Do you somehow expect me to have predicted this event? I am much newer to Diplomacy than yourself, and possess a great deal less technical knowledge. I cannot be expected to understand every nuance and subtlety. It makes sense to me that this should be how things function. It is your prerogative to disagree, but as I said, unless you get a majority of the other players to agree with you, I doubt I will change it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't expect for you to have predicted the event. What I did expect was that when the rules say that "Support is cut if the unit giving support is attacked from any province except the one where support is being given", that support would be cut under those circumstances.

 

It makes sense to me that how the rules we agreed to use at the start of the game say things should function should be the way those things function.

Perhaps we should also enquire our other two GMs (Meta & Ender), as to how they would have adjudicated this scenario.

I'm with Rev on this one. The middle of a game is not the correct time to change the rules.

What Im attempting to say is that it was impossible to predict such a situation would occur given my inexperience, thus how could I have changed the rules before the game? If someone had brought this up as a hypothetical, I would most likely have decided the same way.

But the point is you didn't, and it's already in the rules, and there's only one exception.

 

Plus if you're that unfamiliar with the game should you really be running a campaign, much less modifying the ruleset?

What Im attempting to say is that it was impossible to predict such a situation would occur given my inexperience, thus how could I have changed the rules before the game? If someone had brought this up as a hypothetical, I would most likely have decided the same way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, but now that we're here in the middle of the game, the rules should not be changed, regardless of whether it was a rule change you would have put in at the start of the game or not.

 

If I'm reading Eru/Flame's comments right, that makes myself, Jags, Skynet and Flame opposed to the change, making a majority of the players.

Ah, but Ender & Meta have yet to vote - and we all know that those who were/are GMs have votes that count as TWO.

Very well. I will amend my ruling to follow the specific letter of the rules. I still dont think its makes tactical sense, though.

Hi, apologies for the delay in transmission. I think the rules are pretty clear on the particular matter, but I will agree that it is non-trivial interpreting them.

 

I have adopted the practice of asking the players to check my adjudications when I post them. This is a no-blame process, whereby the posted moves are auditable and available for everyone to see. It is just a matter of checking the interpretation.

 

Archie, try not to get too hung up on the adjudication process, because none of us has played Diplomacy for long; we're all learning this together.

 

I had an interesting problem which didn't eventuate in a previous move in OBS-2 (fortunately there was an additional support order which obviated the difficult question); I shall try to dig it up and post it to see what everyone thinks (over in OBS-2, after I adjudicate the latest moves).

 

Uh..Archie?

Hmm? Ill update tomorrow. Ive been rather busy lately. Spring will be due this Friday.

Yeah, about that update...

Well at least I don't feel so bad about my broken-connectivity-enforced absence.

Im sorry. Its been a very busy week. This is the first time Ive been able to get on the Internet in the last 36 hours. I will fix everything when I can.

I will fix everything when I can.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rev can do it if you like Archie - he seems to understand the rules.

I will fix everything when I can.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rev can do it if you like Archie - he seems to understand the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The problem, of course, with me adjudicating turns is that I am playing in said turns and it would be perfectly possible for me to cheat, as such. Not that I would, but the possibility of it happening is still present.

I will fix everything when I can.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rev can do it if you like Archie - he seems to understand the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The problem, of course, with me adjudicating turns is that I am playing in said turns and it would be perfectly possible for me to cheat, as such. Not that I would, but the possibility of it happening is still present.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whilst theoretically true - it is highly unlikely you would be able to get away with it given that other experienced players (albeit with lesser prowess than yourself), would catch you out or at least dispute the ajudication: e.g. Ender, Meta, The Don etc.

 

No disrespect to Archie, but while he's been a most courteous and decent GM, he has made technical errors in conflict resolution almost every turn. With Mets this applies to a lesser extent. As for Ender, well there haven't been enough turns to judge. I know we're all learning together, but when all's said and done, you've been by far the cr

I believe the GM's of OBS-2 and especially OBS-3 can benefit from your expertise. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That would mean that we actually have a GM for game 2. "

That would mean that we actually have a GM for game 2. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget game 3. "

I will fix everything when I can.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rev can do it if you like Archie - he seems to understand the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The problem, of course, with me adjudicating turns is that I am playing in said turns and it would be perfectly possible for me to cheat, as such. Not that I would, but the possibility of it happening is still present.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whilst theoretically true - it is highly unlikely you would be able to get away with it given that other experienced players (albeit with lesser prowess than yourself), would catch you out or at least dispute the ajudication: e.g. Ender, Meta, The Don etc.

 

No disrespect to Archie, but while he's been a most courteous and decent GM, he has made technical errors in conflict resolution almost every turn. With Mets this applies to a lesser extent. As for Ender, well there haven't been enough turns to judge. I know we're all learning together, but when all's said and done, you've been by far the cr

By cheating, I'm not talking about deliberately botching the adjudication.  I'm talking about writing my orders after I see everyone else's.  The only thing that can be disputed there is whether or not a particularly fortuetous turn of events for me was down to skill, luck or cheating.

 

If we can get someone to act as an intermediary, who would collect orders from all of us and then forward them to me after I'd sent in my own, I'd be willing to do the adjudications.  The intermediary would of course have to be someone who isn't in the game right now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So in order to get Senator Kaftatine in power we must all make a vote of no-confidence in Supreme Chancellor Archorum. Got it.

Edited September 26, 200520 yr by jaguars4ever

That would mean that we actually have a GM for game 2. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget game 3. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah but I'm not in game 3. "

Obviously.

 

"

"

Okay, starting today, I shall reassume my duties, providing no one ( <_< ) attempts a rebellion. Sorry for the delays, but Ive had some fairly important things going on lately. I will revise and post W03 later today, with S04 due Wednesday.