and as con rightly pointed out, some of the teams here now stating they can get along with only one turn player have proven they can not do this in the warlords pitboss game

Which is why I am in favour of having larger teams with more turn players, which you oppose. In itself that's fine, but come up with a better solution then, rather than question my character.

if I am too harsh for you, then best you not visit my pub, young dutchies like you are cannon fodder for the barstaff

Again with the insults, if you're not gonna be constructive why are you even here?

and if you not able to put things in context, then that is not my issue

I see your context, you're clearly trolling.

I come here to play a game called civ, not get caught up in a squabble with you

Same for me, yet when I come here I find you lobbing insults at me.

please accept this post as my sign of you are far superior in all these matters, and I will now step back and allow you to stand tall in your supperiority

Wow, hypocracy galore...

[UnOrthOdOx]

Here's the thing.

**** happens.

Occasionally, people cannot make a turn timer, especially a short one. For whatever reason.

Take the C4DG, and the "24 hour timer". This last turn, Sarantium took well over 48 hours, and presently the Horde is approaching 72.

Now, granted, it's in PBEM format, and no one is enforcing said turn timer. Nearly every team, if not every team in that game has gone over at some point. No big deal.

Pitboss just plain is not forgiving though. You miss the timer, you get skipped. No AI moving for you, no nothing. Just skipped. So, you lose that settler or worker to a barb, or you lose that location to a rival, or you fail to adequately defend somewhere. Because you got skipped.

Is it so shocking that a team that finds itself skipped several times has a hard time recovering interest? We invest much more in these demogames than we do a regular game. Yeah, a regular game, you get skipped a time or two, brush it off. A demogame you've been playing for a year, suddenly you get skipped a time or two and months of work are erased as a result? Not because you were outmaneuvered, or made a mistake. Just due to an arbitrary timer.

SERIOUSLY think about that. I know many playing here are on teams that have taken far more than their turn timer on several occasions in the C4DG. How would you have felt if we had just skipped you there?

I personally have SERIOUS doubts whether pitboss can sustain a demogame as a result. And am all but certain it cannot if you enforce a swift timer.

The original single player demogame in Civ 3, and several subsequent ones: Played twice a week.

Multitude of PBEM demogames, played once or twice a week.

The Warlords demogame bumped that to 3-4 times a week. It proves too swift for some of the demogame crowd, myself included, used to a long history of twice a week. Is that really a shock?

[Krill]

I have been part of team that failed, this much I accept. I joined the Goonies after teh game started, after all of the decision had been made with regards to rules and teams. I won;t play their turns because I don;t have warlords, or rather, I was using the version given to me by Firaxis for testing, which I no longer have access to for no fault of my own. I refuse to buy the game I spent countless hours testing because of "someone else" ****ing about, but I would play as turn player if I did. I have BtS, so this problem will not arise.

The games where I have been turn player I have played the save in a prompt manner (C3CDG with Ormuzd) and the C3C ISDG (with NYE where MM was pretty delicate). The only times where this had been a problem were because of a 24 hour limit, and a 24 hour limit in this game, with PBTS will lead to a similary (small) problem with turn playing which can be gotten round by planing turns in advance (which any good team does) and people who know how to play turns (GS has 11 players, of which atleast 9 have been turn players in previous DGs). If anything, 24 hours will cause more missed turns, because it is alot harder for 2 people to syncronise their lives so that if one person can't play the save another will; a 48 turn timer will at least let 1 person play the turn on the second day if they have something important, such as a long business meeting, a family birthday, a hospital appointment they must take a child to on the first.

People leave DGs, and a small number will join. Alot leave because of RL issues, and to them for prioritising their lives in the correct manner. People leave DGs for many reasons, burning out as turn player (myself, for one), starting a family, or for flaming and trolling on the forrm. Paddy, you should remember the at least one time that flaming and trolling lead to a damaged DG experience, and I seriously hope that you can keep your team in order so that it doesn't happen again, but this thread isn't helping you prove that you can. So I suggest that you stop posting for a bit and reconsider this thread carefully, and think if posting more in here is a good idea. Personally, I hope everyone here can stop posting and cool off for a few days, and I do mean everyone.

[Nugog]

UnO - good points.

Again - I do not believe that the size of the team has anything to do with it.

But Locutus does have a point that the number of turn players (in any format) does.

Let's use Southern Cross as an example.

Southern Cross is a very small (5 players) team. When the team started everyone could be turn player - so no problems there. The team was small on purpose - we were/are relatively new Demogamers - had had some success - and really wanted to see how we would fare vs. the "old hands". The team is also run as a democracy - we vote on all decisions - take the majority view and move on.

When the BtS 3.13 patch came out Zoid who did not have BtS could not log into the game for some reason - but we still had four possible turn players.

So we used the private forum more to post screend etc - and used most of the 48 hours available. We also had "team meetings" on one of the many chat type services out there.

Fed's PC died - so we were down to 4 players and three turn players. This was a bit more troublesome - as all three turnplayers were in the same timezone. Okay for playing - not so flash for democracy etc - especially as all the Kiwi's (and Rob ) pretty much worked the same hours. But we got through.

Zoid got BtS and Fed's PC had a heart transplant, so we were back in action.

Then I moved to PNG - with all the inherent internet issues that brings. So I could not play the turns due to slow connection speeds, and RobWorham and FeMme go on a 2 week holiday in the Southern Alps. So Zoid and Fed play the turns.

Due to some IT issues being addressed in Port Moresby - I may soon be able to actually connect to the game.

So - number of people in the team is not the issue. The real issue is trying to ensure that your team does actually have a turn player. Sounds simple but it is not always that easy.

So - for me - and many others I suspect - the real issue is - where do we draw the line in the sand - and what do we do to/with teams that step over that line?

And as unpopular as I may be for saying it - UnO's points above about PitBoss vs. PBEM for demogames has really got me thinking..........

*EDIT* This was a X-Post with Krill.