Discussion in 'Team CivFanatics' started by Sommerswerd, May 23, 2012.
I say yes.
Yes, the scenario that Sommerswerd posted (even though it took almost ten minutes to read ) was convincing.
I'm very glad to hear that, Bowsling! The scenarios he wrote out is exactly along the lines of what I am dead scared of happening as well..
I rewrote Sommerswerds proposal, to make it less "Sommerswerdish" (*cough* I suspect people will see that it's written by Sommer in it's current form ), with Sommers blessing. I was going to post it, but as the game host I should try to stay out of these matters as much as possible. So could someone please post it? Here is my rewrite for easy access if you see it and don't have the time or want to spend the effort rewriting it yourself:
Posted it, very slightly altered to make it clear that I was posting on behalf of the team.
Now the question is whether we need to defend it via posting some of Sommer's scenarios, or if the other teams will see the wisdom of it. It will be interesting to see the reaction from the other teams - particularly RB. We will just have to wait and see.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
I have been following a PB game thread made by Krill over at the RB site, when I all of a sudden encountered this little tidbit...
This specific way of sending precise information about the map falls under the "alternative ways" section where I gave example with the source code of Windows XP being exported legally from USA in 100's of bags full of printed on paper source and then 1000's of volunteers were typing the source back in computers to gather the whole puzzle back again.
There are 100's of ways this rule to be roundabout (sending via morse-code with flash-light, publishing the maps in public printed magazine, so anyone can buy them and sees the map, printing them on paper and then sending them with pigeons, etc, etc other creative or stupid ways), but we are speaking of mature honorable players who do understand and agree to not break a rule, right?
I think the whole maptrading discussion is silly, either make a rule saying no mapDISCUSSION is allowed until paper, or allow maptrading completely.
If mapdiscussion is not allowed, there are two options. Either players may only the count tiles from cities or units and share this to agree on settling positions, but not mention terrain or resources or whatever more there is. Or players may not give information by counting tiles nor mentioning terrain or resources or whatever more there is.
If maptrading is allowed, players may do what they want with their map knowledge.
Anything other than those extremes will cause players to find creative/abusive ways of trading map information.
I think trading maps with screenies should be allowed, I dont see any reason it wouldn't be. You still can't trade maps ingame before paper, showing cities and gaining traderoutes or whatever it's useful for.
It's curious that you can pop a hut giving map information way before paper...
Please guys this map stuff is a distraction. The game starts in 1 day. We should be fighting to get the shuffle taken out, or just give up on the shuffle rule (maybe it gets voted out later (by 2/3 majority plus admin consent ) and return our focus to the starting location / overall strategy discussion.
BTW, I think that little ninja edit ruff did to the rules "2/3 majority plus admin consent" is a way for them to nerf espionage later over what they think will be a two-team protest by CFC and German site Those guys are sneaky
Nah, its the shuffle or 2/3 majority that are distractions.
You know, that comment made me think of something... I'm a little ashamed I didn't think of it until now because its probably too late
Part of the justification for the nerf on Second Move's resource denial advantage is the nerf of First Move's opening Doublemove advantage. That is a pretty powerful ability that first move has that more than makes up for the resource denial thing. But we took that away, thus nerfing First move and making it less desireable.
It would be better IMO to give opening Doublemove back to First Move. That would get rid of 2 complex rule-blocs and make things alot simpler... Alas, I should have thought of it earlier.
So, we have under 15 hours left before r_rolo's deadline to vote on the ruleset, and so far only three of nine teams have voted:
In addition, Yuufo, UCiv's captain, posted that he is on vacation for the next couple weeks and nobody else on his team reads this thread, and GES of RB posted concerns with the 2/3 vote to change rules. Will we be able to start the game if the other teams don't vote on this in the next 15 hours? If so, are the votes currently in favor of the ruleset as is with no changes? Even if r_rolo is given the option to make a ruling on the contentious issues (shuffle rule and 2/3 vote to change rules), I doubt he would make any changes with this little input from the other teams. I hope the other teams post their votes soon.
How can we start the game if the UCiv captain is away for the next couple of weeks, and none from Team UCiv reads these forums?
Could it be an idea to send an email to all the Team EMails about this? Perhaps ask r_rolo1 to do so before making a final ruling on the rulesets?
Can't you still suggest this? As it is the ruleset is looking to be implemented with an option for the rules to changed with a 2/3 majority anyways...
He gave us an email address to communicate with their team. It seems that they will be able to take care of playing the turns in his absence. But I'm sure they won't be voting on the rules.
Well, then I hope someone from our team can send an email to that address and ask if they have any opinions on the rules and that if they do they should voice them now?
I am about to go into a meeting, but if there are no objections by the time I return (in about one hour), I will send the following message from our team email account.
This includes the changes to rules 5e and 5f that ruff just posted this morning.
Email sent. The timing is bad, it only gives them about 20 minutes to vote! But at least they received something.
Rules Discussion is closed, and it looks like we are on track to get the game started this weekend!
This means that the shuffle rule never got fixed, but hopefully the scenarios that we fear will not come to pass and everyone will have an enjoyable game without ever invoking the shuffle rule. I know, wishful thinking. I'm just happy the game is starting!
Yes the shuffleboard is a disaster ... May God have mercy on us for allowing such a calamatous rule in the game...
I guess a sign of a good compromise is when every one is equally unhappy with it.
Anyway its over (for now)... on to the next fight
Separate names with a comma.