Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

I like Verjigorm's answer better. The halting problem and the busy beaver problem are counterexamples to "nothing is impossible" that you can work out on paper. Division by zero is something my computer does just fine - when I ask for x/0 it tell me "undefined", which is a good answer. The claim that computers will never be able to render judgments is an expression of pessimism about AI that AFAIK isn't as widely accepted as the halting problem.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

You people get deep. :)
I just use the "impossible" thing to try and spark people into actually asking for things. No matter whether its a consult job, or something in a forum like this, I have a hard time getting them to ask for "impossible" things. I have a hacker attitude that makes it hard for me to put time in on something that just amounts to lots of "doing" and no creative thinking. Ive turned down paying jobs because they couldnt come up with anything challenging.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

I just sat down to finalize my moves, only to find out that the game has hosted after 24 hours. I thought the 36 hour limit was accepted. Anyhow, I can't afford another stale, I'm battling for my life.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

It did seem to be accepted.
But by the time I had accepted that, taking it down and putting it back with 36 was abit much.

Now that it has hosted I took it down, changed the timer to 36, and put it back up.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

Well, that was fast.
Anyhow - it's pretty easy for me, as I said before, I cannot afford another stale. You can go back to 24 hours as far as I'm concerned. I won't be making any more moves.
Sorry guys, it was fun while it lasted.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

Yeah its not every time that I happen to be sitting right at the machine when it hosts in order to stop it and reset the timer. But its nice when it happens that way since people dont see a wrong timer for a few hours then complain because they planned on the time it originally showed. Its best to try and keep the countdown display on the game and in the check webpage to be un-fluctuating

So I guess we will be looking for a sub for Jotunheim which is in a very strong position in the game.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

I posted the opening in the appropriate forum, we'll see.


Perhaps you (Gandelf) should have acknowledged that a mistake had been made and made a rollback (as I requested immediately after the hosting) at the same time you reset the timer. Mistakes happen, and how one handles them is the important thing.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

??? Im not sure how appropriate it would be for me to acknowledge that you made a mistake. Did you want to request a rollback to the group?

The timers, both in the game and in the webpage, showed correctly the whole time so it wasnt a server error.
The switch to 36 hours for the weekend and after went rather more smoothly than normal I thought since I was able to catch it right at hosting time. I thought it would solve your problem.

I dont see anything about another timeframe for the change being mentioned by me. I will look thru the posts again.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

Regardless of the outcome, I at least move that this turn be sufficiently extended to allow for the finding of a substitute. Jotunheim's in too strong a position for me to be comfortable with them going stale or AI; Ermor was one thing, with his armies essentially gone, but Jotunheim still has a very good shot at beating one or both of its opponents.

Re: STACKERS, newbie game, (started)
 

I still don't understand why Jorus is quitting. ok so he made a mistake and staled. big deal... he's still in a strong position, he can recover and get back on track, why throwing all this **** at Gandalf and quitting...?