SGOTM 05 Maintenance Thread

[da_Vinci]

I think too long a finish deadline for the SG takes away from the fun. As Big Pig has often mentinoed in our threads, when there's too much lag between turnsets, people tend to lose track of the progress and drift away from the game.

GOTMs are deadlined, I don't see a big problem with deadlining the SGs too.

I think a deadline is fine, I just want to know what the deadline is so we can plan accordingly.

With some teams not in the second millenium yet, and no rush to the next SGOTM given the patch issues, maybe 11/15 or 11/30 is a better deadline than 10/31? I guess we need the various teams to weigh in.

dV

 

[Erkon]

If you need a bit more time then we can move it to 30 November. I was more concerned to avoid months of delay from the first finishes to the last, rather than clashing with the next game.

Is there any request from any team to move the deadline? Extending the time period may not be fair to teams who have "rushed" their turns in order to complete the game within the hinted deadline. (We (Murky Waters) did not rush, so we would not suffer)

I got the impression from SWOTM4 that the reason for delay for many teams was boredom i.e. the not-so-fun-click-next-turn sequence. Will players enjoy SGOTM5 more if we added another month? Of course, patch problems is something else, and a perfectly valid reason for adding perhaps a week. I'm just worried that adding another month will reduce the interest from teams who have completed the game to discuss various tactics with other teams (because of memory decays etc).

I fully understand that some teams have real life obligations that prevent them from playing the game quickly. Still, I think it's wise to stick to a deadline to ensure that teams keep a steady pace to keep all team members interested in the game. Of course, I support whatever decision the staff takes.

 

[AlanH]

I propose that you aim to complete this game in three months, that is by the end of October 2007.

My proposal was never seconded, but it was never challenged either. So until I hear that teamS (note the plural) want it extended, 31 October is still the objective.

 

[BLubmuz]

I agree with Erkon, perhaps some day of delay, a month is too much.

BTW, if the only problem derived from the 3.13 patch is CvGameCoreDLL.dll, people that don't have patched yet (like me) can simply copy that file in a safe DIR, then apply the patch and switch the two files as they need.

Prolly the guys at Firaxis could have told this, as the remedy is so simple if you have prior knowledge.

 

[dutchfire]

My proposal was never seconded, but it was never challenged either. So until I hear that teamS (note the plural) want it extended, 31 October is still the objective.

Great

 

[LKendter]

My proposal was never seconded, but it was never challenged either. So until I hear that team S (note the plural) want it extended, 31 October is still the objective.

I am going to request that if we want a hard deadline that it be announced at the start of the game so that teams now the pace they need to play for.

With two dropouts and analysis paralysis Real Ms. Beyond is very doubtful to finish by Oct 31. I put a note in the team thread asking if the team wants to officially request a deadline extension.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I think Smurkz has similar slowdown issues. I doubt we will finish by 10/31 (with or without the deadline). I tend to agree with LKendter that announcing a deadline at the start is better. But trying to motivate people to play faster makes sense too.

 

[AlanH]

I am going to request that if we want a hard deadline that it be announced at the start of the game so that teams now the pace they need to play for.

My original proposal was intended to represent a deadline. How did you interpret it?

 

[Munro]

Fistful of Dynamite might be hard pushed to finish by the Oct 31st deadline also - although we are making steady progress (about 5th or 6th on the leaderboard in terms or number of turns played).

Agree it is not fair to push out the deadline though if other teams have already planned and played accordingly.

Hmm... maybe all those teams with saves still in the pre-1000ADs have already finished!!

 

[LowtherCastle]

My proposal was never seconded, but it was never challenged either. So until I hear that teamS (note the plural) want it extended, 31 October is still the objective.

I didn't realize that your proposal was up for seconding or not. Sounds to me like we have 1) Precedent, whereby deadlines were a bit flexible, 2) Your proposal, which was concrete, but not seconded, and 3) A Request from teams to know what the deadline is, in advance, if there's going to be a hard one.

Seems to me a good solution would be for you to tack on a week or two, giving teams more than a month to finish, and announce it officially as soon as you've made a final decision.

As for the future, sounds like you might just want to stick to an official three-month deadline or whatever (knowing in the back of your mind that you can extend, officially, if it makes sense to do so, like last time).

No one can really complain either way, AlanH, since the rules clearly state that your decision is final in all cases except where your decision is final...

 

[Ozbenno]

One way or another I missed the deadline date. I doubt Chokonuts will collect our third wooden spoon in a row by then but we'll get a push on and see.

 

[LKendter]

I propose that you aim to complete this game in three months that is by the end of October 2007.

To be honest I barely noticed this comment. In addition, the word "propose" to me implies a soft deadline. It should be bold, and underlined next time to that it can't be missed. I would change it to "you MUST"...


At least 3 of the 4 members of Real Ms. Beyond would like an extension. The fourth is on vacation. I am formally requesting an extension for the team.

 

[AlanH]

I don't accept that everything I write in less than bold/underlined can be ignored.

However, if there is at least one more team who wants to formally request that the end date should be extended, THEY MUST say so. Also, I need an ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL as to the length of such an extension.

Does this meet your requirements for emphasis?

 

[Ralph_Jackson]

I would feel a fair compromise would be a month from now so everybody has a very firm deadline in their heads and sufficient time to "catch - up" (e.g longer turnsets) if they need to.

Ralph

 

[AlanH]

A month from now is only a week later than the original proposal. A week in three months is not a big deal, but I suspect this is not what The Real Ms. Beyond would want.

 

[Kodii]

Speaking from the Real Ms. Beyond, I don't understand the bickering in regards to extending the deadline to November 30. In doing so, all teams who have not yet picked up the pace can do so and finish on time.

Teams who are already ahead will finish early. Whats the big deal? Can't wait for those results for a couple of weeks?

 

[Frederiksberg]

Speaking from the Real Ms. Beyond, I don't understand the bickering in regards to extending the deadline to November 30. In doing so, all teams who have not yet picked up the pace can do so and finish on time.

Teams who are already ahead will finish early. Whats the big deal? Can't wait for those results for a couple of weeks?

I think we are rather talking about getting the results 2.5 months after finishing - at least for some teams. I wonder if they can still remember the game by the end of November...

 

[Erkon]

*** Spam deleted ***

 

[Kodii]

I wasn't aware so many teams were finished?

 

[DaviddesJ]

I wasn't aware so many teams were finished?

The status page hides who has finished, to prevent other teams from seeing their date and aiming for it. I'm not convinced this is such a great idea, though (but then I've always been on the teams that finish late).