RBP2 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!

[scooter]

Completely agree with what sunrise is saying - rules can't just be ignored sometimes and be enforced other times... Also I have no longer have any respect whatsoever for Speaker. Most childish person I've seen on these forums and if he quits RB will be a better place. There, I said it...

[Kyan]

Completely agree with what sunrise is saying - rules can't just be ignored sometimes and be enforced other times... Also I have no longer have any respect whatsoever for Speaker. Most childish person I've seen on these forums and if he quits RB will be a better place. There, I said it...

Totally disagree. He's upset and has made a bad call. There are plenty of people on RB who i feel i could easily clash personalities with but Speaker is certainly not one of them.

He's upsets because he cares. He cares because he's put a tonne of effort in, moreso than most purely for the reason of having a good, educational read.

If you think it'd be a better place without people going out of their way to teach and help others then either your perception of RB is twisted or i'm not in the right place.

[Krill]

FWIW, give Speaker his space. The reasons he is angry are understandable, and under most circumstances, he'd be 100% right.

[MJW (ya that one)]

As seen during the AP cheese that Rego tried to do; you don't get a pop-up or the player getting the city has to wait until his turn to accept the city gift. So it does matter. (Unless Spulla and Dantski say to the Admin that Spulla will give the units to Dantski; and Dantski says he would not backstab. 100 gold to Nakor would be more than enough for that.)

[BCAgamer]

Speaker has made some not-so-great decisions, but i think saying that RB would be a better place if he leaves is a bit much.

[MWIN]

Is it possible to get a save of the game before and after this situation. A look at combat logs and available units should pretty much give an idea whether this rule break gave them an advantage or not.

[WilliamLP]

Hmm, maybe Spullla will quit and Jowy and Athlete should take over the empire for them? It would be pretty fitting since the empire has a lot of their cities!

[Shoot the Moon]

Nothing personal Shoot, and I'm sorry I'm still testy over this, but there was no rules debate as I recall things. Players decided they wanted to change the rules after the game had begun, and did so at our expense. It was voted on by the majority of course, but that's different a disagreement about the interpretation of the rules.

I totally agree with you. The irony is I had originally written the sentence with something a bit more colorful than "debate" but decided to tone it down to try to avoid stirring up any old grudges. How'd that work out?

[sunrise089]

Games would grind to an utter halt in football if every holding call got called. Same with every touch foul in basketball. It's not always appropriate to stop the game just because a rule was broken. I don't think you analogy of the blown perfect game/blow goal really work because those weren't examples of a ref using discretion, but rather they were examples of refs getting the call obviously and terribly wrong. IMO the argument that every foul should be called all the time is way more problematic than asking for a little common sense and discretion. Prime example: Michael Jordan's push off against the Jazz for his famous last shot. It would be awful if a referee waved off his shot because he pushed off. He would be technically right, but it would go against everything that is good about competitions. Same with the (in)famous Helmet Catch - people where I'm from still complain about all the missed holds during Eli Manning's scramble, but the fact of the matter is that it would have been ridiculously inappropriate for the refs to call a foul on the deciding play of the game.

tl;dr it's not about a formula for how many calls are acceptable, it's about the ref using a little discretion. Stopping the game and pissing off the players for no tangible good is the opposite of that.

I used the phrase "rule lawyering" earlier, because that's exactly what this is. Yes they broke the rules, but it makes little difference. Therefore: let it go.

Axiis, your arguments are well put, but I find myself unable to agree with any of them. Your premise seems to be "if I decide the play/player is an example of greatness then they should be allowed to break the rules."

Yes, NFL holding is the best example of the problems of enforcing the rules perfectly. So we should change the rules. What is the justification for why one play gets called for holding and another, where the holding is just as bad, doesn't get called? You say the Perfect Game issue is an example of the ref getting the call obviously and terribly wrong, but if a player holds another right in front of the ref, and it isn't called, then what is that? Not obvious, or not terribly wrong?

Should the NFL, NBA, etc award points for style, or bravery, or to make things close going into the final minutes? Things like that would lead to the excitement and moments of greatness you seem to crave, but they'd also turn things into Professional Wrestling rather than a real sport. Should the Olympic committee overlook famous and storied athletes if they jump the gun? Floyd Landis' (sp?) Tour de France comeback was one of the greatest performances I've seen, so should we overlook the cheating he did in the name of greatness? Again, who decides? Plays like Jordan's and Manning's appear great because the impossible seemed to happen, but the impossible is a lot easier when you've stacked the desk. A punter running 100 yards to score a game winning touchdown is an amazing story, but not if he pulls out a gun and murders the defense. What if instead his blockers go "Waterboy" style and knock the defenders out? What if instead they all just hold them? Again, we have rules because it isn't fair to have impressionable and fallible humans draw the line here.

Last thing I want to quote:

He would be technically right, but it would go against everything that is good about competitions.

I fail to see how rewarding illegal plays that give one side an unfair advantage is what's good about competition. To me calling the plays correctly is the essence of honorable professional sport.

[scooter]

FWIW, give Speaker his space. The reasons he is angry are understandable, and under most circumstances, he'd be 100% right.

To be upset and react strongly is one thing... To react to every single bad thing that happens with personal attacks, hissy fits, and threats to quit is childish. That post of mine wasn't just spawned from yet another string of attacks/obscenities from him today, it's because that's the norm for him.

I can sort of even see where he's coming from on this particular issue... But handle it like an adult for just once, that's all I'm asking. I joined this forum a few years ago because it's one of the first forums I've come across where the players were always polite, reasonable, and just all-around kind people who were never condescending to lesser-skilled players. Speaker has blown his top every single time something's gone even slightly wrong, and I'm sick of it. I'm sure he's actually a reasonable guy, but he's crossed the line now so many times that it's just ridiculous.

Look at it this way... If a less "big name" like, well I'll pick on Athlete since he was in this game, and everyone knows he's never acted like this. If Athlete constantly launched personal attacks on people, threatened to quit all the time, and generally behaved as Speaker has behaved, would ANYONE be defending him?? I really doubt it...