Pink Dot IT Office - Email and technical issues thread - All welcome, all the time

[T-hawk]

Not that I have any authority here, but it seems to me that Daniel is in the clear. First, he was clear by the letter of the law: no unit moved twice within 9 hours. Second, even with an assumption that the new longer timer extends that to 11 hours (either game time or real time), Daniel's move is still okay. Third, Exploit did not miss any opportunity to do anything about it because he was logged in at the time.

Exploit's argument rests on stretching the rule of "9 hours by the game clock" to instead read "half of the real time clock". I can understand a spirit-of-the-rule interpretation, but here I don't think it can override the letter.

More generally, the controversy is how to establish a turn order when both players acted in the first half of the previous turn and both players are logged in at the same time when the turn rolls. There is no clear determinant of priority here. In the absence of any rules to the contrary, I think it just has to fall MP-style to whoever acts and clicks first. Exploit is arguing that his acting first in the prior turn establishes priority. I don't like that interpretation, because it establishes an incentive that everyone should always try to log in ASAP every turn and act first, lest a hypothetical opponent do so to claim priority in an ensuing war.

Just my 2 'spared for a good friend'.

[Exploit]

I seem to be the odd man out with my understanding of the rules. The intent of the rules seems to be more to put a time limit on how long someone has to respond to another's actions, then to actually try to prevent double moves.

It totally blows me away that no one else seems to think DSP double moved Imhotep. Imhotep had less than 1 minute to respond to DSP's move then attack. The 9/11 hour window shouldn't start after the last move, it should be starting when the turn roll's over otherwise you are simply encouraging double moves. Times are in Eastern.

1/18/10 9:53 am Imhotep Logged out
1/18/10 9:52 am Imhotep Finished turn
1/18/10 9:48 am Imhotep Logged in

1/18/10 10:20 pm dsplaisted Logged out
1/18/10 9:54 pm dsplaisted Logged in

1/19/10 12:53 pm Imhotep Eliminated
1/19/10 12:52 pm A new turn has begun. It is now 1270 AD

I am tired of arguing the point and of getting screwed over by this idea that the time limit is more important then giving someone a fair chance to respond to a move.

Is anyone aware of someone who is unspoiled by this game who might be willing to take over my position?

[dsplaisted]

I am tired of arguing the point and of getting screwed over by this idea that the time limit is more important then giving someone a fair chance to respond to a move.

Is anyone aware of someone who is unspoiled by this game who might be willing to take over my position?

If Imhotep wanted a chance to respond, then I think he would have agreed to a turn order with me. I believe that the reason he didn't was because he doesn't believe in having a strict turn order.

Do you really expect to play a game with 11 teams and not have all of them get screwed over in some sense at one time or the other? Anyway, in my opinion you are getting far more screwed over by the fact that almost all of the teams seem to have decided to ally against you than by the fact that you have different beliefs about how double-moves should be handled. Do you really want to quit over that?

A strict turn order is the only way to prevent double moves (in the sense that you seem to understand them). And really, it's not good enough to only enforce a turn order on warring civs, because when you go from a lack of a defined turn order to a strict turn order, you will often end up with double moves. So the only way to avoid double moves is to play sequential turns instead of simultaneous turns. So the rules we agreed to for this game certainly don't rule out double moves altogether, they try to strike a compromise between avoiding negative effects of double moves and allowing the game to continue at a reasonable pace with players having the flexibility to play when their schedules allow.

[regoarrarr]

Anyway, in my opinion you are getting far more screwed over by the fact that almost all of the teams seem to have decided to ally against you than by the fact that you have different beliefs about how double-moves should be handled. Do you really want to quit over that?

I suggest a renaming of your civ to "Destroy DSP"

FWIW Imhotep has posted (and in theory read) my spoiler thread so he appears to have ended his time in this game.

[Kyan]

It totally blows me away that no one else seems to think DSP double moved Imhotep.

I can totally see your point here Exploit and understand completely why you are annoyed.

However, Imhotep wasn't double moved in my opinion. Imhotep declined a turn order (well, actually he just didn't respond but that's hardly Dsp's fault).
Dsp technically played by the rules and he was well aware, as was everyone else, that Imho just wanted out of the game as soon as possible. Dsp could have done an actual double-move and Imho wouldn't have cared a jot. But he didn't. He made sure to follow the rules just to be safe.

Unfortunately, i think it's just one of those things that, whilst it sucks, no party is in the wrong so you have to just take it on the chin. As has been pointed out, the challenges have been mounting up for your civ and the last thing it needed was another knock-back but this is where you get to show off your skills and show the newbs like myself how it's really done!

[Broker33]

My two cents worth.
1) Dsp moved within the letter of the law.
2) Imho definitely wanted out of the game and has posted in spoiler threads so has no problem with what happened.
3) Imho has repeatedly stated that he was vehemently opposed to turn order splits and would have quit the game if they were imposed. He knew the rules and liked the rules.
4) Seems your biggest argument is you wanted to gift troops to delay dsp taking the city but you were not at war so double move rules wouldnt affect you

Most players prefer a turn order agreement but Imho was opposed to that and would have prefered more a MP style of battle.

Not really seeing the need for a reload here

[Exploit]

I was rather enjoying the everyone against me part of the battle however this absurdly broken interpretation of a no double move rule has bitten me for the second time.

Here is how the no double move rule is being described:

Turn timer 18 hours

Hour 1: Team A finishes his move moving all of his movement points.
Hour 2-10: Theoretical 9 hour window that Team B has to respond to Team A's move however since Team A is finished anyway in fact this window is really Hour 2-18.

Now suppose Team B makes his move in Hour 2 then the following occurs (the same is true if Team B makes his move any time before Hour 9):

Hour 3-12: The 9 hour window given to Team A to respond to Team B's move. Of course Team A has already done all of his moves in Hour 1 and therefore cannot actually do anything to respond to Team B's move during his "response window".

Hour 10-18: If Team B makes his move any time during the last half of the turn then Team A still cannot begin to respond until after the turn has flipped over so his 9 hour response window is actually 9 hours minus the number of hours remaining in the turn when Team B finished his move (i.e Team A gets 1 hour actual response time if Team B finishes at Hour 10).

This interpretation of the no double move rule does absolutely nothing to deter double moves and in fact it encourages double moves and legalizes them!

I am just not interested in playing a game where I have to play 24 hours a day to try to prevent being double moved all the time and even then it comes down to how fast I can act when the turn flips.

I have posted a message in CFC to see if I can find a replacement. Please suspend the game until I can find a replacement.

Thanks,
Exploit

[Broker33]

I was rather enjoying the everyone against me part of the battle however this absurdly broken interpretation of a no double move rule has bitten me for the second time.

Here is how the no double move rule is being described:

Turn timer 18 hours

Hour 1: Team A finishes his move moving all of his movement points.
Hour 2-10: Theoretical 9 hour window that Team B has to respond to Team A's move however since Team A is finished anyway in fact this window is really Hour 2-18.

Now suppose Team B makes his move in Hour 2 then the following occurs (the same is true if Team B makes his move any time before Hour 9):

Hour 3-12: The 9 hour window given to Team A to respond to Team B's move. Of course Team A has already done all of his moves in Hour 1 and therefore cannot actually do anything to respond to Team B's move during his "response window".

Hour 10-18: If Team B makes his move any time during the last half of the turn then Team A still cannot begin to respond until after the turn has flipped over so his 9 hour response window is actually 9 hours minus the number of hours remaining in the turn when Team B finished his move (i.e Team A gets 1 hour actual response time if Team B finishes at Hour 10).

This interpretation of the no double move rule does absolutely nothing to deter double moves and in fact it encourages double moves and legalizes them!

I am just not interested in playing a game where I have to play 24 hours a day to try to prevent being double moved all the time and even then it comes down to how fast I can act when the turn flips.

I will post a message in CFC to see if I can find a replacement. Please suspend the game until I can find a replacement.

Thanks,
Exploit

We all know this and it has been discussed at length and the solution was warring parties could agree to turn splits. If you would rather quit than agree to split the turns that is your choice. You were not even the party at war and as I understand it Dsp has asked for a turn split with you which would prevent you having to be on 24 hours and prevent double moves.

[Dreylin]

Hour 10-18: If Team B makes his move any time during the last half of the turn then Team A still cannot begin to respond until after the turn has flipped over so his 9 hour response window is actually 9 hours minus the number of hours remaining in the turn when Team B finished his move (i.e Team A gets 1 hour actual response time if Team B finishes at Hour 10).

Errr, no. There is no "9-hour response window"; the rules are simply that any individual unit cannot move again until 9hrs have passed. Thus since Team A moved all units in the first hour of the turn, they are free to move from the start of the new one.

Which I completely agree would naturally lead to:

This interpretation of the no double move rule does absolutely nothing to deter double moves and in fact it encourages double moves and legalizes them!

however I tried that arguement before, as Broker mentioned, and the consensus was for the rules to remain as they were originally written - although most parties (and I believe that Imho is the exception) have agreed to turn-splits in all subsequent wars.


But regardless of what the double-move rules say, the fact is that you were not at war with dsp at the time, and thus they simply don't apply to you vs. dsp. Imhotep has repeatedly stated in the past that he would not play under an official turn-split rule and has lived by the consequences of that, and if you had been at war with dsp, then he has already stated that he would have agreed a turn order with you - so there's no problem there either.

I'd be sad to see you leave over this (especially given my own feelings about the rule in question), but I really don't think that anyone has done anything wrong here.

[Imhotep]

Yes, the game is over for me. At least I gained some experience from it, if nothing else.