[NO PLAYERS] PB25 Lurker Thread - Then Happy I, That Lurk and am Belurked

[The Black Sword]

Eh, I don't think there's ever been a case where everyone conceded and the lurkers didn't let them know. The main problem that comes up is that people don't think to actually write 'concede' in their threads, even if they would do so if asked directly.

[GermanJoey]

Eh, I don't think there's ever been a case where everyone conceded and the lurkers didn't let them know. The main problem that comes up is that people don't think to actually write 'concede' in their threads, even if they would do so if asked directly.

PBEM63 and PB23 are two examples... but, that said, I guess I have a broader-scoped frustration with lurker passivity at RB in mind, rather than just limited to concessions, which probably colors my view of this particular topic. But, it feels similar to me. I don't know if people don't care or if people are afraid to post anything at all, lest they say too much. But, how many days went by when we were waiting for a single person to reply to the PB29 map thread, the thread's post-count constant and Krill ever-present under the Last Post column every day when I refreshed that forum waiting for the game to being? Did anyone ever even reply at all? I have no idea. And how many people have given map feedback for PB30 so far in the last 5 days since it was posted - a game which was organized around lurker participation and saw many lurkers saying they'd help in the game setup thread? What about PB28 or PB26? At RB, I feel like one needs to speak up if they have something to say, because its likely nobody else will be speaking at all.

I suppose reviewing a map takes at least a bit of time - 15 minutes of looking and 15 minutes to type up a few sentences - but why should a concession be such a hassle? It takes a few seconds to simply say, "there is some talk among the players of concession, how do you feel about the game?" It is obviously not possible to phrase it so neutrually in this game, of course, because the game is down to just three players. I also don't understand why you think its unfair to mention concession at all in this circumstance. Is it more fair to Commodore to force spend another 30 hours playing 30 turns in a game where his main opponent has already given up? Or to HAK, who stresses how he doesn't have time for the game anymore every time he posts and who will no longer have benefit of his play partner? Is it better to let them burn out?

[Ichabod]

My 2cents is that message was over the line, Joey. Lurkers have no take in the game, other than to spam meaningless things in player's threads. Let the players solve their own problems, if they want to resign or what not. What I see here is that DZ's fun was hindered by that comment you made. If Commodore and HAK are having trouble playing their turns, they shouldn't have signed up for the game or they should look for a replacement or whatever. Either that or concede to DZ. But a lurker trying to force the issue is bad, because it gives that feeling of "my fun is ruining messing up with other people's lives" to anyone that wants to continue. Incidentally, that's why I didn't force any concession talk in PBEM63, in respect to Seven and TBS. But when Seven asked me directly if I'd like to continue or stop, then I felt free to say I wished to stop.

[Mardoc]

I suppose reviewing a map takes at least a bit of time - 15 minutes of looking and 15 minutes to type up a few sentences

And, anymore, tracking down the latest mod and installing it - another 10-15 minutes - and the time has to be spent at your civ computer, rather than anywhere you have an internet connection. And you really should read the lurker thread first so you're not just repeating what other people already said. And it has to be time with your brain engaged.

I don't know about you, but I can't actually count on having more time and energy at my civ computer than I need to play my *own* turns, let alone an extra hour. So, gosh, it has to wait for a weekend...how barbaric!

Edit: Oh, yeah, one more thing. No one will ever ever thank you for helping with the map, except maybe occaisionally the mapmaker himself. The players will go between 'I hate you, you screwed me' and 'meh'. So if you post any opinions, you're also signing up for abuse

- but why should a concession be such a hassle? It takes a few seconds to simply say, "there is some talk among the players of concession, how do you feel about the game?"

Why the heck should lurkers be involved at all if concession talk is public? Just post in the tech thread!

If they want concession to be handled by the lurkers, it's precisely because they don't want information to be spread.

. I also don't understand why you think its unfair to mention concession at all in this circumstance. Is it more fair to Commodore to force spend another 30 hours playing 30 turns in a game where his main opponent has already given up? Or to HAK, who stresses how he doesn't have time for the game anymore every time he posts and who will no longer have benefit of his play partner? Is it better to let them burn out?

'Fair' is basically undefined. You can't get any two people to agree on a definition, let alone a whole forum.

But, we can agree that it's not what the players asked for.

Look. The lurker code is probably overkill. But you weren't around back in the days when no one would ever post anything about their plans. We used to find out about wars the turn they were declared. People would go dark for a week before popping up to say 'and I completed the Pyramids this turn'. It's taken quite a bit of time and lurker hands-off-ness for people to trust the community enough to report to the standard we've gotten used to.

Most of that is because we object to lurker interference even in the cases where 95% of everyone doesn't really care. If we draw the line way the heck over here in nitpick land, then even when someone crosses it, they still probably haven't affected the game. Which means they haven't convinced a player that they have to choose between reporting and winning.

[Old Harry]

But, how many days went by when we were waiting for a single person to reply to the PB29 map thread, the thread's post-count constant and Krill ever-present under the Last Post column every day when I refreshed that forum waiting for the game to being?

PB29 is a special case as not that many people have TOW installed or understand how the map balancing need differs from BTS/RTR. I know I'm not reading much in that game as I don't have time to get my head around another mod.

Look. The lurker code is probably overkill. But you weren't around back in the days when no one would ever post anything about their plans. We used to find out about wars the turn they were declared. People would go dark for a week before popping up to say 'and I completed the Pyramids this turn'. It's taken quite a bit of time and lurker hands-off-ness for people to trust the community enough to report to the standard we've gotten used to.

Most of that is because we object to lurker interference even in the cases where 95% of everyone doesn't really care. If we draw the line way the heck over here in nitpick land, then even when someone crosses it, they still probably haven't affected the game. Which means they haven't convinced a player that they have to choose between reporting and winning.

This.

Anyhoo, I think HAK is having fun still and Commodore enjoys playing Civ4, so Donovan shouldn't feel obliged to down tools.

[GermanJoey]

But, we can agree that it's not what the players asked for.

It is literally what HAK and Mindy explicitly asked for.

Which means they haven't convinced a player that they have to choose between reporting and winning.

FWIW, people don't seem to update much beyond what you describe anyways, possibly because player threads now are such lonely experience compared to the old days.

[Krill]

Seriously just ditch Cylindrical.

[BRickAstley]

Seriously just ditch Cylindrical.

If the purpose of the game is to blatantly use and embrace imbalance there's nothing wrong with it.

[Krill]

The aim, even in PB30, has still been to balance the game. The difference to other games is that the balance should be that each player should have an equal chance to win the game. PB30 uses some sort of system involving lurkers to decide on what's balanced, but it's still aiming for balance all the same.

Given that, why would you still use a map construct that makes it harder to achieve balance because of limits? Toroidal just gives more control to the map design team.

[GermanJoey]

I gotta admit, this is a pretty solid play. I've never thought about it, but trade missions are better on smaller maps because your GM doesn't have to travel very far to get a good route multiplier. On huge maps, e.g. PB18 or PB27, your GM would need to travel for like a dozen turns to get a route this good, while this guy was just born a few turns ago. A trade mission is also especially effective for Commodore right now because he has good beaker multipliers (libraries, a capital academy, and cheap Phi Universities) but little-to-no wealth multipliers.

I wonder if Commodore can sweep south, from his recent Ruff takings in the north, and capture the MoM before his next GA?