Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901 - Now an OPTION

Official announcements from the creators

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby super_dipsy » 02 Aug 2011, 21:54

Hello all - this is not really me, because I am on vacation, but instead is an AI clone that the actual me left in case it was needed. Rick just turned me on (don't you dare, Craw!) so that I could answer some questions about this. If I run out of disk space, by the way, my answers may get really slow or I might run out of mysql connections altogether.

The idea was discussed in various places, but I am a little worried that some of the discussions may have happened in my own head...well I did need a holiday. The idea was to stop games being spoilt by NMRs on turn 1. The concept was to reset the game back to waiting for players, as a new game. No, it will NOT show up as a 'game with surrendered countries', so there will NOT be a +1 for taking over the vacant countries. However, there were some choices to make. Some of these have been raised already. The main one was, do you start the game completely fresh again, or do you try to give some continuity. My view was that people in the game are probabloy going to be fed up that some turkey didn't want to be austria or whatever, and that the game was going to have to start all over again; in addition, after playing Italy seven times in a row and finally being gifted England, if the game restarted and I was Italy AGAIN I might be really upset. If it is a Chaos game, I might be really pleased that for once I have got two units next to each other on the board, and again iif the game restarted only for me to lose it I might burst into tears. Then there are all those messages I sent - do I really have to send them again?

So the decision I took was to leave the countries as assigned, which is why the games always go back onto the joinable games list with the vacant countries only offered for new players to take. This is also why I left the generated map the same with games where a random map is generated or random starting countries are assigned.

So to answer some of the questions; no, you will not be able to see any orders because all the orders have been wiped out. You will only be able to see the comms you could see in the first turn 1. You will be the same country. You will see your own comms. The game will restart as a new game apart from that, so it will NOT show up as a restarted game, and you will NOT get a point for joining it. You WILL have to confirm again once there are 7 players just as you did before - why? Because it might be a few days before you get back to 7, and by then your circumstances might have changed, so it is worth getting people to confirm again.

Now to the question of is this unfair to new joiners. Possibly yes, in that the new joiner has no way of knowing this is a restarted game - that is something that perhaps should be changed, but requires a lot more code. However, apart from that, maybe I am just twisted and sad but I see all sorts of possibilities in this restart scenario. I have just set up all my alliances, the game goes back to the beginning and now restarts again. The assumption of course is I will stick with my alliances (!) I guess, ... sounds like a good opportunity to me for a little naughtiness ;) . Is the new player at a disadvantage? Only in the fact that he/she does not know that it is a restarted game in my view.

I think I've covered everything that was asked, let me check. Just to clarify, searching will show this just the same as any other unfilled game, although a clue might be that it WILL be 'selected countries' rather than random or preference or whatever.

However, it may be that it would be better to discuss this idea some more and wait until the real me returns to continue with the idea. It is supposed to be a benefit but it is a big change and there are obviously some issues that need to be adddressed. One option is I could just turn it off until actual me returns. Or we could leave it on and use the time to gather experience to improve it. My real self should be coming back by end of the month at the latest, possibly earlier.

Hang on, I think I missed one. If you want to leave when the game is reset to waiting, you can do so without penalty just as you would do today. But if the game fills back up and you confirm then once the game is back normal rules apply.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 12194
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (931)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby Malevolence » 02 Aug 2011, 23:27

gotta say im a little sad about this new rule, i know it solves a problem, but i like taking advantage of first turn NMRs from my neighbors, haha. Well, looks like those days are over :|
Creator of 1939, Superpowers, Future of the World, Fate of the World, Fantasy CYOC, Outbreak, History of the World, Italian Renaissance Diplomacy, 21st Century Diplomacy, Inheritors
User avatar
Malevolence
 
Posts: 7585
Joined: 20 May 2011, 22:01
Location: Washington, DC
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1049)
All-game rating: (1031)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby estragon0 » 03 Aug 2011, 02:06

The poo-poo head who NMRed the first move will suffer a -1 penalty, yes?
"Silver" member of "The Classicists."
User avatar
estragon0
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 21 Feb 2011, 18:02
Location: Philly, yo
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1020)
All-game rating: (1172)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby Zoterik » 03 Aug 2011, 03:49

Presumably this would take effect before the moves were made known to the players who did issue orders, yes? I don't think any of us want our strategies revealed when the game reverts back to 1900. Forgive me if this was asked already.

Never mind, I just saw that there was a second page. Oy.
His Royal Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and its dominions (History of the World)
ग्रेटर भारत के मौर्य साम्राज्य के सम्राट (Ancient History of the World)
User avatar
Zoterik
 
Posts: 267
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 05:09
Location: Одесса, Украина
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby cs » 03 Aug 2011, 08:16

super_dipsy wrote:Now to the question of is this unfair to new joiners. Possibly yes, in that the new joiner has no way of knowing this is a restarted game - that is something that perhaps should be changed, but requires a lot more code. However, apart from that, maybe I am just twisted and sad but I see all sorts of possibilities in this restart scenario. I have just set up all my alliances, the game goes back to the beginning and now restarts again. The assumption of course is I will stick with my alliances (!) I guess, ... sounds like a good opportunity to me for a little naughtiness ;) . Is the new player at a disadvantage? Only in the fact that he/she does not know that it is a restarted game in my view.


This to me is the biggest issue, but I know how to manage it--don't join games that haven't started unless you create them yourself (or if 1-2 other players have signed up). If we can figure a way to a field to the DB to flag those games as restarts, of course, it's a different story.
User avatar
cs
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: 24 Apr 2009, 23:24
Location: Venice, but moving to Trieste in 1901
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby Uffington Horse » 03 Aug 2011, 08:54

Should there be a penalty for the player who NMR'd in the first place causing all this trouble?
User avatar
Uffington Horse
Premium Member
 
Posts: 249
Joined: 02 Mar 2011, 14:33
Location: Kolodong, NSW, Australia
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1030
All-game rating: 1353
Timezone: GMT+9

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby rick.leeds » 03 Aug 2011, 11:00

Again, covering the question about the penalty to the player who DID NMR, I would imagine if the game is re-starting, then the penalty probably ISN'T applied. But I need to go do what I didn't have the time (or, admittedly, the inclination to do yesterday - lack of sleep is an issue for me at the moment :roll: ) to look at that. It could well be that there would be a penalty written into it for the auto_surrender (in a ranked game, obviously), as this happened in game time. There probably ought to be, but it may need adding (and could be difficult to code if the game ISN'T providing a +1 for taking up the position). I'm sure Dipsy will get back to us on it.

And distinct apologies to Dipsy for pulling him back here :|
World Diplomacy Forum.
Online Resources editor at the Diplomatic Pouch.
Don't let the stepladder get you. Watch where you're stepping. ANY step could be a doozy.
User avatar
rick.leeds
 
Posts: 8360
Joined: 11 Jan 2009, 04:40
Location: Wherever I am, I'm scratching my head.
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1158)
All-game rating: (1070)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby presser84 » 04 Aug 2011, 05:03

estragon0 wrote:The poo-poo head who NMRed the first move will suffer a -1 penalty, yes?


Was wondering this myself.

super_dipsy wrote:Now to the question of is this unfair to new joiners. Possibly yes, in that the new joiner has no way of knowing this is a restarted game - that is something that perhaps should be changed, but requires a lot more code. However, apart from that, maybe I am just twisted and sad but I see all sorts of possibilities in this restart scenario. I have just set up all my alliances, the game goes back to the beginning and now restarts again. The assumption of course is I will stick with my alliances (!) I guess, ... sounds like a good opportunity to me for a little naughtiness . Is the new player at a disadvantage? Only in the fact that he/she does not know that it is a restarted game in my view.


I agree. I think that since it's 1901 (or W1900) there is plenty of time to get in there and get down and dirty with your diplomacy and change some minds. Does it create a little bit more of an uphill battle for the new player? Maybe, That's why think the player who joins should get +1 point and be made aware that they are taking over a surrendered restart.

super_dipsy wrote:If it is a Chaos game, I might be really pleased that for once I have got two units next to each other on the board, and again iif the game restarted only for me to lose it I might burst into tears. Then there are all those messages I sent - do I really have to send them again?


I like to play a lot of chaos games and I feel like this will hurt chaos on the site. I imagine many players, especially ones that don't care about their surrender stats and rankings will keep surrendering in W1900 until they find a favorable game start and the unfavorable surrendered position will likely never be filled. I think chaos should be excluded from this enhancement.
Westeros Diplomacy - GM/creator
Diplomacy of Ice and Fire 2 - GM
Keirador wrote:Stop being a dickasaurus rex.
User avatar
presser84
 
Posts: 4327
Joined: 21 Dec 2010, 23:05
Location: New Jersey, USA
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1460)
All-game rating: (1678)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby WokkaPater » 05 Aug 2011, 03:09

Why don't you just say "screw them, they're joining an active game so they'll of course be at a disadvantage" and go on with your lives. Just make sure they're joining an active game. No need to restart.
I am alive. Sometimes you need a break to keep it that way.
User avatar
WokkaPater
 
Posts: 10331
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 05:34
Location: A swamp of savage bears.
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Protecting games from NMRs in Spring 1901

Postby krossevans » 05 Aug 2011, 10:48

I think it is bad because then the game can just keep starting again if one person can't fill their orders in
User avatar
krossevans
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 20 Jan 2011, 07:25
Location: Australia!!!

PreviousNext

Return to Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest