[Sheap]

Before I get to arguing, I don't want this to in any way disrupt the timely starting of the game. Everyone please get your vote in and once there is a majority I will put up the server

You seem to be in the minority, then: The by-and-large accepted standard is that score graphs should be off

I'm not sure how accepted this standard is. Of the people that weighed in so far it is 50/50 as to who likes score graphs and who doesn't.

it disadvantages nations that have better scouting and spying abilities

Nations with good spies have plenty of advantages already. They can spy on well defended enemy provinces with less risk of being caught, are more likely to have more and better spies in enemy territory when they are needed, and usually have special abilities such as inciting unrest or assassination. The default setting is to have score graphs on, meaning that the "natural" balance of the game is to play with them on.

Most people, upon discovering that they are in bad shape, start wimping out of the game: They go AI, or worse, go AWOL

Which sucks, but (from the game reports I have seen) there are only a few players who will wimp out of a game just when they start to feel they are losing. In most games players like this develop a bad reputation and people stop wanting to play with them. I would also point out that, even in games without score graphs, players still bail whenever they feel like it. So score graphs off does not actually solve this problem. It also seems somewhat wrong that one must trick someone into playing.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#3 doesn't really increase the fun factor of the game.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Says you. I happen to enjoy trying to be deliberately secretive and misinforming my opponents about my technological and military progress.

Spreading misinformation is one thing, but this is something else. Scouts are cheap and any player who wants to put in the effort of spreading them everywhere, then counting up all the province coins, counting castles, replacing losses, and generally going through an enormous amount of micromanagement, can get the same information they would get from the score graphs. Only the players who want to go through all this hassle get the information. Other players, faced with this daunting task, just give up. Games are supposed to be enjoyable pastimes. Success in game should be based on investment skill, tactical skill, diplomatic skill, and knowledge of the game system, not on how much unpleasant micromanaging work one is willing to tolerate.

Research can be extrapolated based on what spells your opponent uses for summonings and in battle, which in turn requires that you spy on him and watch his battles with your scouts and spies, unless you want to find this information out the hard way by attacking him personally.

The information gained from spies is not even really the same as the information gained from the score graph. You can do (once again) more work, and convert spy-information into some approximation of scoregraph-information.

Again, players are faced with the choice of doing all kinds of disagreeable scutwork, or losing the game. Anything which deliberately makes the game unpleasant, in my opinion of course, is inherently bad.

[ July 11, 2004, 21:02: Message edited by: Sheap ]