I would gladly eat my words if this is a mistake and Frank
accidently put in orders last turn. I really don't think it is
though as his team let him know to drop at least a week before the
last turn was processed. Clint also delayed the game a day in order
to see why he wanted to continue to play. It's also been a week
since the last turn was processed. He's been e-mailed by Clint more
than once and by our team members too.
Players like this really bug me! 
Hi Joel,
Have you heard it from Frank Gingrich himself that he wants to
carry
on playing despite being vastly outnumbered? Is there any chance
that
this is just a simple mistake and that he sent orders in early on
in
the turn before the team decided to drop and they ended up being
processed? If Frank has read this I'd certainly be interested in
hearing why he is continuing with the game, if it isn't a mistake
then the only reason I can think of is to hold on until the
opposition drops so he wins by default and improves his player
rating
(I assume that ME games are calculating the player ratings now
even
though we haven't had any info released yet). If this is the case
then I think that it is clear that something will have to be done
to
prevent this in the future. The two to one ratio rule would be a
good
guide for stopping a game and so it gets my vote as a possible
solution to the problem. Even if it isn't a rule that is set in
stone
I think that Clint should stop a game if he feels the opposition
have
no chance of an overall win. If the weaker team can persuade him
otherwise then thats fair enough and I'd trust his judgement in
the
matter. I doubt it is something that would pop up too often as
most
teams know when they are beaten and do the decent thing (even if
it's
just to use the money on a new game instead with better prospects).
For the moment though I'd like to hear what Frank has to say on
the
matter before any hate mail starts appearing
Chris Guise.
> I'm currently in game 41 where on T11 the opposing team's
captain
> told our team and ME Games that their team was folding and would
> hand us the victory. T12 rolls around with us fully expecting
the
> game to end and low and behold we find a single player (Frank
> Gingrich who I will immediately attack in any future games
unless
he
> apologizes to our team) on their team has decided to stick it
out
> against our team of 12 players.
>
> So we now have a 12 vs 1 game that will take awhile to complete
> because this is a no assassinate/kidnap game and his position is
> hard to get to with armies(west of the S.Kingdom/south of the
> mountains). We have 1 idiot who has decided to try and get the
win
> hoping our team will drop. This is exactly why Clint should
> implement the 2 to 1 ratio and game ends rule.
>
> 12 players vs 6, game ends. 10 players vs 5, game ends. 8
players
> vs 4, game ends. In any game that I've ever played once you get
> down to 2 to 1 ratio of players, everyone at that point knows
the
> game is over and it's just dragging on because a couple players
are
> dragging their feet hoping the other team will drop from boredom
and
> they get the win. At 2 to 1 odds, I think players on the 2 side
> should be allowed to claim victory. This allows everyone to
start
···
a
> new game that is fun instead of continuing with a boring game of
> hunt every last one of them until the are dead.
>
> So what do you say Clint?
>
> -Joel Mason
