This maybe might be true for players here.
Please don't forget all the other teams participating.
Remember that the official position of Team CFC on this issue is that we are in favor of the Anti-Doublemove Mod. There are some of our team that aren't fans of using it, but most of us are.
Double moves can be fixed quite easily with a much neater...with... (Civstats and a rule).
It has been my experience that Doublemove rules work best in relaxed non-competitive MP games, where there is one player controlling a team. In that environment, a Doublemove is usually an accident and it goes kinda like this... Player A- "Um you DMed me", Player B "Whoops sorry dude, you totally get a reload"
In competitive games, particularly MTDG games when a turnplayer gets accused of a DM he is shamed and embarrased in front of his whole team and there is a tendancy to get defensive... "I was just logging in to look around", "I didn't move any units", "You DMed me before and I didn't say anything!" and a litany of other excuses. Then the teammates of the Turnplayer rally behind him and start quitting in protest when the admin enforces the rule... Game ruined. This has happened now in BTS MTDG I AND II!!
It absolutely dumbfounds me that we would be foolish enough to go down this same road of "Oh we just need a rule and the admin can enforce it and everything will be fine" NO IT WON'T!
That approach has FAILED in two MTDG games in a row. Please stop this madness and accept that we NEED this Anti-Doublemove Mod... For the Love of Heaven
The mod is completely inflexible when it comes to real game situations which call for human judgment. One example would be switching turn orders in the middle of a war for convenience, or to group allies together to avoid needlessly long turns.
This comes up when there is only ONE player on a team, not in MTDGs. AFAIK, there hasnt ever been a situation in an MTDG where this has happened (Whole teams needed to switch places in the turn). Surely team RB, with their 70+ players can find one person to play their turn in their 24 hour phase of the turn timer.
And Allies can group themselves together by attacking during the correct phase of the turn.
- The additional requirements just to log into the game, not to mention the lengthy enforced lock-outs, will not come without a cost. By putting up more barriers to getting into the game, the number of players that are able and willing to check up on the game will naturally dwindle. Every last person who has been thinking about/talking about/discussing this game already has Civ4 BTS 3.19 on their machines... but if another layer of requirements and restrictions are added, a significant chunk of casual players won't bother to check in on the game due to the added complexity. For a democracy game whose primary appeal is that it brings dozens more people to the table than any other game setup, this would be a great shame. It just doesn't seem at all like the kind of environment we should be setting up for this particular game.
I can't believe you just said that... I am speechless (Well not literally of course
I'm never "speechless")
But seriously... I can't believe you "fixed your mouth to say that"
as the saying goes. That sentiment is soooooo rich coming from Team RB. WTF?!?
YOU guys are the ones who started this whole mess of excluding new players.
CFC is getting innundated with RB refugees because YOU decided it would be nice to add some "
additional requirements just to log into the game" and "put
up more barriers to getting into the game"! Becacause of your restriction policy the "
number of players that are able and willing to [play] the game will naturally dwindle." YOU GUYS (Team RB) have "added
another layer of requirements and restrictions" so now "
a significant chunk of casual players won't bother [or be able to play] the game due to the added complexity. "
But this statement is the most frustrating of all:
For a democracy game whose primary appeal is that it brings dozens more people to the table than any other game setup, this would be a great shame.
Yes Team RB, it is a shame and no the climate of exclusionary practices don't "
seem at all like the kind of environment we should be setting up for this particular game" does it?.... It is a shame that you don't realize that recruiting new interest in the game is one of the goals of a Democracy game. It is a shame, and SHAME ON YOU
for forcing us down this road
It's ironic that you would say that the DM thing can be controlled with "a rule" plus admin enforcement, but you can't or wont accept the idea that the "double-account-spying thing could be controlled the same way... a rule against it plus admin-enforcement