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

[dsplaisted]

Exploit,

Now you moved before me (on turn 188 ) even though I moved before you on turn 187. Do you not consider this a double move? Are you rejecting the turn order agreement I proposed? If I end my turn now and then play at the beginning of turn 189, will you complain that I have double moved on you?

Thanks,
Daniel

[dsplaisted]

Guys, I've paused the game while I wait for an answer from Exploit.

I'm sorry for the delay, but I want to try to avoid any more double-move disputes. Feel free to unpause if you don't think it's worth waiting on him to answer.

Thanks,
Daniel

[regoarrarr]

I agree with the pause until it is determined if there is a turn order and if so what it is

[Exploit]

Let's recap the sequence of events:

a) the game was paused to resolve whether DSP's move was a double move and whether a reload was in order
b) during the discussion DSP made an offer to follow a turn order going forward which if I accepted meant that the move he had already made would have to be accepted
c) I clearly turned DSP's offer down for reasons spelled out in my post to the effect
d) there was a discussion on whether the double move rule should be modified, in which I proposed a compromise in response to Rego's request
e) DSP vehemently opposed any change in the existing time limit based double move rule
f) there appears to be little will amongst the group to change the existing rule
g) I made my move under the existing rules which were in effect at the time.

As far as I am concerned we were not under any turn order agreement when I made my move and given how strongly DSP has been supporting the status quo ruleset, I did not think he was interested in a turn order agreement. Nevertheless, if DSP wishes to proceed with the rest of the war using the current turn order (me going first each turn) then I am willing to agree to that.

I am unpausing the game.

Regards,
Exploit

[Dreylin]

Wait, what!?

So you reject an offer of a turn-split so that you can use a rule you dislike, only to offer a turn-split again the next turn!?

You're going back on this statement:

I guess the only difference is in how such a move is perceived, I see it as exploiting a bad rule to get an underhanded advantage while you see it as a legal move with tactical merit.

If you truely think it's a "bad rule" which gives an "underhand advantage" then why are you now using it when there was a clear offer of a turn-split on the table.

Once again: you were not at war with dsp when the originally contested move took place and therefore cannot claim a double-move against you; Imhotep actively chose to use the existing rule rather than a turn-split and live with consequences. There was no infraction of the letter or spirit of the rules.

I have re-paused the game as there are less than 4hrs on the turn and this doesn't feel very resolved to me.

[dsplaisted]

There is a difference between changing the rules of the game, and two parties agreeing to a turn order agreement between themselves. I offered a turn order to Imhotep and I offered one to you, so I don't know how you arrived at the conclusion that I wasn't interested in a turn order agreement.

I understand that you don't think it was fair for me to move first against Imhotep on turn 187, but I thought that was the reason you rejected my proposal, and once you agreed to play on I thought you would have been OK with the turn order I proposed.

I think I should get the first half of the turn, since that is the order we took our turns on the turn I declared war. I think it will be to my advantage to play first this war, which is why I want the first part of the turn order. I also don't think the fact that this would mean you would play before me on turn 188 but after me on turn 189 gives me any additional advantage... if you had played after me on turn 188 according to my proposed turn order the outcome would have probably been better for me (since you wouldn't have been able to attack my stack on flat land).

Still, I don't want to hold the game up any more over this. So if you insist on having the first part of the turn, you can have it. Just let me know and we will play on.

Daniel

[Exploit]

Still, I don't want to hold the game up any more over this. So if you insist on having the first part of the turn, you can have it. Just let me know and we will play on.

Daniel

Very well, I insist on having the first part of the turn so we may play on. I have unpaused the game again.

[regoarrarr]

Okay - so can somebody summarize the ruleset that we are playing on?

Turn timer, with Exploit first and dsp 2nd?

Are we going with the RPB2 draft set forth by Krill the other day? Something else?

[dsplaisted]

I've ended turn, so you are free to play now Exploit.

Rego, the game rules haven't changed. I have agreed to a turn order agreement with Exploit where he plays first. I expect him to try to play within the first half of the turn timer, and I will be free to play any time after he ends his turn.

[sunrise089]

Okay - so can somebody summarize the ruleset that we are playing on?

Turn timer, with Exploit first and dsp 2nd?

Are we going with the RPB2 draft set forth by Krill the other day? Something else?

I hope not. We're more than half way through this game, so I'd prefer to have an example of a no-enforced-split game alongside the now similar rulesets in RBP2 and RBP3.