Hi all!
Some time ago we had a thread about communication in GB games. Clint stated that he would think up a limited system like a 100 word diplo every five turns. I would greatly appreciate that, not only because I think I am wasting time and money in one of my GB games. So did we get any further regarding this issue?
If you feel so strongly about wasting time and money, then the obvious thing to change is your involvement in the Gunboat game, not the game itself. It was specifically designed as a “quiet, independent” game. That’s what you got. Learn and move on.
Current GB games were to remain as they were. Any new GB games would possibly have the communication, but the details needed to be hammered out. Also, I don’t think anyone is starting a new GB anytime soon.
They generally dont change the “house rules” of a game in progress. The three nation GB game they offered a while back did include the limited communication rule, I think it was 100 words or less once every five or ten turns.
So, I suspect its a work in progress. They havent offered any GB games in a while though…
If you exchange a diplo every five turns, the game will still be quiet and independent. IMO it would not spoil the general idea of the game to know what the other nations of your alliance are up to and if continuing to play makes any sense - in either case that you are fighting a losing game or that you are bored because nothing happens.
The alternative would be just to drop wthout anybody knowing - THAT will spoil the fun of others, since Clint is obviously not very successful replacing any dropped GB positions.
Perhaps, but I would think replacing a dropped GB position would be damn hard to do to begin with…
I’m enjoying my GB game, winning or losing. Would diplos every X number of turns change the game? Yes. Would it change my strategy, likely not. I like being able to do what I want to do without any concern for my teammates. I just trust that they’re smart enough to keep their nations afloat and moving forward towards defeating any enemies present. And if none are present, then they should be going out to find some.
Propose an idea for a GB scenario, gather up enough players to generate interest, and Clint will take care of the rest. 
Hell, if it sounds good enough, I might join in as well.
GunBoat Diplomacy:
send 1 gold to their capital. = I need gold
Send 2 gold to capital= I have gold to spare
Send 1 leather to capital= I need military help
Send 2 leather to capital= I have military avialable to help
Send 1 food to capital= I am about to lose this position.
etc…
Brian H.
The alternative would be just to drop wthout anybody knowing - THAT will spoil the fun of others, since Clint is obviously not very successful replacing any dropped GB positions.
We’re doing okay with replacing nations. Lots of players have tried it out and realised that they prefer the normal game format.
GunBoat Diplomacy:
Anyone doing this will be removed from the Gunboat game. You are NOT allowed to diplome in any format in most of the games (and strict rules for the other). Same as not naming characters “Attack SindarT6” for example - not allowed. Any attempt to side-step the rules - similar action will be taken by us. Have a nice day…
Clint:D
Hey Clint–
Are you aware that it is illegal to communicate in Bridge, Spades, or team based Hearts as well? Do you think the players in these games communicate? Do you think it can be stopped? Good Luck you are gonna need it!
Brian H.
It’s very easy for Clint & Co to check such things as they get all the orders (except when playing in the game).
But why would you want to do such a thing? Why sign up for a Gunboat game with the intent to bend/break the rules with a pre-determined system of communication.
It would be totally ruining the game for those of us who sign up for the challenge/learning experience.
Just my 2 øre.
So why don’t we make a poll?
If the majority of players agrees, why not change house rules in running games?
I am in GB games 18 and 136 and I vote for a 100 word diplo every five turns, i.e. 20, 25 and so on.
I would never even attempt to communicate in a Gunboat game. Besides being against the rules, it would not only ruin the game for others but would also ruin the game for the player communicating; as this would defeat the very point of playing. The example of communication I gave was crude and simple. My point is that for the few people who would abuse the rules, it would be entirely possible to do so. There are far more sophisticated ways of communicating that the ME staff would never catch even examing every single order. I will NOT post methodologies for accomplishing such cheating however, so please do not ask.
As far as a gunboat game that ALLOWED some limited communication as has been suggested, I do not think we need a pole. My experience is that the ME staff is HAPPY to run any kind of game if there is interest including special mods.
Brian H.
Yeah, but it has been said that there would be no changes to the games already running - and they are what I am interested in. If the majority of players IN these special games, i.e. 18 and 136 are against communication, I would meekly retreat to my hole…
Hmmm it is generally not a good idea to change the rules under which a game operates mid stream, unless there is a serious bug of some sort. Of course in this case my opinion is irrelevant. Since the game is ongoing only the opinions of the people in the game matter
Brian H.
Are you aware that it is illegal to communicate in Bridge, Spades, or team based Hearts as well? Do you think the players in these games communicate? Do you think it can be stopped? Good Luck you are gonna need it!
Yep - I recall that organisers brought in screens for Bridge. In Bridge you have the bidding system as a method of communication but you’re not allowed to say “play a Heart partner and the contract will go down!” or any form of non-card playing (in tempo) communication which the opposition has access to. The problem with screens (to stop facial or similar gestures - ie hidden communication between partnerships) was that it detracted from the game.
In the same way any form of communication between players would detract from the Gunboat game and hence is not allowed. I can imagine a way to hide the game number etc but determined players could break it. We keep an eye on some aspects of the game that I don’t want to advertise here for cheating just in case.
So far I haven’t had a confirmed case of players cheating in this way (communication), and one cheat we caught (for other reasons). We have to trust that the players are not abusing our and other players’ trust here. So rather than needing luck - rather a sense of fair play which so far seems to be justified so far.
Clint
I am playing in active gunboat games. Some I have picked up, and others I have been in from the beginning. All equally entertaining. I strongly prefer no communication.
Clint–
The best players in bridge, spades, and team based hearts communicate all the time even, (and especially) when there is money on the line. The communication is not verbal nor is it by any type of gesture. It involves certain methodologies as to what cards are played under what circumstances. As the cards ARE the game they cannot be hidden, and this communication cannot be stopped. Such methods could easily be adapted to ME. Again I do not want to give too much detail on this as it would only encourage misbehavior.
Brian H.