Is Oxy still playing or is he on vacation? He's the only one yet to play turn 119, ~3:30h remaining.
|
Pitboss 18 IT and Tech Issues Thread
|
(August 14th, 2014, 18:33)yuris125 Wrote: Hey guys, a reminder that I will not be able to play the next turn until Monday afternoon. As I'm at war, I cannot give lurker instructions this time. Sorry for the delay this will cause Stuff like this is going to make this game take absolutely forever. The 40 hours turn is already bloodcurdlingly long without a further delay. Everyone is going to end up at war at some point. We need to get away from the default being that we will wait and adopt more of a play on attitude. Someone please tell me if I'm going across the line and becoming unreasonable in my expectations. There are too many players in this game for any single player to delay things for long. I don't care about the particulars of this specific war, I care about a broadly based policy to use as guidance for the remainder of the game. If this is our precedent then we may never finish this game. Am I wrong? It seems like we have been down this road a few times now and I don't want to be the only one banging the drums to play on if no one else (except OH) is with me. However, I would like the see this game continue on for a good, long while yet, and the constant delays aren't aren't helping. Yuris, this is not intended as a shot against you. I just want a more firm policy to be enacted or this game is never going to finish.
August 14th, 2014, 22:12
(This post was last modified: August 14th, 2014, 22:13 by Lord Parkin.)
Even if you cannot give instructions, when opting for the sub option you will still have a rational and thinking person behind the wheel who can make reasonable on-the-spot judgments. I do agree with BGN that this game is large enough that most wars - other than perhaps the inevitable titanic endgame struggle - are not going to be worth delaying the game multiple days for. Even if a sub does an abysmal job of playing a war turn (which I would hope they wouldn't), it's unlikely the blunder will have any significant impact on the eventual outcome of the game with this many players.
(August 14th, 2014, 21:49)Boldly Going Nowhere Wrote: Am I wrong? It seems like we have been down this road a few times now and I don't want to be the only one banging the drums to play on if no one else (except OH) is with me. I'm with you Boldly! Oh, hang on.  Anyway in this situation it kinda depends how Yuris' war adversary feels - if the turn rolls on Saturday night then Yuris plays on Monday afternoon the other guy will have a few hours before the deadline. I would like to see a firm lurkers-play-your-turn-if-you-can't-get-to-it-within-48-hours policy, shall I go set up another poll?  BTW: Mackoti is subbing for Nakor - is this a ded-lurking thing or is he going to be able to play the civs that Parkin is at war with?
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld
Guys, come on, I warned about being away this weekend over a week ago, never got as much as a grumble about it, and planned around me having a pause. I agree that the game needs to progress faster, a stricter policy is needed, etc. I was all for a stricter policy from the start. But in this particular case, if this pause was a problem, I would've expected objections when I first posted about it on the 7th
August 15th, 2014, 05:23
(This post was last modified: August 15th, 2014, 05:27 by GermanJoey.)
I agree with you both too, for whatever that's worth. Right now, with a 40 hour timer, we have potentially an 80 window to play consecutive turns if not at war, and yet some people still can't make this work. This problem gets compounded when people get into war, and now all of a sudden we may have to wait for someone who still hasn't played with 3 hours left on the clock. It sucks and is very unfair to someone playing in the second half, especially if they were the defender.
I don't know how active people have been about re-negotiating which half of the timer they get, but maybe that's something we let people to be more active about. For example, if you're in the first half of the timer and you know that you can't play within the first 24 hours of a turn, either contact Parkin to play for you beforehand or else your war opponent gets to go first now, after those 24 hours, meaning he'll get a double move but you won't, perhaps with devastating results. What do people think? Hopefully it'll encourage people to play or at least be more active about arranging a sub... (August 15th, 2014, 03:49)yuris125 Wrote: Guys, come on, I warned about being away this weekend over a week ago, never got as much as a grumble about it, and planned around me having a pause. I agree that the game needs to progress faster, a stricter policy is needed, etc. I was all for a stricter policy from the start. But in this particular case, if this pause was a problem, I would've expected objections when I first posted about it on the 7th I'm completely sympathetic but... isn't there any way you could arrange a sub? Maybe Parkin could take screenshots of the battlefield, and then you could instruct him what to do?
The hotel I booked was chosen for costing £25 a night, not for having wi-fi and other essentials
If you absolutely cannot wait for me to play the turn on Monday, LP can go ahead and play my turn. But I believe I don't request pauses excessively often, don't delay playing the turn, don't abuse the turn timer, I warned about needing a pause a week in advance... honestly, I don't know what else I needed to do to get a pause. Unless we're operating a strict no pause policy, which I was not aware of
I signed up for a 33-player game, and the Boldly camp seems to be here for the 33-player game.
Those seem like axioms to me, not arguments, though. I can't see any way to persuade you to change your priorities, anyway.
EitB 25 - Perpentach
Occasional mapmaker |
