MP: Setsumi - Come for the game, stay for the drama!

[SciencePro]

Originally Posted by Dragar

As soon as an admin message directed me to the forums I came to the thread and replied, forgive me for not checking the forum over the brief period this all happened...

i sent out the original request as both an email and forum post and waited more than 50 hours (from 01:37 GMT on 10-2 to 04:32 on 10-4) I'm not sure why you wouldn't have gotten it then.

Anyway, voting will remain open until at least 05:00 GMT on 10-6. After that we will resume play as expediently as we can.

[SciencePro]

Originally Posted by Micah

It's simple enough to check the server logs if there's any suspicion of people trying to cheat by submitting extra turns, though I hope we would be above that sort of thing.

yes, my concern is that for the current turn (56) people have already submitted turns and as far as i know there is no way to delete the orders without rolling back the hosting results from the previous turn. The only thing we can do is request that everyone re-submit the 2h files with no new orders. The log will not show whether a 2h file contained new orders or not, just whether one existed.

and yes, I hope we'd be above any shenanigans but everyone might not feel obligated to cooperate with an option they didn't agree to. Or they might not be bothered to read all the posts/emails etc... Options A, and C don't require any cooperation whatsoever and B only requires a tiny bit (refrain from sending new 2h's during the short time window while Zeldor is doing his free turns).

[Kuritza]

Cant help saying that this poll is just baaaaaaaaaaaad.

A) This variant is unacceptable for Zeldor. If we choose A, congratulations - we've lost 10 days only to continue playing without Zeldor.
B) It seem this version has most votes by now.
C) This variant is unacceptable for me. Do you really want me to go AI to make up for Ermor's stales?
D)This is simply an overcompensation. Giving Ermor 3 free turns in late game, with just one turn for us to save our armies, when he already has a huge lead in armies and gems (except me maybe), is an I.WIN button - Marignon will die with no hopes to recover.
E) It 'almost' ok, but it punishes me for Ermor's stales. I fail to see how this is fair.

[Zeldor]

I'd surely prefer to have some agreement by biggest players than voting like that. But well, it's not like we didn't try. I will wait till everyone makes a vote and add mine, checking if it can make any difference, as I'd prefer to not vote about a matter that is about me.

[SciencePro]

Originally Posted by Kuritza

Cant help saying that this poll is just baaaaaaaaaaaad.

Okay obviously I wasn't clear before. Let me say it a little louder: YOU CAN SUGGEST WHATEVER OPTION YOU WANT! Please do that now. If people are interested in whatever option you come up with they can re-submit their vote.

There is no fear of "splitting the vote" because the schulze system will figure out what would have won in a pairwise runoff between the two best options.

So could we please try to make some kind of productive suggestion instead of just griping, complaining, and threatening to quit.

Dragar has suggested:
Option F: Declare the game finished and Ermor the winner.

Kuritza has suggested:
something? Fill me in here. What do you want to do?

[SciencePro]

Originally Posted by Zeldor

I'd surely prefer to have some agreement by biggest players than voting like that.

I don't think it is fair to exclude the "little" players in a decision that will affect them too.

Just because a player doesn't have a realistic chance of getting 1st place in the game, he might still enjoy playing his turns and learning more about the game. It wouldn't seem right to submit a big rollback or force stales on them without allowing them the same chance to weigh in as everyone else.

[Kuritza]

Originally Posted by SciencePro

Okay obviously I wasn't clear before. Let me say it a little louder: YOU CAN SUGGEST WHATEVER OPTION YOU WANT! Please do that now. If people are interested in whatever option you come up with they can re-submit their vote.

I already voiced my opinion, in the very beginning. We should have just continued because 3-turns rollback and forced stales are absurd. Bad stuff happens, there's nobody to blame for it. Continue if you can.

Ok, we tried to make an agreement, we suggested some variants. Micah did, I did, you did. We tried. But in my opinion its either everybody agrees on something, or we just go on as is.
I can assure you that I will quit this game if we rollback 3 turns after our democratic poll. Or, for example, if we decide on 3 forced stales with one turn in-between, and Ermor takes that opportunity to raid the hell out of me somehow.
Or is Man going AI because of these stales a better result than Ermor going AI?
If we cant continue normally, we should close this game without a winner.

P.S.

Well, I have another solution. There are 10 players in this game; if one player can ask for a 3-turns rollback, so can others, right?
I vote for a 30-turns rollback. Then its fair for everyone!

[Ossa]

/givecookie_to_Kuritza

Well said.

[Kuritza]

Then again, just closing the game is still punishing these of us who didnt stale and just want to keep playing. ^^

[SciencePro]

okay so I tried to help the group come to a fair solution. But obviously I have failed completely as a leader.

Since my approval rating is hovering at exactly 0% there is no point to me continuing as admin. The admin password is painintheass

Good luck to anyone who wants to step up and take over.