October 29th, 2020, 17:29
(This post was last modified: October 29th, 2020, 17:30 by Cyneheard.)
Posts: 5,641
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
(October 29th, 2020, 16:00)Hitru Wrote: I think reload is out of question if Corn had battles and cities were captured etc. I would like to see Scooter and Comm to come up with solution instead of asking lurkers to make a ruling. If we need to make ruling would adding 2 ( or some other arbitrary number ) turns to their peace and flipping coin who has 1st half of timer sound fair? That way neither can benefit from the naval moves made last turn.
Honestly, adding one turn would be sufficient.
EDIT: But otherwise I agree. And this needs to be resolved soon.
October 29th, 2020, 19:34
Posts: 8,703
Threads: 92
Joined: Oct 2017
I approve of adding 1t to any peace between the two.
"Superdeath seems to have acquired a rep for aggression somehow. ![[Image: noidea.gif]](https://www.realmsbeyond.net/forums/images/smilies/noidea.gif) In this game that's going to help us because he's going to go to the negotiating table with twitchy eyes and slightly too wide a grin and terrify the neighbors into favorable border agreements, one-sided tech deals and staggered NAPs."
-Old Harry. PB48.
October 29th, 2020, 23:00
Posts: 6,479
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
Agree. Though this makes me want to just say "play on"
(October 29th, 2020, 11:35)scooter Wrote: During peace we haven't come close to observing a split.
I personally don't find "well this action, amongst a series of similar actions, was the critical one which should receive special treatment because I, the beneficiary of said special treatment, deem it so" to be a very compelling argument. A counter, not lost on me, is that it's hard to have rules for every scenario, and so sometimes we need to draw a good-faith line somewhere when there's obvious and apparent harm. But "obvious and apparent harm" can get real subjective, real fast, as Commodore's own perspective on the earlier double move demonstrates, so I'd personally rather err on the side of not deferring to the party who stands the most to benefit from a decision being the one to determine whether the decision is necessary.
October 30th, 2020, 02:12
Posts: 656
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2018
So, anyone against this solution? I think this game should get back on track soon.
Completed: pb38, pb40, pb41, pb42, pb46 and pb49
Playing: pbem78
October 30th, 2020, 03:47
Posts: 7,602
Threads: 75
Joined: Jan 2018
October 30th, 2020, 05:14
Posts: 8,786
Threads: 40
Joined: Aug 2012
1. Are there any lurkers who think Scooter is correct that Com camped the timer? (I see no evidence other than Com playing at the turn roll, something I've done a million times)
2. If so is camping the timer for one turn actually a problem? (I've done this more times than I can remember to get second half in a sneak attack)
3. And if it is a problem is the injury great enough that Scooter needs recompense?
If the answer is yes to all three then forbidding war dec on t139 and having Com take the first half on t140 should be sufficient to alleviate Scooter's complaint and Com probably wouldn't mind either. I wouldn't toss a coin for turn order as Scooter is complaining he's a turn behind on his defences not claiming he should be first.
But I don't see the reasoning on points 1 and 2, and I think setting precedent based on someone being grumpy about how their game is going is a mistake. Although how to break that to Scooter without him quitting will be a challenge.
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
October 30th, 2020, 05:19
(This post was last modified: October 30th, 2020, 05:20 by civac2.)
Posts: 2,067
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2020
Commodore was sick with food poisoning for a day or two. He said it was brief but nasty.
Timer games suck but any rule against them is likely unenforcable and can easily be worse than the problem.
October 30th, 2020, 05:36
Posts: 656
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2018
I don't see any compelling evidence that Comm camped the clock.
And usually attacker definitely should get to choose the half he wants, here the problem is that they both want to attack, which per our rules (that work 99% of the time without any problems) states that they both get to choose which half they want. As this is impossible I suggest random turn order instead.
But I have no problem with saying that we add 1 turn to their peace treaty and ask then to keep current turn order.
To be completely honest I think this has delayed the game too much already and it's not that big of a deal, neither party should not assume that they are in turn split during peace time without some settler race etc in place.
Completed: pb38, pb40, pb41, pb42, pb46 and pb49
Playing: pbem78
October 30th, 2020, 06:55
Posts: 7,602
Threads: 75
Joined: Jan 2018
(October 30th, 2020, 05:36)Hitru Wrote: And usually attacker definitely should get to choose the half he wants, here the problem is that they both want to attack, which per our rules (that work 99% of the time without any problems) states that they both get to choose which half they want. As this is impossible I suggest random turn order instead.
My solution for this would be to amend the rules that OH posted. In this scenario both players could write their intended slot into the war in their thread. If we lurkers see that both want to attack the same turn in the same half, we can flip a coin. That way nobody has to play the clock until one of them gives up, which is annoying for both parties.
October 30th, 2020, 09:27
Posts: 5,641
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
Can we make sure to resolve this today?
I don’t know what the solution should be, but this can’t be a week-long discussion.
|