|
|
|
|
|
March 26th, 2009, 12:52 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Actually, I added 24 hours... the hosting schedule was mixed up with the last llamasever glitch and it was on 48 hours.
|
March 26th, 2009, 03:13 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 790
Thanks: 7
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Thanks, i really didn't notice it .
|
March 26th, 2009, 07:13 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 3,465
Thanks: 511
Thanked 162 Times in 86 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Hi, I'm back from my vacation and will take over Caelum again.
Thank you so much Calmon for subbing for me.
|
March 28th, 2009, 04:41 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 3,465
Thanks: 511
Thanked 162 Times in 86 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Are we still on 72h?
I'm sorry guys but for me this is way too short a turnaround for that late in the game. I find it too stressing. Considering that there's always some reason for delay and that actual turn around is closer to 4-5 days I don't see why we should stick with 72h.
Anyway, as I was saying, for me its too stressing. I'm afraid that unless its changed I'll have no choice but to bow out of this game.
Had I known this game won't accommodate the turnaround according to game progress (like most MP games) I'd have passed from the first place. So IMO this is something worth mentioning in the first post of the game thread so that players be aware of that from the beginning.
|
March 28th, 2009, 06:50 AM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ghent, Belgium
Posts: 1,333
Thanks: 39
Thanked 59 Times in 43 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Well, while my personal preference would be to try and keep it at 72h - while granting extensions when necessary - to try and keep the game moving a little bit, I've also allways been of the opinion that if the pace is to fast for some, then it should be slowed. So, bottom line, if WL feels he can't keep up with 72h, I'll back him.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Amhazair For This Useful Post:
|
|
March 28th, 2009, 12:48 PM
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,226
Thanks: 12
Thanked 86 Times in 48 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Above is seconded.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Micah For This Useful Post:
|
|
March 28th, 2009, 06:35 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Quote:
Originally Posted by WraithLord
Are we still on 72h?
Had I known this game won't accommodate the turnaround according to game progress (like most MP games) I'd have passed from the first place. So IMO this is something worth mentioning in the first post of the game thread so that players be aware of that from the beginning.
|
Well, obviously the hosting has progressed as the game has progressed, if people are ready to take it up the next notch to 96 hours that's ok with me.
|
March 28th, 2009, 08:41 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Irving, TX
Posts: 3,207
Thanks: 54
Thanked 60 Times in 35 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
No, I cannot agree to 96 hour. That level of hosting time is never agreeable to me. 72 hour is the max.
I'm sorry if you must bow out because of this Wraith. But then, you are really not much of a factor in this game anyway. Right?
__________________
Be forewarned, anything I post is probably either 1) Sophomoric humor, 2) Satire, 3) A gross exaggeration of the power I currently possess, 4) An outright lie, or 5) Drunken ramblings.
I occasionally post something useful.
|
March 28th, 2009, 09:24 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 3,465
Thanks: 511
Thanked 162 Times in 86 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
Well as the 3rd in the majority of the scores I wouldn't quite put it that way.
Yes, clearly Mari and Bogarus are the leading nations but that does mean I'm not at all a factor in the game. Besides I'd venture I'm much more of a factor in this game than you are
As the majority of the players support my request I don't see why I should bow out of the game b/c of your preference. I find your insistence strange and inconsiderate, had 72h been that important to you why didn't you rail at all the delays the game for so many turns now.
Bottom line - If 72h stays then I'm out.
I'll let QM take the final call on this one.
|
March 28th, 2009, 09:59 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: The Artifacts Game - [ running ]
I do believe Lingchih was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. In any case, I have already set it to 96h.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to quantum_mechani For This Useful Post:
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|