Disputes Thread

[Zoid]

FFS, you really are grasping at straws now, aren't you?

[Indiansmoke]

FFS, you really are grasping at straws now, aren't you?

What's that for?

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Cant be done, other team members have the right to log in and take a peek at things surely ?

So far only 1 team has been found to have moved units after an end turn or to have played a double move !

Somewhere trust has to be given ! and vigilence to catch any underhandedness by your wartime opponent, just like our turn player spotted things amiss by logging in to check things out after having played the turn !!!

In fact your post is very contradictory, we would never be able to find evidence of wrong doing were we not able to log in and check !

[Indiansmoke]

No you have 24 hours to play your turn and we have 24 hours to play ours....all I say is we donot log in before you finish your turn and you do not log in after you finish yours...

Or this will become messy...we can log in and move units before you move yours and you will not even know it...and you can do the same...This has to work with proper rules not trust...

[Krill]

Zoid, Chrisius, stop flaming, and discuss the issue with civility.

Indiansmoke, you make a fair point, would you care to comment on what would happen when civstats went down?

[Indiansmoke]

Zoid, Chrisius, stop flaming, and discuss the issue with civility.

Indiansmoke, you make a fair point, would you care to comment on what would happen when civstats went down?

What I would propose is load from last autosave...which is the last person that logged in the game in and take it from there....if a team has a problem with the timming of the reload....prevents them taking turn or whatever....then host should co-ordinate with them what time they would like it up again.

[sunrise089]

Krill - this seems a dangerous road to go down. I know in our case at least there is often discussion well into the turn. Even if unit movement is locked down to prevent double-moves and misunderstandings, it seems difficult to expect a turnplayer playing at the beginning of the turn to perfectly make tile assignments, take screenshots, decide new builds, etc. IMHO none of these things are the least bit unfair; all we need to block is the prospect of troops moving twice...the present rule seems to do that well.

[Krill]

Dude, I may now be the admin, so I'll have to rule on any disputes, but talking about how to make the rules easier to understand and better is a good thing. So far you have given at least two good reasons not to implement this rule in this manner, because you have discussed it.

I'm not going to stop any discussions in this forum so long as they don't break the rules of this game or Apolyton, but I am going to encourage any discussions that may lead to this game being more fun, more active and easier for me to administrate. But I'm not the one deciding what the rules are, the teams can make the decions on what is and is not part of the ruleset.

[Indiansmoke]

Krill - this seems a dangerous road to go down. I know in our case at least there is often discussion well into the turn. Even if unit movement is locked down to prevent double-moves and misunderstandings, it seems difficult to expect a turnplayer playing at the beginning of the turn to perfectly make tile assignments, take screenshots, decide new builds, etc. IMHO none of these things are the least bit unfair; all we need to block is the prospect of troops moving twice...the present rule seems to do that well.

You know when a city will grow, which tiles can be worked, what can be build....from previous turns...you can plan all this and discuss it way in advance.

The thing is that it is inevitable that when a person from your team loggs in game after we moved he will see what we did and will change things...it is not just about moving units and attacking.

Example...you play, finish turn... we log in move one chariot on the sheep tile your city was working...a player from your team logs in after sees that you can no longer work the tile...what do you do? You leave it? or you assign a new more optimal tile?

Things like that are impossible to monitor...

[RobWorham]

Krill, I have to say that I totally agree with both Chris' and Sunrise's comments.

Limiting logins to one player per team is a great way to make sure the team activity number dwindle. The perennial problem with DG's is keeping the interest levels up anyway!!

If all teams members lived in the same time zone then IS's ruling might be more workable, but for a large team spread over the globe it is impossible for everyone to log on in such a small window, should they so wish.....

Limiting discussion and intra team dynamics is a sure well to ring the death knell for the future of DG gaming at Poly!!!

[sunrise089]

@Krill - I'm sorry if I caused confusion. I don't think we should restrict these sort of activities, but I don't want you or anyone to shut down the discussion. Discussion is always a good thing.

@Indiansmoke - I don't know why you would oppose changing tile assignments in the scenario you posted. To me, it would be foolish NOT to allow it. The point of the double-move rule is very simple - prevent teams from gaining an unfair advantage by attacking a city or stack with units never visible to their opponents, or units whose movement path was unclear. It (IMHO) should serve no other purpose. Multiplayer civ is played with simultaneous turns to give each team a level playing field...trying to simulate sequential turns by (for example) forbidding reasignment of tile assignments when an enemy unit blocks or pillages the tile is (again IMHO) the opposite of what we want to do.

As for knowing when a city will grow or finish builds...perhaps you guys just don't run your team the way we do ours. It is entirely conceivable that our turnplayer will log in at the beginning of the turn and encounter new information - a barb unit appeared, or a religion spread, or a new resource was uncovered. Do you expect the turnplayer to make binding decisions based on that info by himself? Doing so defeats the purpose of the demogame if you ask me.

This game has had enough difficulties already. I find it difficult to believe restricting a team's ability to log-in will in any way improve players' interest.

[Indiansmoke]

Krill, I have to say that I totally agree with both Chris' and Sunrise's comments.

Limiting logins to one player per team is a great way to make sure the team activity number dwindle. The perennial problem with DG's is keeping the interest levels up anyway!!

If all teams members lived in the same time zone then IS's ruling might be more workable, but for a large team spread over the globe it is impossible for everyone to log on in such a small window, should they so wish.....

Limiting discussion and intra team dynamics is a sure well to ring the death knell for the future of DG gaming at Poly!!!

I did not say limit team log in to 1 player.....I said you have 24 hours to make your moves and we have 24 hours after you.

In the first 24 hours of the turn, or until you press end turn anyone can log-in.

[Krill]

Krill, I have to say that I totally agree with both Chris' and Sunrise's comments.

Limiting logins to one player per team is a great way to make sure the team activity number dwindle. The perennial problem with DG's is keeping the interest levels up anyway!!

If all teams members lived in the same time zone then IS's ruling might be more workable, but for a large team spread over the globe it is impossible for everyone to log on in such a small window, should they so wish.....

Limiting discussion and intra team dynamics is a sure well to ring the death knell for the future of DG gaming at Poly!!!

Dude, I may now be the admin, so I'll have to rule on any disputes, but talking about how to make the rules easier to understand and better is a good thing. So far you have given at least two good reasons not to implement this rule in this manner, because you have discussed it.

I'm not going to stop any discussions in this forum so long as they don't break the rules of this game or Apolyton, but I am going to encourage any discussions that may lead to this game being more fun, more active and easier for me to administrate. But I'm not the one deciding what the rules are, the teams can make the decions on what is and is not part of the ruleset.

Rob, please reread what I posted, and drop the hostility. So far Tony has been hostile, and you returning the hostility at everyone else who does not agree with you will not help the game. Indiansmokes ideas may be unacceptable to the DG format, but they should be discussed and voted on. Your last sentence seems to agree...

[Indiansmoke]

@Krill - I'm sorry if I caused confusion. I don't think we should restrict these sort of activities, but I don't want you or anyone to shut down the discussion. Discussion is always a good thing.

@Indiansmoke - I don't know why you would oppose changing tile assignments in the scenario you posted. To me, it would be foolish NOT to allow it. The point of the double-move rule is very simple - prevent teams from gaining an unfair advantage by attacking a city or stack with units never visible to their opponents, or units whose movement path was unclear. It (IMHO) should serve no other purpose. Multiplayer civ is played with simultaneous turns to give each team a level playing field...trying to simulate sequential turns by (for example) forbidding reasignment of tile assignments when an enemy unit blocks or pillages the tile is (again IMHO) the opposite of what we want to do.

As for knowing when a city will grow or finish builds...perhaps you guys just don't run your team the way we do ours. It is entirely conceivable that our turnplayer will log in at the beginning of the turn and encounter new information - a barb unit appeared, or a religion spread, or a new resource was uncovered. Do you expect the turnplayer to make binding decisions based on that info by himself? Doing so defeats the purpose of the demogame if you ask me.

This game has had enough difficulties already. I find it difficult to believe restricting a team's ability to log-in will in any way improve players' interest.

Simultanious turns is to speed up game...not for the reasons you mentioned.

Regarding rules..So you say by working better tiles than you should have, you are not gaining an unfair advantage?

Regarding time to discuss....you have 24 hours to discuss from beginning of turn...you say you need 48 hours....I am quite happy myself (will have to check with my team though) to increase the timer of the game during wars (make it 96 hours) so every team has more time.

Finnaly and back to the issue of "gaining an unfair advantage".

If you log in after us you see the outcome of the battles. So you know which attacking units of ours won and which lost and what health our units have, whether they gained a promo etc.

So for example if you had overflow from previous turn slave and could produce unit in 1 turn for next turn...all that info would help you decide whether you need axe spear or chariot...so all you do is log in after we make the battles and look at the outcome, then decide what to build using your overflow...isn't that unfair?

[Zoid]

I'm not going to stop any discussions in this forum so long as they don't break the rules of this game or Apolyton, but I am going to encourage any discussions that may lead to this game being more fun, more active and easier for me to administrate. But I'm not the one deciding what the rules are, the teams can make the decions on what is and is not part of the ruleset.

Firstly, you can't stop any discussions. You're admin of this game by popular vote, you're not Ming. And secondly, reloading the save every time someone b1tches about "unfair" conduct is a sure way to kill this game or make it less fun. Its already a lot less fun than it was before this whole double move mess started. I'm sure PAL feels that as well, that's why they're blowing (Indian)smoke up our asses...