[SPOILERS] RB PB7 LURKER Thread

[scooter]

I actually sort of feel bad for LP. Why did this game bother saying "we're not going to legislate double-move rules except for the 2H rule to simulate the 8 second live rule" and then everyone freaks out everytime someone double-moves? Seriously, if you're going to get mad everytime someone does something perfectly legal, why not just use the PB4 ruleset? LP signed up for a game where double-moves were explicity allowed and people jump on him every time he does double-move. Creating a game under one ruleset and then enforcing a different one halfway through is dumb. Someone invokes the word "casual" every time they it up by leaving a settler unprotected like somehow it's supposed to be LP's fault that they ran a settler out into the fog with no defenders.

Don't get me wrong - some of LP's shenanigans HAVE been stupid and I'd be 100% annoyed if I was everyone else too... Just pointing out that they created a ruleset that specifically enabled his kind of play so don't be shocked that one person in an 18-player game is exploiting it. And actually it sounds like Mackseven have done the same exact thing a few times - stuff like ending turn but not moving all units and being sneaky like that is really no different from what LP has done. The only difference is Commodore doesn't seem to blow up like ASM/Azza do.

[darrelljs]

I actually sort of feel bad for LP. Why did this game bother saying "we're not going to legislate double-move rules except for the 2H rule to simulate the 8 second live rule" and then everyone freaks out everytime someone double-moves?

I think plako's intent was for everyone to be on the honor system to abstain from power gaming, precisely to avoid the need for the complicated rules of past pitboss games. That said, I also have some small sympathy for LP, because I don't think he understood this at all. As you say, having even a minor rule gives the impression that anything which meets it is acceptable.

Darrell

[scooter]

That said, I also have some small sympathy for LP, because I don't think he understood this at all. As you say, having even a minor rule gives the impression that anything which meets it is acceptable.

This is probably the better way to say it. It seems to me that 18 players were signing up for about 6 different games here which is why 2/3rds of the players seem unhappy with the game.

[Bigger]

I never really understood the drive to 1upt, anyway. huge armies don't actually take up all that much room in the real world.

not only that, but Firaxis solved the stacking problem pretty effectively in Alpha Centauri, anyway (zone control, plus 20% collateral damage to the entire stack IF a unit was destroyed in the stack). It wasn't 1UPT, but it certainly kept you from stacking more than a dozen or so deep - 5 lost battles and you would lose the entire stack. If the lazy programers really thought SOD were a problem they could have gone back to that.

[Bobchillingworth]

This is probably the better way to say it. It seems to me that 18 players were signing up for about 6 different games here which is why 2/3rds of the players seem unhappy with the game.

I think LP interprets "casual" as meaning "few rules", which iirc was about exactly how this game was pitched.


Most of the other players seem to have decided that a "casual" game for them means "minimally competitive", which is a valid interpretation of the word and perhaps the real intent behind this game, but not actually enforced by any of the rules this game does have.

[Fintourist]

What would be the problem with following rules:
- Moving inside enemy territory is forbidden during the first 8 hours
- Attacking enemy units on neutral ground is forbidden during the first 8 hours

Attacker can still "manipulate" the clock and move in at the last minute, but defender would always have an appropriate time to react.

These rules allow double-moving when defending your own territory, but for an invading stack this should not be a significant problem. IMO these rules would create a suitable advantage for the surprised defender.

[Rowain]

I actually sort of feel bad for LP. Why did this game bother saying "we're not going to legislate double-move rules except for the 2H rule to simulate the 8 second live rule" and then everyone freaks out everytime someone double-moves?

Especially if he really logs out 6-8 hours before the turnroll.
Azza&ASM make so many idiotic moves. I wonder if they don't do it on purpose so they can whine in the player-thread & tarnish LP and have an excuse why they lose.

Creating a game under one ruleset and then enforcing a different one halfway through is dumb. Someone invokes the word "casual" every time they it up by leaving a settler unprotected like somehow it's supposed to be LP's fault that they ran a settler out into the fog with no defenders.

Don't get me wrong - some of LP's shenanigans HAVE been stupid and I'd be 100% annoyed if I was everyone else too... Just pointing out that they created a ruleset that specifically enabled his kind of play so don't be shocked that one person in an 18-player game is exploiting it. And actually it sounds like Mackseven have done the same exact thing a few times - stuff like ending turn but not moving all units and being sneaky like that is really no different from what LP has done.

QFT

[Gazzahk]

I am sorry but I do not think that LP has broken any rules, has he? I asked this before and it was suggested that he had not, has he since?

There is all this 'spirit of the game' thing going on but double moves are not outlawed, nor is logging in more than once ... he may be more intense than others but for everyone it is only a game.

It seems to me that it is the word casual which is where the problem lies. What can it mean? Only build a half hearted stack when attacking or don't defend properly? Is that casual? Log in only once a day, casual enough? Fine if you have time constraints but what if you are able to log in more than once a day and you are interested in the game? Does it make you hyper gamer? Not sure how to play the game indifferently which at times is what seems to be suggested for some players.

It is supposed to be casual yet many are complaining about bad starts, poor resources, double moves, words said in the diplo thread where I thought that it was already agreed that anything goes ... some seem rather super sensitive in a casual game.

Anyway, what is minimally competitive when it is at home? You ought not try to win? Would this describe some of Azza's plays? Certainly casually leaving units undefended... Casual, yes I guess. LP is is hyper competitive because he attacks an unguarded unit. I just don't get it.

Perhaps he should play under an assumed name next time.... That could be interesting if there is a next time.

[scooter]

I am sorry but I do not think that LP has broken any rules, has he? I asked this before and it was suggested that he had not, has he since?

No you asked before and I told you - he blatantly broke the diplo rule twice - once after he'd been warned about it. So double-move shenanigans aside, yes he has.

It seems to me that it is the word casual which is where the problem lies. What can it mean?

I agree with this though.

[scooter]

I think LP interprets "casual" as meaning "few rules", which iirc was about exactly how this game was pitched.

Yeah and this is why I'm sympathetic, because when I saw the signup thread for this game, I interpreted it the same way, and I was surprised when everyone pitched a big hissy-fit over a couple double-moves. My interpretation of "casual" and the double-move "rule" was that casual meant "you will get double-moved a lot - so deal with it and just accept it's part of the game." It seemed everyone else understood it that way too - tons of scouts got intentionally double-moved and killed by warriors and no one got upset. But then someone benefits from several double-moves and then suddenly some people wrote a little revisionist history on the setup of the game to condemn LP.