Discussion Thread related to Multipolarity IOT

[JohannaK]

/expected.

 

[Dem Taqat]

I was anticipating the next installment of MP. Unfortunately, with the actions of a select few, have dampened the mood of the game itself.

While I am outside the loop on this whole fiasco. Calls of a General Strike/Revolution against the moderators is ridiculous at best. Perhaps treading the line of a PDMA. I'm on the mindset of never messing with the guy who has the ability to toss out infractions and ban you.

The mods don't need the IOT forum for anything, the only thing it manufactures is a little bit more spam (and we have plenty of that already ).

I find it rather amazing that I, myself, still have any sort of interest in any IOT game. Despite the infighting that goes on.

Although given my recent experiances that interest is fading somewhat.

However, I agree with the idea that GMs should more or less be in control of their games

The whole point of a GM is to keep order in their game, ensure that it is fun, and enforce the rules. Too do this, they need effectively absolute power.

(bans of course, should require moderator approval).

On the contrary, if a GM decides that a player is having too negative an impact on the game, it should be within their rights to kick them. By signing up for the game, the player has agreed to follow the rules and accept the authority of the GM to enforce them; if they then don't follow them, the GM should have the power to punish them by kicking.

DT
With Stupid

 

[SamSniped]

I agree with DT's last two statements there. Well, three. The two about mod power, and the I'm with stupid one.

 

[BSmith1068]

It happened before game because diplomacy always happens before the game starts. Every game that has a sign-up happen has diplomacy happening within an hour or two. Would an embargo two minutes after game start be DIFFERENT from an embargo before the game? Again, we were diplomatic about it. We weren't going around telling people to declare embargoes or anything. We had our opinion; TF said our thought process was logical, and so the embargoes happened.

Just because something is done all the time doesn't make it right or ideal. In my opinion all diplo before game start should be restricted. The game should be an equal opportunity for all players whether they were the first to sign up or the last.

All too often the world is set well before signups are closed. Alliances have been formed
. Unclaimed territory all divided up. Etc. Etc. Anyone joining towards the end of signups is at an extreme disadvantage not only because they have less options for nations (completely.understandable) but because they risk upsetting the already established world order just by joining. This is not fair to those players and it certainly creates a higher barrier to entry into the games and discourages overall participation especially by new players.

 

[Lighthearter]

Agreed with Dem. I'm more or less a moderate in this "Revolution" nonsense by which I'm more inclined to accept a compromise where the mods disallow blacklists and keep tabs on us, but we have the authority to GM as we see fit with some glaring exceptions.

Joining a game is like saying "I have read and agree to the terms & conditions" etc. If someone breaks the rules of the game, it is the GM's right and not the mod's to kick them. If a mod wants to get into a game, they need to talk to the GM first and see if he has the situation under control, or warn him to shape up. Not unilaterally edit posts and lock the thread because they feel things have gone too far.

Seriously, if it gets to the point where mods have more power than GMs in their own threads, players will cut to the chase and ask MODS if it's okay to do something, ignoring the GM. After all, if GM says it's K to invade X neighbor for X reason, what does that matter? It doesn't if Bird can come in and say "No it's not cool I'mma edit your posts and remove your orders and lock the game thread until YOU play by the rules" irregardless of what the GM told these people.

Which is exactly what just happened, by the way. Sone and Mosher had Tani's explicit approval and Bird still felt like running in and flexing his own muscles. If a mod is responsible for judging whether players' in-character actions are acceptable or not and edits orders, locks threads - what's next? An infraction for embargoing someone Bird likes? A ban for invading one of his friends?

Blacklists being banned I can -grudgingly, and exploiting loopholes the GMs can't close- accept. Forcing us to go through a mod to control our own games? Too much, but not quite too much to get me to act. Being Big Brother to control player actions and undermining GM authority in their own games? Too far, Bird, FAR too far.

I don't GM to crunch numbers while you manage my game, I GM to be a GM. You gonna start taking ACs from me too, after all this is done?

-L

 

[Sonereal]

So you're saying that because you simply don't like my nation that you will embargo it?

I gave both IC and OOC reasons. If you can't read, that is your problem.

Would you be more likely to suspend your disbelife if it was the Obama Republic in africa?[/S]

Do I come across as an Obama Apologist or something? Come to the chat once in a while and you'd see me complaining about the left like I do the right. I'm left-leaning, not a left-apologist.

Moderatores Imperii is correct Latin, for the record. Moderator is 3rd declension, therefore Moderatores, the nominative plural form, is used because it is the subject "Moderators." Imperium was correct in your statement. it is 2nd declension neuter, therefore Imperii, the genitive singular form, shows possession, translated in this case as "of the government/empire."
Therefore, "Moderators of the empire."
And there's your daily Latin lesson

I owe you for the Latin and for Excel help now.

Just because something is done all the time doesn't make it right or ideal. In my opinion all diplo before game start should be restricted. The game should be an equal opportunity for all players whether they were the first to sign up or the last.

All too often the world is set well before signups are closed. Alliances have been formed
. Unclaimed territory all divided up. Etc. Etc. Anyone joining towards the end of signups is at an extreme disadvantage not only because they have less options for nations (completely.understandable) but because they risk upsetting the already established world order just by joining. This is not fair to those players and it certainly creates a higher barrier to entry into the games and discourages overall participation especially by new players.

While I can see that being the problem, it should be the GM who takes steps to deal with it, not the Moderators. If the GM request moderator assistance, then by all means, let the moderator come in and do something. When the moderator just jumps in and locks a thread over it, there is a problem. Especially if the GM wasn't notified that his thread was going to be locked before hand.

 

[SamSniped]

I should have asked for a bonus in SonRISKDiplomacy

 

[NedimNapoleon]

This flag is more awesome

 

[Bowsling]

I feel like I should explain why I've been quitting IOTs "on strike".

I'm more or less indifferent as to the causes of the strike. There's a reason why I've never joined a TF game, and it's because the stuff that bothered you guys bothers me, too. I'm sure you can attest to some of my reactions over silliness in Valkyrie. So my solution is simply to ignore those games, because I know that nations like Romney in Africa and Spammer's Crusade are welcome in them. I find it completely absurd (not necessarily in a bad way), but that's my opinion. Some people would completely disagree with me, and I respect their right to do so. I stay out of their "fantasy" games, and they stay serious within serious games.

Another thing that I find completely absurd (in a bad way) is the "strike". Whatever your qualms are over the events are in a certain game, they should stay there. Refusing to play or GM all games is simply unfair to the community. I come here to play IOTs, not to complain about the moderating system, and especially not to endure other's complaints about the moderating system. For a GM to stop GMing a game because of events in another game is, in essence, a violation of the fundamental trust that exists between the GM and the player. I will certainly have difficulty in the future committing time and effort to a game run by any of the strikers, because I now know that they don't have any respect for the players playing their game. This is why I quit SE and Diplomacy: I just don't feel like wasting time on a game that a GM feels he can stop GMing simply as a protest to a bloody moderator action in another game.

Valkyrie is different, given that the UK getting NPCed would probably kill whatever was left of that game, so I will stay in for the time being.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

I'll update in a day or two anyways, dont worry, and Valk is as realistic as an IOT can be.

 

[Ailedhoo]

While I am in understand of the strike, I have to disagree on the whole issue made of the "silly" and even "stupid" nation thing. especilly as it goes against the main of the strike to attempt to ensure the GMs have their power ensured. Sure, sure you may feel bizare as a serious nation to do talks with a "silly" nation but the notion that all nations should be serious is up to the GM, as noted for instance with IOT: the Next Step. That kind of rule is also used for period based games and even games in fictionial universes... at times. Alas though this is the judgement of a GM. Say I agree that the Spam nation is silly but I like sillyness. Yes I know the idea of Romney as a African leader may have... issue but so is the idea in MP3 that the Isle of Man (which I am to play as) could rise from a little isle that is basically a mear plaything of the United Kingdom, whom goverment is a bit like the Jar Jar Binks of politics, to somehow become a empire with the possibility of striving for superpower.

In IOT 9 the big powers included the Downfall Gang whose comedy contributed to the game well. In MP2 the dark humour over the food issue with the Formatting Crew did make me laugh a bit. And to me the de facto example of a great IOTer is Double A, a figure who does not take the games uber seriously. Heck the main thing the war over the "silly/stupid" issue was made me considering setting up a British comedy nation in a future game... perhapes IOT IX or MP4? Well we will see...

Anyrate: what I am saying is that silly nations does not equal stupid, even if the main contribution is in the end to be listed in the Imperium Offtopicum wiki. People may claim the purpose of a game is competition but if that were the case then why is the term competitive games a term? Could you argue Dwarf Fortress, game of ones doom, to be competive? What of co-operative games? Heck the purpose of Civilizations is not of competition but of seeing your civilization through. A Paradox game is of this. Even with its score system, CK2 is more a game of making history then getting the largest score... even if I admit to take account of the score.

Going back to the definitions here are the two first of 5 noun for game in the Oxford dictionary:

1a form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules.


(games) a meeting for sporting contests: the Olympic Games


(games) British athletics or sports as a lesson or activity at school: in order to be popular, you had to be good at games


a person’s performance in a game; a person’s standard of play: Rooks attempted to raise his game to another level


2an activity that one engages in for amusement: a computer game


the equipment for a game, especially a board game or a computer game: buy your games and software from us

Now notice that it is the second, not the first, that Imperium Offtopicum fits more?

Note that I am not commencing a cruade against seriousness. As Extra Credits mentioned there is something beyond fun. Let we must remember the notice of why we play. There are more games then permit serious nations only then permit silly nations only in IOT. We should allow the sillyness to shine. One of the most important things in maturity is knowing when to be silly, as noted well by Extra Credits.

Hence I suggest we allow silly nations into MP3 and beyond. The GM can decide if they want to have restrictions on the type of nations that appear in their game but these restrictions should not become universal norms. You cannot have serious withou silly and vice versa. We must play round and then we can enjoy the game...

...and then focus on power political ganging.

 

[mayor]

@Aleidhoo: This isn't about silly vs. serious nations in IOT anymore. It currently is a "fight" undertaken by several GM's to remain the supreme rulers if it comes to their IOTs instead of a moderator

@Bowsling: Like I said, the strike is not a silly vs. seriousness fight.

I just don't feel like wasting time on a game that a GM feels he can stop GMing simply as a protest to a bloody moderator action in another game.

I understand that and I feel, more or less, the same however I do understand their position. If I were a GM I wouldn't like it, for example, if a moderator barges in and starts making game decisions without my consent. That's what they're trying to establish, that they are supreme in their game thread when it comes to game affecting decisions.

 

[Sonereal]

I understand that and I feel, more or less, the same however I do understand their position. If I were a GM I wouldn't like it, for example, if a moderator barges in and starts making game decisions without my consent. That's what they're trying to establish, that they are supreme in their game thread when it comes to game affecting decisions.

Exactly. A moderator should not be allowed to lock a thread because he disagrees with an embargo. He shouldn't be allowed to go back through player orders and edit them either. If the moderation feel that they're ultimately the ones in charge of the games, then they should run them.

There have been about 140 IOT games since IOT started two years ago. Mosher, Nedim, LH, and I have ran nearly a full third of those games. I think we have a better understanding of how our games should be run, both mechanics-wise and enforcement wise. It isn't like the four of us are new IOTers who just came in on the CivV boat. A lot of us have been here since the original CivIV S&T->Forum Games IOT migration.

So far, most of the major IOT GMs agree that right now, the moderation versus GM power is skewed far too much toward the moderation side when it comes to making our games. The people shouting the loudest against all of this are the people who also haven't actually moderated an IOT.

The people making this only about silly versus seriousness are completely missing the point. The problem isn't that the thread was locked. The problem is that the thread was locked in a way that went over the GM's head and, after the lock, had the moderator go through and edit orders. At no point did TF have a say in the thread being locked, and the moderator intervened in the way that pretty much said "lololo this is Sonereal's fault, he gonna have to beg for forgiveness for me to unlock it".

How much has moderators contribute to these games? Notice, we had none of these problems before we had a moderator thrown at us. The mechanics and history of this genre have been forged and refined by the Game Moderators, not the Board Moderators. If you remove the Moderator from the administration of a game, you lose little. Player being an asshat? Kick them. He keeps complaining in thread? Ignore him or report as spam. The moderator doesn't have to be proactive. You remove the Game Moderator from the administration of a game, you lose the game. No two ways around that.

Even if you argue for the idea that some new players would just rise up to the challenge and GM forgets the point that most of these modern IOTs were created using mechanics made and continually improved upon by the Old Guard. Valkyrie was designed in-house by Nedim. Shattered Europe had a ton of collaboration between Mosher, RedSpy, Mechaerik, and I. Tyo's current IOT is using an economic system largely inspired by economic mechanics I've been working on for the last two months. MP3's probable resource economic system came about largely because of the growing interest in resource economics, which started with Nedim, was improved upon in my beta, and has been increasingly sharpened by Tyo, TF, Mosher, and I.

So, it goes back to the "you don't have an IOT without a game moderator" because it is the game moderators who improve and push the game. Not the board moderators, who do nothing but lock and edit player orders they don't like.

 

[christos200]

I did not agree in the MP3 thread with Son and Mosher about the embargoes. I believe that their reasons are silly. But since the GM allowed it and there ware no personal insults in their posts, the Moderator has no justification to close a thread and edit orders.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

Thank god the mod didn't see the unholy mess that Caeser1345 made. I would've gotten banned let alone the player.

 

[christos200]

Why you would have been banned?

 

[Ailedhoo]

I did not agree in the MP3 thread with Son and Mosher about the embargoes. I believe that their reasons are silly. But since the GM allowed it and there ware no personal insults in their posts, the Moderator has no justification to close a thread and edit orders.

There is also the consideration of allainces, notable including plans in MP3. The allaince consideration? The Papal offerings.

Now if a sign up thread generated allaince is permitted... then what of other policies?

 

[Sonereal]

Why you would have been banned?

Because the player had been kicked and banned, including another player that appeared later who we're still convinced was a sockpuppet.

Now if a sign up thread generated allaince is permitted... then what of other policies?

Better question is: What does this have to do with what we're talking about right now?

 

[Dem Taqat]

Better question is: What does this have to do with what we're talking about right now?

DT
With Stupid

 

[Thorvald of Lym]

Dem, you do know we have this smiley?: