MP Noobs & Vets: Rise of the AI Menace. EA, BI. Game Over. Team ACGHHS wins! - Page 98

Septimius Severus · #**971** January 9th, 2010, 07:30 PM

Another 14 hours has been added to the current turn timer to allow for voting and any turn submissions.

chrispedersen · #**972** January 9th, 2010, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Septimius Severus

This is the situation as it stands:

Chris says that his team will likely not want to play on unless a rollback is done.

Not exactly. Not one played voted to continue.

Quote:

If a team or player has breached a built-in messaging limit in the game that has caused them to lose gold or items or a bug has occured (perhaps because of player actions) that is inherant in the game that is known about and that we have no control over

I do not understand your statement. Neither of those conditions are true. The bug is controllable. The only person that claimed to have some idea of the bug was DrP and he was consistently wrong on the details.

Quote:

If team ACGHHS wants to bring in an expert to examine files to determine whether the limit has been breached that is fine, unless I hear from someone very high up that this justifies that we immediately do a rollback without all players consent, we go with what the everyone in the game wants to do via majority vote.

I really don't understand what you're asking me to accomplish here. What does "higher up" entail - anyone that is an acknowledged veteran of the game?

As I've seen the turns, anyone that examines the turns will conclude that the game did in fact eat items. But fine, I'll go see if I can trouble a vet to verify what squirrel has said, and that he thinks its worth a rollback. I do think it should be a matter of honor that squirrel doesn't lie, but.. ok.

[/quote]

vfb · #**973** January 9th, 2010, 09:46 PM

Chris asked me kindly to have a look at the turn. Sorry Chris, I am an IRC thug, not a respected member of the forums!

Besides, this thread does not have enough drama in it. However, I will be taking this useful "Majority Vote" concept away from here, as I've got a bunch of minorities I need to go oppress. Thanks!

DrPraetorious · #**974** January 9th, 2010, 11:07 PM

Could everyone please vote in the poll:
http://noobsvets.silverforum.net/vie....php?f=3&t=193

one way or another so we can move forward (or backward)? Right now, we've got a tie, of all things.

AlgaeNymph · #**975** January 10th, 2010, 12:12 AM

For those of us who've stayed out of the drama, what's the short version regarding why or why not to rollback?

Gandalf Parker · #**976** January 10th, 2010, 12:49 AM

One of the players sent messages with gold and items to other members of his team. 20 messages were sent and properly processed by the game.
(this much is verified by the game logs)

He didnt notice that the "## message sent" counter stopped incrementing at 20. In other words at message 21 it did not say "21 messages sent". Apparently he had not run into this in solo or blitz play (understandable I guess since those rarely involve so many messages)

Also they found out that messages over 20 do not return the items.

They feel this is a bug and wish to redo the turn. Im guessing to more selectively send fewer items and retain the lost goods.

Pretty much all of our rollbacks have been caused by player action so far.

The precedent is....
Since this is partially a "newbies learning multiplayer" game should "I didnt know" learning experience constitute a rollback and redo. Particularly if an incident is not easily verified. Possibly not a problem with this one but it opens a door for misuse later.

chrispedersen · #**977** January 10th, 2010, 01:39 AM

I think a less pejorative shorter version is:

Squirrel sent more than 20 items and gold to teammates, amounting to almost an entire turns gold to one player; the items in excess of 20 were around around 50 gems worth of magic items.

The items in excess of 20 and gold did not show up.

It has been verified that this can occur.
Its a bug that has never been listed in any forum.

The proposed solution was to verify the problem did occur, and if so, run the exact turn files with the only difference changed or canceled "sent items" to teammates.

Gandalf Parker · #**978** January 10th, 2010, 02:42 AM

Sorry. Didnt know the amounts lost. Thats part of the "hard to verify" thing.

And saying "bug" might be abit pejorative also. At least to Johan.
It has been discussed altho not as a bug. I find specific discussions of it which includes expert vets, and beta testers, and Edi (who handles the bug list). So it was known even if it was not listed as a bug. Altho I am surprised no one has added it to the wishlist to have it lock the menu and grey-out more message making when it hits the limit.

Im not sure what it would mean anyway. Do we roll back for known bugs? for new bugs that arent listed? Im not sure its one but Im also not sure what the point is if it was.

Septimius Severus · #**979** January 10th, 2010, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

Im not sure what it would mean anyway. Do we roll back for known bugs? for new bugs that arent listed? Im not sure its one but Im also not sure what the point is if it was.

I too am concerned about this sort of precedent. I don't want to be rolling back again and again here. We will never get anywhere. But this is why it is important that everyone playing decide.

Now, has anyone else, other than squirrel, lost any items, gems, or gold through this message limitation quirk this turn? I.e. Have you sent anything that was not received?

The reason I ask, is that if a rollback is done, our policy generally has been to allow only the affected individual(s) to resubmit. If it comes to it, the least pain and time involved the best.

Turn out and vote if you have not already. Democracy only works if people get involved and utilize it. If anyone is unclear as to the question or the issue (I know I was) don't hesitate to ask as Algae has done. 9 votes so far, we should have at least 16 if everyone votes.

vfb · #**980** January 10th, 2010, 04:43 AM

Yes, don't be racist, to the bugs. Please call them "features".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

Sorry. Didnt know the amounts lost. Thats part of the "hard to verify" thing.

And saying "bug" might be abit pejorative also. At least to Johan.
It has been discussed altho not as a bug. I find specific discussions of it which includes expert vets, and beta testers, and Edi (who handles the bug list). So it was known even if it was not listed as a bug. Altho I am surprised no one has added it to the wishlist to have it lock the menu and grey-out more message making when it hits the limit.

Im not sure what it would mean anyway. Do we roll back for known bugs? for new bugs that arent listed? Im not sure its one but Im also not sure what the point is if it was.