.com.unity Forums - MP CarCrash - EA Game - CBM

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Multiplayer and AARs (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=145)

- - MP: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running) (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=42834)

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazzepi (Post 695222)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Executor (Post 695220)

And there go the invading forces of Sauromatia...

Don't worry. Replacements are already en route.

Jazzepi

I'm not worried, furthermore Pangaea welcomes any replacements that are due to arrive.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Executor (Post 695225)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazzepi (Post 695222)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Executor (Post 695220)

And there go the invading forces of Sauromatia...

Don't worry. Replacements are already en route.

Jazzepi

I'm not worried, furthermore Pangaea welcomes any replacements that are due to arrive.

OH YOU SHOULD BE >:|

Jazzepi

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Just had a delay game request from Executor due to a malfunctioning keyboard. The message was a bit unclear because of this problem, but I will delay the game 8 hours just in case. I chose 8 hours because that allows me to check again in the morning (GMT) to see if Executor's problem has sorted itself out or not.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

I have PM-ed Executor to see what the status is regarding his computer problems, as I have not yet heard back from him since he sent me his original delay request.

So this is just a heads up to everyone that I will be delaying the game again if necessary to accomodate Executor's problem. He didn't mention any specific period of time in connection with his request (typing with a broken keyboard naturally presents problems) and have so far only delayed the game by 8 hours. The current turn is only waiting for Executor's .2h file, so at this stage I am intending to keep a close eye on the hosting, and delay hosting as required until Executor sorts his problems out.

So apologies to everyone for the current delay and hold-up. But I doubt if any of us has ever not had any computer problems at some point in time, so hope it's easy for everyone to understand the problems this sort of thing can cause. Executor has been one of the forums most active players over the past year, so I am certain he will get back to us asap.

Sorry again, and will keep you all updated as best I can.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

@ All - Executor has sorted his keyboard out, so he shouldn't have any more problems there at least.

There is currently one hour left before hosting, and Jazzepi's turn has not yet been submitted. I have posted before about how I prefer being a pro-active admin with regards avoiding possible stales if I spot them in time, so I will be extending the hosting time by a few hours if it appears Jazzepi is likely to stale.

Edit: Hosting delayed by 6 hours to help prevent Jazzepi from staling.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

My mistake. After reviewing my PMs, Yomi and Sauro don't have any standing NAPs.

Jazzepi

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

I have just delayed the game by a few hours as it looked likely a double round of stales was going to happen. (Sauro and Atlantis)

At this stage of the game (turn 47), can I please ask all the players how thay are managing with the current 30 hour hosting schedule? I know there are a lot of wars going on at the moment, and I have had to delay the last two turns in order to avoid stale turns occuring (which is a decision I alone made as admin).

My current thought is to increase the hosting schedule slightly, perhaps to 36 or 48 hours. Please let me know your thoughts on this, as I'd like to try and find some sort of balance if possible between keeping a good pace going, and avoiding players staling or rushing their turns.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazzepi (Post 695950)

To the rest of you, a warning :

Calahan is a liar and a thief. He's broken his NAP with us by moving 3+ stealth armies through our provinces to purposefully activate our PD. While at first I thought it was just a fluke, he still has armies nested in our territories. I would not be surprised if he is in cahoots with Caelum.

Jazzepi

Excuse me Jazzepi, but what NAP are you talking about? I have only signed one NAP in the whole game, and it was not with your nation of Sauromatia.

I know we are currently having a difference of opinion on another thread, on a completely seperate issue, so I would kindly ask that any personal feelings you have towards me do not spill over onto this thread as a result.

Edit: May I also remind everyone of the rules regarding NAP's for this game as written on the game status page.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calahan (Post 685299)

Situation Regarding NAP's etc (Non-Aggression Pacts)
No NAP agreements in this game will be considered as inviolable in any way. You are free to sign as many NAP's as you wish, but you do so at your own risk. Also, I personally think that in a game like Dominions 3 there isn't really any such thing as an NAP, since in theory everyone is aiming to win, and there can be only one winner. So all NAP's should instead be considered as Mutual Benefit Agreements, whereby both nations benefit for whatever reason(s) from not engaging in hostilities against the other nation. But the moment one side is no longer benefiting from such an agreement, then that is the moment they are most likely to break them. So if you are ever surprised by a nation breaking an agreement, then maybe you were mistaken with regards to just how important that agreement was to them, or how much they could gain from suddenly attacking you.

Also, if any NAP (or like agreement) is broken in any way, be it intentional, accidental, or whatever, then you have no right what-so-ever to complain about it in the game thread. Please keep this in mind. Any disputes regarding these matters should be dealt with via PM's.

It clears says here that if any NAP's are broken, you have "no right what-so-ever" to complain about it in the game thread. Please can I ask everyone to bare this in mind for the rest of the game.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calahan (Post 695951)

My current thought is to increase to hosting schedule slightly, perhaps to 36 or 48 hours. Please let me know your thoughts on this, as I'd like to try and find some sort of balance if possible between keeping a good pace going, and avoiding players staling or rushing their turns.

While I don't need any increase in "thinking time" I do appreciate the need for diplomacy time when players live on opposite sides of the planet. 48 hours would be tolerable, BUT I gotta say that I strongly disagree with the policy of postponing the turn whenever it looks like someone's going to stale. If you're going to do that, you may as well remove the time limit altogether.

If someone is going to miss the deadline, all they have to do is ask for an extension, which takes 2 seconds assuming they have connectivity. If they can't be bothered doing that, then a stale is appropriate, IMHO.

Re: CarCrash - EA Game - CBM - (Running)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapmeister (Post 695954)

Thank you for your feedback Zapmeister. I know my policy of extending the hosting to avoid stales is definitely not the norm for games, and may certainly not be to everyone's liking. But I personally have a serious issue with games becoming unbalanced because of stales / AI-turning etc. so I do try to avoid these things happening if I can.

But I do take your viewpoint that there is very little point having a 'deadline' if I am just going to extend it whenever anyone looks in danger of missing it (although I am not always around). I thought there was going to be two nations staling this turn, but the Sauromatia turn appeared very shortly after I extended the hosting (I extended it 10-15 minutes before the deadline).

My apologies to everyone if my decision to do this is affecting the flow of the game, and I will not take this 'pro-active' stale prevention action again unless someone (other than me) thinks it is a good idea.