Total number of teams & minimum members limit

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Locutus


I wouldn't consider having 5-10 people on all teams 'good numbers' by any stretch of the definition. In fact, you just proved why we should ensure teams have at least ~15 members each -- that just reduces the risk of teams dying even if the predesignated turn players drop out (which inevitably will happen)...

Taking a little liberty on the sign-ups (i.e. including the Spanish team, PAL members who haven't posted here but signed up on their own site and people of whom others say they will join but haven't yet) we currently have around 90 people interested in this game, the vast majority of them casuals. That's enough for six teams IMO. Seven could work if they're well-balanced in terms of size and turn players but eight is really pushing it.

Well said, I can live with 8 in th spirit of compromise but that is really my upper limit, I would of course prefer fewer teams and more members per team.

Originally posted by Locutus QFT. I'd prefer around 72 hours in fact, give people plenty of time to do the democratic part of this Democracy Game, though I suspect that idea will have little support. If you want fast games sign up for some regular Pitboss games in our PBEM forum, 48 hours is the bare minimum necessary to allow for this to be more than an MP Succession Game.

Yep 72 would be better, but I can live with 48, and yep if you want a fast game go elsewhere Ill settle for a decent pace and team interaction.

24 hour timer is like having a job IMHO.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Aidun
I generally liked the speed of the C4 MP DG, just as an example. I'm not sure what timer is used there.

The vanilla DG is PBEM-based and therefore generally actually a lot slower than the Warlords game, which is Pitboss-based with simultaneous turns and has a 48-hour turn timer (with PBEM it varies on the teams of course, can be anywhere from 2 days to 2 weeks but usually it's 4-5 days).

[Beta]

48 hours. Nothing more and nothing less. (ok - con made me say this.)

As to team size, I am not convinced the actual number is all that critical, provided it is above some minumum threshold. What is important is to have a core of players who will stick with the game through thick and thin. And using the Templars for example, I know even with the number of members we have now, that we will be fine. We are not closing the ranks, I am just saying that the current folks can and will carry the team.

For a team that may not have a core of dedicated demo gamers, then yes, the more the merrier for the guarantee of continued existence.

[Nugog]

The number of members is not over critical for the actual playing of the game. How many did the Goonies start off with?

However - if we all have larger teams, with different players/members than we usually have - well, this is good for Demo gaming and the community.

48 hours is the minimum in my opinion - later in the game it may even not be enough for democracy based teams.

[Krill]

[q=Beta]For a team that may not have a core of dedicated demo gamers, then yes, the more the merrier for the guarantee of continued existence.[/q]

GS seems to have a pretty solid core as well. While we won't be stopping anyone else from joining either if they wish to, we do have enough players to start the game with.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Nugog
The number of members is not over critical for the actual playing of the game. How many did the Goonies start off with?

They started out with 5 or 6, like almost all Warlords DG teams. Couple of lurkers joined them later, and Giwi was assigned in December to keep the team alive, but they were never a big team. Still, almost everyone that *was* on the team has a rich on Apolyton and in DGs (UnO, Krill, polarnomad, Pinchak, Will, AAHZ, Guynemer) yet none of them are either around anymore or able/willing to play turns. So having a core group of players alone isn't a guarantee either. Hence my insistence on large teams: a core group is good, but the more people complement that core, the better the team will be able to cope with core guys dropping out, which *will* happen sooner or later.

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Locutus


...............


QFT. I'd prefer around 72 hours in fact, give people plenty of time to do the democratic part of this Democracy Game, though I suspect that idea will have little support. If you want fast games sign up for some regular Pitboss games in our PBEM forum, 48 hours is the bare minimum necessary to allow for this to be more than an MP Succession Game.

so does this mean you will actually be playing in this demo game?
or just here for the setup process?

I feel this important to be defined

if you are going to be an active participant of this demo game, which would be indeed good to see, then excellent

[Locutus]

Of course I'm playing, I didn't sign up to GS for the pretty civgroup icon

[Paddy]

excellent to hear

but please understand my not being sure, afterall you are a member of the apolyton staff team in the warlords pitboss game

and we went for some time with no one showing up at all from your team back a few months back

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Locutus


They started out with 5 or 6, like almost all Warlords DG teams. Couple of lurkers joined them later, and Giwi was assigned in December to keep the team alive, but they were never a big team. Still, almost everyone that *was* on the team has a rich on Apolyton and in DGs (UnO, Krill, polarnomad, Pinchak, Will, AAHZ, Guynemer) yet none of them are either around anymore or able/willing to play turns. So having a core group of players alone isn't a guarantee either. Hence my insistence on large teams: a core group is good, but the more people complement that core, the better the team will be able to cope with core guys dropping out, which *will* happen sooner or later.

Amen

The problems we are having in the Warlords Demo game are starting to get REALLY old.

And I dont appreciate teams saying they are good to go with one turn player, and you know who you are. The Templars got two solid and one short term sub turn player (s), and we are recruiting a third.

I expect every other team to do the same, or drop out and join another team.

[Paddy]

who are you refering to con? very interesting

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Paddy
excellent to hear

but please understand my not being sure, afterall you are a member of the apolyton staff team in the warlords pitboss game

and we went for some time with no one showing up at all from your team back a few months back

Almost every team in that game has had problems at some point. In fact, right now there are only 3 teams left of which I have any kind of evidence that they are more than a one-man team and only one of those I'd describe as a successful team -- so of course that's gonna lead to periods of unresponsiveness, having to play the turns by yourself just about every single day is a big load to carry for anyone who has a job and a family.

In our case snoopy decided long, long ago that he wants to play that game on his own, I and the rest of the staff have had nothing to do with that team anymore for many months, and not by our own decision (although I certainly don't want to place the blame on snoopy either, too many things went wrong in that game, I don't think you can blame anyone in particular).

[Paddy]

no blame being implied

and as to one man teams, not sure about what evidence you have there, but some of us are in teams, and moving along

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Paddy
who are you refering to con? very interesting

Paddy read around these forums, its easy enough to figure out

And THEY KNOW who they are

I am not going to have any sympathy 4 months from now when some team stops playing turns.\

Some peoples collective memories around here are shorter than the appendages between there legs..................................

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Locutus
In our case snoopy decided long, long ago that he wants to play that game on his own, I and the rest of the staff have had nothing to do with that team anymore for many months, and not by our own decision (although I certainly don't want to place the blame on snoopy either, too many things went wrong in that game, I don't think you can blame anyone in particular).

What da heck?

Isn't it SUPPOSED to be a democracy game?

This is ridiculous IMHO.