February 12th, 2010, 14:17
Posts: 272
Threads: 4
Joined: Dec 2009
This request is joke referencing RPB2 and everyone has fallen for it??  
One turn of not selecting a build is not the end of the world. Whilst i'd possbibly consider supporting a reload under certian circumstances, I consider this frivolous and i'm surpised it's even been requested. As it was the end of turn I suppose it would have been worth a try.
I'd be saddened to see a game admin being appointed to decide a non issue like this. I think it could lead to reloads being requested because
"my GG Rifle lost at 99.99999999% odds to a warrior - thats not right; can we have reload"
February 12th, 2010, 14:24
Posts: 4,833
Threads: 21
Joined: Nov 2009
Morgan Wrote:I'd be saddened to see a game admin being appointed to decide a non issue like this. I think it could lead to reloads being requested because
"my GG Rifle lost at 99.99999999% odds to a warrior - thats not right; can we have reload"
I'm probably not the person who should be contributing to this discussion, but I can't imagine anyone making such a request (yes, I know it's just an extreme example). As for me, I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that reloads can be requested when you meant to do one thing, but did something else, instead.
I suppose if we decided which situations allow a reload request, it would remove some ambiguity, but I personally don't want to delve into another round of rules-smithing. The chance that we'd get everyone here to agree to one definition is probably very nearly zero.
February 12th, 2010, 14:24
Posts: 15,382
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
Krill Wrote:Can we just get a game admin? I know this is probably the fourth or fifth time I've asked, but we would at least not be left hanging like this.
I'd really like this too, but I don't think we had any volunteers. I would strongly support (in no particular order) T-Hawk, Sullla, or Kylearan for the admin position, but I don't think any of them want a position like that...?
February 12th, 2010, 14:26
Posts: 4,833
Threads: 21
Joined: Nov 2009
scooter Wrote:but I don't think any of them want a position like that...?
Can't blame them. 
Would be nice, though, if anyone volunteers.
February 12th, 2010, 14:28
Posts: 4,138
Threads: 54
Joined: Dec 2009
The problem with this decision is that it sets a precedent. You either have to accept reloads for every misclick or none at all.
If you agree to reload this, where do you draw the line now you have started accepting misclick reloads.
Players become better by making mistakes and learning from them and not making them again.
"You want to take my city of Troll%ng? Go ahead and try."
February 12th, 2010, 14:29
Posts: 23,587
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Morgan Wrote:This request is joke referencing RPB2 and everyone has fallen for it??
One turn of not selecting a build is not the end of the world. Whilst i'd possbibly consider supporting a reload under certian circumstances, I consider this frivolous and i'm surpised it's even been requested. As it was the end of turn I suppose it would have been worth a try.
I'd be saddened to see a game admin being appointed to decide a non issue like this. I think it could lead to reloads being requested because
"my GG Rifle lost at 99.99999999% odds to a warrior - thats not right; can we have reload"
That's kinda the whole reason for the game admin. It stops any of the players from having to say anything, from having to interfere, and being disliked/mark placed against their name/flamed by the party that requested the reload. The whole point of the game admin is to take the role of most hated party, to sort out the frivolous from the serious, and keep the game rolling.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 12th, 2010, 14:41
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Jul 2006
I'd like a game admin, but like others have said I think the issue is that we haven't had anyone volunteer. I think when the next game starts we should choose an admin as part of the sign-up process.
FWIW, I am on the side of not allowing a reload in this instance.
February 12th, 2010, 14:48
Posts: 272
Threads: 4
Joined: Dec 2009
The only game i've ever playing in that had an Admin was the CFC MTDG.
We all know how that ended.
From what i've seen; RBP2 and 3 have been overcomplicated by minor issues that in any other pitboss (that i've experienced) would not have been worthy of comment in any public thread.
February 12th, 2010, 14:59
Posts: 23,587
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
No, that game didn't have an admin.
It had forum moderators that didn't watch the game, and Sullla who, according to him, didn't even look at the game for three months. A good game admin is on every day, reading the threads, contactable for every problem that arises. A good game admin is acknowledged by everyone to be the sole point of arbitration in the game. A good game admin helps to deal with all of those minor point that arguably shouldn't be made public, in private, keeping the game flowing.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 12th, 2010, 15:03
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Jul 2006
Krill Wrote:No, that game didn't have an admin.
It had forum moderators that didn't watch the game, and Sullla who, according to him, didn't even look at the game for three months. A good game admin is on every day, reading the threads, contactable for every problem that arises. A good game admin is acknowledged by everyone to be the sole point of arbitration in the game. A good game admin helps to deal with all of those minor point that arguably shouldn't be made public, in private, keeping the game flowing.
Krill is a good game admin
|
