1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Slow Game Thread

Discussion in 'Team SANCTA' started by Krill, Apr 13, 2009.

  1. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    really want to post this:

    Rule: 4.1 -- Turn Timer
    Spoiler :

    The PitBoss server will give each team 24 hours in which to play the save and pass it on to the next team. If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted. AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.
    The game may remain paused up to 120 hours, at which point any team may un-pause the game so play may resume.
    An official vote to “continue sooner” may be posted by any team in the turn-tracker thread. Each such vote by a team will reduce the 120 hour extension by 24 hours.


    Disclaimer:
    Spoiler :

    Ok now I am not looking for this to be any type of dig, or flame (but logic dictates with such a precurser it could be inhernetly implied...but bear with me)


    Ok so Let's have a look:

    If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted.AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.

    Based on the Time stamps the Action was:

    Husch Logged in, Logged out.
    Posted MS needed more time (quoted above)
    Logged in, Paused, Logged out.

    Now what to me isn't fully explained is this:

    AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.

    The Rational was 2 fold:
    Which Would potentially be valid but:
    1. owenbevt logged in. He could of played the save, thus rational #1 can't hold.
    2. If the turn had cycled all the way around in 24 hours, or even 2-3 days, then yeah maybe everyone hasn't had opportunity to weigh in. But the last time the save was there was just shy of a week ago (~164hours). So any worker moves, builds, trades, etc. could be hashed out with lots of comment time.

    Now the counter arguement for this: (which I hope MS says as that is all they have to do)

    ==> Something so drastic happened on the interturn that would warrant immidiate team discussion. What could these be?

    A. Barb Movement. But MS sees the barbs moves when the end thier turn, so they have also had ~a week to discuss this.
    B. War. Units lost / damaged from last turn that only now are showing up.
    C. Random event. (mute as you wouldn't be able to log out of the game with out a descision)

    So to me a more robust rational needs to be given here. If team participation is low, slowing down to more than 1 turn a week isn't going to help increase it. In fact we will find many teams starting to lose more players.
     
  2. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Counter argument: we started a war with Kaz. Doesn't affect MS though.

    What is the aim of such a post? What is the ultimate outcome that we should be aiming to make?
     
  3. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    Nothing feasible could change for them here, the pending war was also known about prior.

    1. To get MS to play faster 2 pauses in a row is ridiculous especially sicne they have low activity. MS has no chance at this game, and by slowing it down are making others lose interest.

    2. To indirectly influence #1. By either:
    A. Having All teams commit to vote down MS to 48 hours (highly unlikely)
    B. Have the wording of the rule 4.1 be clarified to something that G_W posted. Ill add that to my post.
     
  4. IamJohn

    IamJohn (was)?

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Out there, somewhere, anywhere...
    I really think that something needs to be done, it's getting really frustrating and pretty pathetic.
     
  5. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    I think that we need to, today, vote down the request for a pause from MS and demand they get a second turn player like all the other teams have.
     
  6. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    new proposed post:


    Rule: 4.1 -- Turn Timer
    Spoiler :

    The PitBoss server will give each team 24 hours in which to play the save and pass it on to the next team. If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted. AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.
    The game may remain paused up to 120 hours, at which point any team may un-pause the game so play may resume.
    An official vote to “continue sooner” may be posted by any team in the turn-tracker thread. Each such vote by a team will reduce the 120 hour extension by 24 hours.


    Disclaimer:
    Spoiler :

    Ok now I am not looking for this to be any type of dig, or flame (but logic dictates with such a precurser it could be inhernetly implied...but bear with me)


    Ok so Let's have a look:

    If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted.AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.


    Now what to me isn't fully explained is this:

    AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.

    So 2 Cases:
    Case #1 is Obsolete:
    Spoiler :

    The Rational on quote #1 was 2 fold:
    Which Would potentially be valid but:
    1. owenbevt logged in. He could of played the save, thus rational #1 can't hold.
    2. If the turn had cycled all the way around in 24 hours, or even 2-3 days, then yeah maybe everyone hasn't had opportunity to weigh in. But the last time the save was there was just shy of a week ago (~164hours). So any worker moves, builds, trades, etc. could be hashed out with lots of comment time.

    Now the counter arguement for this: (which I hope MS says as that is all they have to do)

    ==> Something so drastic happened on the interturn that would warrant immidiate team discussion. What could these be?

    A. Barb Movement. But MS sees the barbs moves when the end thier turn, so they have also had ~a week to discuss this.
    B. War. Units lost / damaged from last turn that only now are showing up.
    C. Random event. (mute as you wouldn't be able to log out of the game with out a descision)


    Case #2 is going to be happening:
    Spoiler :

    So if you Read Case #1 before, this is a pre-emtive pause, because Husch doesn't have access to Civ, so it can't be something unpredictable. As such that leaves participation level.

    But if we go back to the rules we have a catch-22 on this pause:
    ...that team may then pause the game
    So None of us can pause the game for MS. But if they can log in to pause it, why can't they play it?

    As such I feel this pause request is in violation of the rules.
    Fact is MS needs another turn player, slowing down the game because there is heated discussion is one thing. Slowing it down because of lack of particiaption isn't fair to the other teams.

    Disclaimer 2:
    Spoiler :

    Yes I paused for Saturn. But that prevented a reload due to lack of tiem notification. In hindsight it actually gave our current war buddy more time for a reload on thier missed move.





    So to me a more robust rational needs to be given to pause the game. If team participation is low, slowing down to more than 1 turn a week isn't going to help increase it. In fact we will find many teams starting to lose more players.
     
  7. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    I think that the rulle should be specifically rewritten to deny pauses for the two reasons HUSch gave; anyone agree with that PoV?
     
  8. Dreylin

    Dreylin Cousin Itt!

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    755
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    To me, the proposed post is very "rules-lawyery" and is bound to put MS's backs up - probably killing any chance of a trade.

    We do need to clarify the rules on pausing in order to stop this sort of behavior, but I think it might be better accomplished by taking a softer line to start with - start by just asking why they don't have a reserve turnplayer for this sort of eventuality, push them to appoint one, and if they can't or won't then go for the throat.
     
  9. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Correcting spelling and grammar...

    Spoiler Memphus;8153979 :
    New proposed post:


    Rule: 4.1 -- Turn Timer
    Spoiler :

    The PitBoss server will give each team 24 hours in which to play the save and pass it on to the next team. If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted. AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.
    The game may remain paused up to 120 hours, at which point any team may un-pause the game so play may resume.
    An official vote to “continue sooner” may be posted by any team in the turn-tracker thread. Each such vote by a team will reduce the 120 hour extension by 24 hours.


    Disclaimer:
    Spoiler :

    Ok now I am not looking for this to be any type of dig, or flame (but logic dictates with such a precurser it could be inherently implied...but bear with me)


    Ok so Let's have a look:

    If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted .AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.


    Now what to me isn't fully explained is this:

    AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.

    So 2 Cases:
    Case #1 is Obsolete:
    Spoiler :


    The Rational on quote #1 was 2 fold:



    Which Would potentially be valid but:
    1. owenbevt logged in. He could of played the save, thus rational #1 can't hold.
    2. If the turn had cycled all the way around in 24 hours, or even 2-3 days, then yeah maybe everyone hasn't had opportunity to weigh in. But the last time the save was there was just shy of a week ago (~164hours). So any worker moves, builds, trades, etc. could be hashed out with lots of comment time.

    Now the counter arguement for this: (which I hope MS says as that is all they have to do)

    ==> Something so drastic happened on the interturn that would warrant immediate team discussion. What could these be?

    A. Barb Movement. But MS sees the barbs moves when the end thier turn, so they have also had ~a week to discuss this.
    B. War. Units lost / damaged from last turn that only now are showing up.
    C. Random event. (mute as you wouldn't be able to log out of the game with out a descision)


    Case #2 is going to be happening:
    Spoiler :



    So if you read Case #1 before, this is a pre-emptive pause, because Husch doesn't have access to Civ, so it can't be something unpredictable. As such that leaves participation level.

    But if we go back to the rules we have a catch-22 on this pause:
    ...that team may then pause the game
    So none of us can pause the game for MS. But if they can log in to pause it, why can't they play it?

    As such I feel this pause request is in violation of the rules.
    Fact is MS needs another turn player, slowing down the game because there is heated discussion is one thing. Slowing it down because of lack of particiaption isn't fair to the other teams.



    So to me a more robust rational needs to be given here. If team participation is low, slowing down to more than 1 turn a week isn't going to help increase it. In fact we will find many teams starting to lose more players.
     
  10. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    We have done in the past :( MS are just a cr&p team with no organizational skills though. Now this is the third pause in the past 5 turns.
     
  11. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    Draft #3

    Rule: 4.1 -- Turn Timer
    Spoiler :

    The PitBoss server will give each team 24 hours in which to play the save and pass it on to the next team. If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted. AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.
    The game may remain paused up to 120 hours, at which point any team may un-pause the game so play may resume.
    An official vote to “continue sooner” may be posted by any team in the turn-tracker thread. Each such vote by a team will reduce the 120 hour extension by 24 hours.


    Disclaimer:
    Spoiler :

    Ok now I am not looking for this to be any type of dig, or flame (but logic dictates with such a precurser it could be inherently implied...but bear with me)


    Ok so Let's have a look:

    If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension in the turn-tracker thread, and state the reason they believe it should be granted .AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.


    Now what to me isn't fully explained is this:

    AFTER the extension request and rational have been posted in the turn tracker, that team may then pause the game.

    So 2 Cases:
    Case #1 is Obsolete:
    Spoiler :


    Based on the Time stamps the Action was:

    Husch Logged in, Logged out.
    Posted MS needed more time (quoted above)
    Logged in, Paused, Logged out.

    The Rational on quote #1 was 2 fold:
    Which Would potentially be valid but:
    1. owenbevt logged in. He could of played the save, thus rational #1 can't hold.
    2. If the turn had cycled all the way around in 24 hours, or even 2-3 days, then yeah maybe everyone hasn't had opportunity to weigh in. But the last time the save was there was just shy of a week ago (~164hours). So any worker moves, builds, trades, etc. could be hashed out with lots of comment time.

    Now the counter arguement for this: (which I hope MS says as that is all they have to do)

    ==> Something so drastic happened on the interturn that would warrant immediate team discussion. What could these be?

    A. Barb Movement. But MS sees the barbs moves when the end thier turn, so they have also had ~a week to discuss this.
    B. War. Units lost / damaged from last turn that only now are showing up.
    C. Random event. (mute as you wouldn't be able to log out of the game with out a descision)


    Case #2 is going to be happening:
    Spoiler :

    So if you read Case #1 before, there was the possibility of the rationals that I presented

    However this is now a pre-emptive pause, so it can't be something unpredictable.

    As such that leaves participation level, as explicitely state in the quote, because Husch doesn't have access to Civ.
    So I ask:
    Spoiler :

    ...If a team is unable to play in time, they may post a request for an extension...

    Is this an acceptable request? Can another team member not be found to play the game?

    But if we go back to the rules we have a catch-22 on this pause:
    ...that team may then pause the game
    So none of us can pause the game for MS. But if they (MS) can log in to pause it, why can't they play it?

    Disclaimer 2:
    Spoiler :

    Yes I paused for Saturn. But that prevented a reload due to lack of time notification. In hindsight it actually gave our current war buddy more time for a reload on thier missed move ;) which they didn't ask for at the time.


    As such I feel this pause request is in violation of the rules.
    Fact is MS needs another turn player, slowing down the game because there is heated discussion is one thing. Slowing it down because of lack of particiaption isn't fair to the other teams.



    So to me a more robust rational needs to be given here. If team participation is low, slowing down to more than 1 turn a week isn't going to help increase it. In fact we will find many teams starting to lose more players.
     
  12. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    Anyoen else care to comment?
    Krill, Myself and Iamjohn want to post it.

    Dreylin is currently warry of the diplomatic consequences.

    anyone else?
     
  13. Whomp

    Whomp Keep Calm and Carry On Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    18,200
    Location:
    Chicago
    I think stating the need to get another turnplayer is a immediate priority or there will be a need to call the admins into the game and resolve the situation. The waits will undoubtely desteoy the game as we've seen in the current c3c mtdg.
     
  14. AutomatedTeller

    AutomatedTeller Frequent poster

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Medford, MA
    Can we get an example of what it would say?
     
  15. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    I'd be tempted to add something in about diplomacy...
     
  16. ruff_hi

    ruff_hi Live 4ever! Or die trying

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    9,026
    Location:
    an Aussie in Boston
    And after many days of listening to people talking about rules while I ride the tube, I find myself at Mornington Crescent. I wonder how that happened?
     
  17. IamJohn

    IamJohn (was)?

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Out there, somewhere, anywhere...
    Your mind is entering a state of shock because of all the delays, that's why :p
     
  18. Dreylin

    Dreylin Cousin Itt!

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    755
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Well, oyzar just sent me a PM attempting to recruit me into MS, so there's some efforts from the other teams too.
     
  19. Sullla

    Sullla Patrician Roman Dictator

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,833
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore MD
    Here's something for you to ponder, Krill: are the Mad Scientists the Templars of the CivFanatics Demogame, or are the Templars the Mad Scientists of the Apolyton Demogame?

    Food for thought during your latest pause session. :D
     
  20. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Hehehe

    Way ahead of you...
     

Share This Page