> We clearly won, and everyone of the enemy (except one) seems
to see
> it that way.
And that is his choice. I understand that you don't like it but
it doesn't remove his right to obstinately continue if he so
wishes. What if he thought he could get a couple of stand-by
players involved?
Gavin
(Clint's never going to leave the office again. Every time he
goes away, the list sprouts a talkfest! <g>)
And that is the point of the conversation. For the greater good, changing the rules to prevent a lone hold-out from keeping a boring game going another 5-10 turns.
As you say, at this time it is the lone hold-out's right to annoy the hell out of 12 people. However, I'm not convinced it should be their right. The question was posed to get other's opinions. Should a game be automatically ended by GSI once it has clearly become a bug hunt?
Frankly, you saying "it is his right", does not add to this conversation. We know what the current rules are. We are trying to discuss what the rule "should be".
SHOULD IT be the right of a lone hold-out, to continue a game that has clearly been dominated by a given team.
> > We clearly won, and everyone of the enemy (except one) seems
>to see
> > it that way.
>
>And that is his choice. I understand that you don't like it but
>it doesn't remove his right to obstinately continue if he so
>wishes. What if he thought he could get a couple of stand-by
>players involved?
>
>Gavin
>(Clint's never going to leave the office again. Every time he
>goes away, the list sprouts a talkfest! <g>)
And that is the point of the conversation. For the greater good,
changing
the rules to prevent a lone hold-out from keeping a boring game
going
another 5-10 turns.
As you say, at this time it is the lone hold-out's right to annoy
the hell
out of 12 people. However, I'm not convinced it should be their
right. The
question was posed to get other's opinions. Should a game be
automatically
ended by GSI once it has clearly become a bug hunt?
Frankly, you saying "it is his right", does not add to this
conversation.
We know what the current rules are. We are trying to discuss what
the rule
"should be".
SHOULD IT be the right of a lone hold-out, to continue a game that
has
clearly been dominated by a given team.
If the 2:1 default wasn't agreed to by the players before the game
started absolutely. You seem to think that just because you
dominated the game and the opposition minus one lost the will to
continue you should be declared victors. What if Winston Churchill
had taken that position in the summer of 1940? If you want to be the
winners kill him quit expecting Clint to end the game for you.
If the 2:1 default wasn't agreed to by the players before the game
started absolutely. You seem to think that just because you
dominated the game and the opposition minus one lost the will to
continue you should be declared victors. What if Winston
Churchill
had taken that position in the summer of 1940? If you want to be
the
winners kill him quit expecting Clint to end the game for you.
Again, we are taken out of context. What I started this thread with
was only an EXAMPLE of a bug game ruining the fun for 12 players.
The example was 41 and it just so happens to be a NKA game. We
don't expect Clint to say, yeah, majority of players don't like
having to chase bugs so I think I'll end game 41.
What we do expect is that Clint will take the surrender from the
other team's captain(he was CC'd in the surrender). Both teams
voted in a captain before the game began. Throughout the game, the
captain's had the final word in everything. Players were told not
to go to Clint but to the team captains and this is the way things
worked in our game. When the other team's captain declared my team
(actually Keith's team) the victors, the game was over. We don't
know why the game was processed and think it was just a
misunderstanding. I'll guess we'll find out soon.
Generally I assume that the TC speaks on behalf of the team - saves a lot of confusion (for us and the teams). In this case the TC surrendered on behalf of the team which in every case before hand I took to be a team drop. When we received Frank's orders (after contacting him to be sure that's what he wanted) we run the game - unfortunately I was away on the day so wasn't able to clearly implement our policy here but I think it got sorted correctly.
Players (winning side) sometimes like to put in a final turn, to achieve their VCs, try thing out etc . We have to process the final turn to end the game officially and to get the end of game standings. If we're not sure that every player on the team is dropping (a proviso just in case as sometimes players forget that they are dropping or have sent in a turn early for the dropping team) we ask that the to-be-winning team sends in orders to run if they want to. (We get quite a few last minute changes of mind here - games drop or continue at the last moment with little time for us to contact everyone).
Other points:
Payment in advance for many turns I can't see as an option. If we had a bigger player base we could support it but at present I don't think that's feasible. I generally try to have a list of 1 of each of 1000, 1650, 2950 2wk turnaround games for players to join (with 1000 I chat to the players to get an agreement on the specific variant of that game that will be played be it Normal, NKA, LAS or other). Anything else is much harder to fill.
Dropouts generally are not a problem to get filled. It used to be, no longer is.
We don't intend to implement the >2:1 rule for ending games. However, as part of any Grudge game agreement I would advise both TCs to come to an agreement on this and the One Ring before agreeing to play against each other (plus any other variant rules they want). Then send an email confirming any modifications to the normal rules to me and we're then able to implement that as a rule in that game. (In that case as it is a Grudge game I will assume that the TC speaks for the rest of the team. Any problems between the individual player and TC are to be resolved between them in that case - nothing to do with us.)
Grudge teams are separate from teams. ME is a Team game but there is a variant called a Grudge game where special rules generally apply - these rules are not very clear and open to interpretation and we'll leave it at that...
I hope that helps.
Clint
What we do expect is that Clint will take the surrender from the
···
other team's captain(he was CC'd in the surrender). Both teams
voted in a captain before the game began. Throughout the game, the
captain's had the final word in everything. Players were told not
to go to Clint but to the team captains and this is the way things
worked in our game. When the other team's captain declared my team
(actually Keith's team) the victors, the game was over. We don't
know why the game was processed and think it was just a
misunderstanding.
