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

[chrispedersen]

I'd like to just go no schedule, quickhosting only through 1/3

[rdonj]

I voted delay, shut off the hosting timer to do our best to accommodate people's schedules. That said, if people get turns in anyway it won't bother me in the slightest. I don't have any holiday traveling to do, so I am going to just be sitting around waiting for you slowpokes to get your turns in.

I would like to reach turn 30 by christmas also, but I am beginning to think that's unlikely

[Septimius Severus]

Everyone, make your needs/desires heard via the forum poll if you have not already. I'd like to cover the whole period (12/24-1/02) inclusive using one of those options decided by majority if we can. Everyone gets a say.

[chrispedersen]

I really don't think this is a vote issue. You have a number of players already indicating they have travel plans and will not be available.

Sure, you could let them stale -but it kind of ruins the whole point about playing players. Since you have 3+ players already saying they can't do it - just quikhost it and be done with it.

[Septimius Severus]

For some it may not be and I do understand believe me. We've got two players (Illuminated and Grudge) so far indicating sporadic internet access for the period. I've provided options that cover the whole spectrum of needs/desires/wishes as best I could. I will do my best to honor whatever is decided via the polls. If everyone casts their vote, what your saying will bare itself out anyway.

[chrispedersen]

Suppose 8 people vote to keep going on a usual schedule. Are you really going to keep the game going when 5 people say they can't (won't) play?

[Septimius Severus]

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

Suppose 8 people vote to keep going on a usual schedule. Are you really going to keep the game going when 5 people say they can't (won't) play?

Let me ask you this by contrast, suppose 14 players vote against any delays, is it really fair to hold up the game for 2 players?

Anyway I don't think either of these situations are likely to happen. I am confident people will vote in the best interests of everyone taking into account the holiday and the needs of others as well. 96 hour turns or timer off will accomodate almost everyone fairly well over the holidays, and there is the 72 hour middle ground as well, so I am not worried about it really.

I am simply asking people to speak up and let their voices be heard in the forum and to use that venue to inform me of their plans/desires for both poll questions. I certainly don't want anyone making up anyone else's mind for them.

[chrispedersen]

[quote=Septimius Severus;722711Let me ask you this by contrast, suppose 14 players vote against any delays, is it really fair to hold up the game for 2 players? [/QUOTE]

Yes.

Since 'liberal delays' was stated at the outset and its the norm to break for major holidays, yes, I have no problem with you just saying game is quickhost only.

[Maerlande]

I was going to jump in, but ....

Here's my view. Why on earth do we need anything fancy? Do like everyother game and turn off the timer for Christmas.

[Septimius Severus]

Originally Posted by Maerlande

I was going to jump in, but ....

Here's my view. Why on earth do we need anything fancy? Do like everyother game and turn off the timer for Christmas.

Is every other game on this forum turning off the timer for the entire period from Dec 24th through January 2nd?

From what I can recall Llamaserver hosted games cannot turn off the actual hosting timer from the admin page (without special instructions to Llamabeast anyway), as far as I am aware they can shut off quickhost, postpose hosting or just increase the hosting interval. There is no option for removing the hosting timer completely, which we can do via Gandalf's server with his direct involvement. Essentially we'd be running only on quickhost but with no actual turn timer to ensure that hosting takes place, if option 2 wins out. That is all I am saying.