Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Miscellaneous information about using the site.

Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby diploguy » 18 Mar 2018, 05:01

By doing so you're giving the replacement player a "move" order that no one else had the chance to plan for. Allow me to illustrate.

In a recent game I and another nation were close to eliminating a particular nation. We knew we had to be careful how we did this because we could end up allowing him to retreat into our flank. We were talking about our orders to ensure this wouldn't happen when this nation surrendered. No one replaced it for the Spring orders so we made different plans. Then in the Fall I was waiting for it to be replaced. It wasn't so we made plans that didn't include protecting the unwanted retreating areas. We had successfully eliminated the nation... until it got replaced during the retreat phase and was able to retreat into our flank. It's a critical point in the game and this extra time now to chase this guy down may just toss the stalemate lines towards a solo win.

"Well you should have seen it coming..." We did. We were planning for it. Are we really supposed to make orders as if there's still a person playing it... just in case? Sure there's an unfair advantage when you're neighboring a surrendered nation. And we used that knowledge to gain in other ways I suppose. I would rather not have gained but dealt with the retreating issue first though.

Is this just a "I learnt my lesson" thing or does this sound a little unfair and should be fixed?
diploguy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 144
Joined: 07 Nov 2011, 03:45
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1130
All-game rating: 1179
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby nanooktheeskimo » 18 Mar 2018, 05:05

Learnt your lesson.

That nobody is entering orders for a country should never be the expectation, and it is a gamble anytime you proceed as if nobody will. Some gambles pay off, others don't. Lesson learned.
Platinum Classicist
(h/t lordelindel)

I am your (co-) Leader.

GM of Sengoku, Heptarchy 14.

NorthEast

Need a forum game GM'ed? PM me!

Mod (but I'm normally not talking as one)
User avatar
nanooktheeskimo
 
Posts: 7352
Joined: 19 Jun 2014, 19:52
Location: East TN
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1225
All-game rating: 1407
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby asudevil » 18 Mar 2018, 05:07

You should always make orders to plan for him to be playing. Cause if anything, the fact that you DIDNT allows you to be more aggressive than you would have been if the original schmuck hadn't quit. So if the original player had been playing, or if someone had picked up the spot...you would have made more careful, cautious moves...which would have slowed you down and ... dare I say ... "balanced" the game. Instead, you were hoping to get lucky to get to a stalemate line that this retreat now is going to screw up. Which again means that if the guy had never quit...you wouldn't have been able to GET to that stalemate line.

So...yeah...lesson learned...not broken.
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.

Want to play fantasy football this season here...Reigning Champion
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16422
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1377
All-game rating: 1531
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby diploguy » 19 Mar 2018, 03:40

asudevil wrote:You should always make orders to plan for him to be playing. Cause if anything, the fact that you DIDNT allows you to be more aggressive than you would have been if the original schmuck hadn't quit. So if the original player had been playing, or if someone had picked up the spot...you would have made more careful, cautious moves...which would have slowed you down and ... dare I say ... "balanced" the game. Instead, you were hoping to get lucky to get to a stalemate line that this retreat now is going to screw up. Which again means that if the guy had never quit...you wouldn't have been able to GET to that stalemate line.

So...yeah...lesson learned...not broken.


and now the replacement player missed his Spring orders for his 1 piece...

Okay, lesson learnt.
diploguy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 144
Joined: 07 Nov 2011, 03:45
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1130
All-game rating: 1179
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby asudevil » 19 Mar 2018, 06:27

diploguy wrote:
asudevil wrote:You should always make orders to plan for him to be playing. Cause if anything, the fact that you DIDNT allows you to be more aggressive than you would have been if the original schmuck hadn't quit. So if the original player had been playing, or if someone had picked up the spot...you would have made more careful, cautious moves...which would have slowed you down and ... dare I say ... "balanced" the game. Instead, you were hoping to get lucky to get to a stalemate line that this retreat now is going to screw up. Which again means that if the guy had never quit...you wouldn't have been able to GET to that stalemate line.

So...yeah...lesson learned...not broken.


and now the replacement player missed his Spring orders for his 1 piece...

Okay, lesson learnt.


That doesn't stun me at all
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.

Want to play fantasy football this season here...Reigning Champion
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16422
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1377
All-game rating: 1531
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Don't allow replacements to enter during retreats

Postby NJLonghorn » 26 Jul 2018, 20:25

diploguy wrote:Is this just a "I learnt my lesson" thing or does this sound a little unfair and should be fixed?


As others have hinted at but not explicitly said -- not only is it not "unfair", but it is the only fair thing that could have happened. Getting a chance to be more aggressive because some a-hat quit is unfair. Getting punished for trying to capitalize on the unfair advantage is exactly what should have happened.

I wish the culture here was to forgo such opportunities. It's kind of like in a bicycle race when a contender has a flat at a pivotal moment. The prevailing ethic is for all of the other contenders to soft-pedal until the tire (or tyre??) can be replaced and the unlucky rider can catch up. Any rider who sprints ahead to capitalize on the other's misfortune deserves to have a flat of his own.

Jeffrey
Classicists, Aspiring Bronze Silver Gold Bronze Member
I have never surrendered and never NMR'd, and hope to keep that alive. Never mind, the perfect run has come to an end. Dammit, DAMMIT, DAMMIT.
User avatar
NJLonghorn
Premium Member
 
Posts: 218
Joined: 07 Sep 2017, 23:41
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1187
All-game rating: 1307
Timezone: GMT-5


Return to Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests