Posts: 15,441
Threads: 115
Joined: Apr 2007
(July 17th, 2013, 12:49)WilliamLP Wrote: So we've got a reload that arguably shouldn't have been granted
No, it absolutely should have been granted because of the rules and precedent in this game. Maybe the rules are dumb, fine, but I would remind you that we argued against most of the rules that are in place.
Anyway, redoing trivial misclicks that won't change the outcome of anything is crazy, and I have no idea why we would do that. We're still going to take 2 cities, move forward towards the German army with 1-movers, and send our sentry & spare Knights up into the northern tundra.
Posts: 6,505
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
(July 17th, 2013, 12:59)scooter Wrote: Anyway, redoing trivial misclicks that won't change the outcome of anything is crazy, and I have no idea why we would do that. We're still going to take 2 cities, move forward towards the German army with 1-movers, and send our sentry & spare Knights up into the northern tundra.
Devil's advocate: If they won't change anything why fix them? The reason NOT to fix them is pretty clear...
NOT saying one way or the other what my own opinion is here, I just feel there are a few questionable justifications being used.
Posts: 6,686
Threads: 246
Joined: Aug 2004
Are we seriously even discussing this?  No, we're not going to repeat obvious accidental misclicks when we redo the turn tonight. This is exactly the kind of hyper-nitpicking that makes Realms Beyond obnoxious at times. Give it a rest.
Posts: 1,285
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2009
I agree with scooter when he said the reload was justifiably granted.
Also, I think we should *not* repeat the accidental mis-clicks.
Kalin
Posts: 6,505
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
(July 17th, 2013, 13:38)Sullla Wrote: Are we seriously even discussing this?
I don't think we're REALLY seriously discussing it. I think William is serious, and I felt the "play differently" position was attacking him with a weak-defense of that view, but I think the number of people who both care and want to repeat the misclick is very small, and certainly not enough to overthrow our dictator turnplayer 
Probably everything that wasn't William's actual post or an agreement/disagreement to it, including my post, should have gone in the rant thread though.
Posts: 8,838
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
If this were an RB game, William would be right, and I don't think there is any harm for bringing it up for discussion.
Darrell
Posts: 17,738
Threads: 82
Joined: Nov 2005
(July 17th, 2013, 14:31)darrelljs Wrote: If this were an RB game, William would be right, and I don't think there is any harm for bringing it up for discussion.
Darrell
Why don't we run it by the admin? I only say that because a third reload of the turn would be awful
Suffer Game Sicko
Dodo Tier Player
Posts: 2,313
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2010
This is dumb. Do what makes us win. Despite protestations to the contrary, we do that anyway.
Completed: SG2-Wonders or Else!; SG3-Monarch Can't Hold Me; WW3-Surviving Wolf; PBEM3-Replacement for Timmy of Khmer; PBEM11-Screwed Up Huayna Capac of Zulu; PBEM19-GES, Roland & Friends (Mansa of Egypt); SG4-Immortality Scares Me
July 17th, 2013, 14:47
(This post was last modified: July 17th, 2013, 15:00 by pindicator.)
Posts: 17,738
Threads: 82
Joined: Nov 2005
(July 17th, 2013, 14:44)Gold Ergo Sum Wrote: This is dumb. Do what makes us win. Despite protestations to the contrary, we do that anyway.
For game strategy and diplo, absolutely.
For what could be seen as a rules violation? That's potentially toxic
Edit: This is a bad argument by me. If it's in the ruled to allow a reload for misclicks then we are 100% clear for fixing our misclicks here
Suffer Game Sicko
Dodo Tier Player
July 17th, 2013, 14:50
(This post was last modified: July 17th, 2013, 14:52 by darrelljs.)
Posts: 8,838
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
<snip, moving to rant thread>
|
