Replacement Thread for OBS-3

[jaguars4ever]

Oh n0es!1! Not the sweet, innocent I-Ties! 'Tis truly a sad chapter indeed.

[Reveilled]

Bugger. Finished.

[metadigital]

I am innocent! I am sweet! What have you done to the inventors of art and beauty and pizza?!

[Reveilled]

Hmm. Okay, we have a little problem.

 

Basically, this game has no rules for handling dropouts. The rules of the game are pretty clear that the policies for players who don't or can't submit orders should be worked out before the start of the game. In OBS-1, therefore, I made the three-turn dropout limit part of the house rules. Archie, however, neglected to give any house rules. Therefore, there are technically no rules for how to deal with countries who haven't submitted orders.

 

And thus, we come to the real problem.

Obviously, in my capacity as GM, I'm going to have to set rules on this now, and those rules would be to impose a three-turn cutoff. Furthermore, given the manner in which I GM, there would have to be unanimous agreement among players on the introduction of this rule. Unfortunately, I'm also aware that in my capacity as the player of France, I'd vote against this rule's introduction.

I'm sure you can see the potential problem with the GM expectation of impartiality this would cause.

 

Thus, I'm going to call for a vote on this. If a majority of players vote for it, the three-turn civil disorder limit will be imposed.

[metadigital]

What was the question?

[jaguars4ever]

I believe Rev's issue pertains to Civil Disorder - which, as you know, may result upon certain criteria (as the aforementioned "3 strikes & you're out" rule). Further upon which, removals may take place under the precedent of number of units exceeding the number of SC's, with units furthest away from home first, fleets before armies. I know in the game you're GMing, Mets, you've been lenient enough to allow submission even upon failure to send orders 3 consecutive times in a row.

 

 

However, this is an issue I feel the GM solely deserves to make. Given that the game is already underway I do respect that Reveilled has the courtesy to at least ask us anyway. So yeah, you have my vote Rev.

[Reveilled]

Would it be better if we set the three-turn rule, but I kept a similar leniency about the rule as Mets does?

[jaguars4ever]

Would it be better if we set the three-turn rule, but I kept a similar leniency about the rule as Mets does?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

"Camaraderie, adventure, and steel on steel. The stuff of legend! Right Boo?" "Squeek!"

 

[jaguars4ever]

Grr. <_<

 

Recounted here is chapter Spring 05 of the great tale of the defeat of the Evil Czar Jaguars4ever, leader of the Great Russian Satan, in which the most evil Czar cunningly outwits our Hero and causes him to fall into a trap.  <_<

The Hunt for Red October.

[metadigital]

Of course I do it the best way. "

 

Regarding your earlier ethical dilemma, Rev, I don't see the problem:

• as GM you ask for a vote, and (either overtly or covertly) determine whether it must be unanimous* or a set majority; and
  
• as a player you cast your vote.
  

* This is the tricky bit. As you have already been quite visible in your unanimous requirement for rule changes (nasty Ender!), I see no obvious disingenuation ...

 

:D

 

You can thus make your decision based on your own greedy little self-interest, safe in the knowledge that you are acting completely legitimately. Bit like winning at a casino: you know you shouldn't, but if you do you feel that guilty enjoyment.

 

Also, it's not like I've been "pulling a Darkside", I've had to visit the hospital every day for the last three weeks, so I haven't had time to fill my personal commitments, let alone do anything fun.

[Reveilled]

Urg. I'm swamped presently with work and revision for University exams and reports, which in addition to cutting into my time with CivIV, may adversely affect my ability to GM for a few days. So before anyone sends me any orders, I'm going to have to postpone adjudication until Saturday. Apologies.

[jaguars4ever]

Don't worry about it Dipmeister. But just to confirm, F05 deadline is now on Nov. 12, right?

[Bokishi]

Viva la Revolution!

[Reveilled]

Don't worry about it Dipmeister.  But just to confirm, F05 deadline is now on Nov. 12, right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Aye she be.

[metadigital]

Right, now Reveilled out of the way, send me your orders and I'll adjudicate ...

[jaguars4ever]

Right, now Reveilled out of the way, send me your orders and I'll adjudicate ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Viva la Revolution!

[Reveilled]

Sorry, I am aware the adjudication is today. I'm a bit occupied with stuff at the moment, but it'll be done by the end of the day. Promise. Cross my heart.

[metadigital]

Another casualty of Civ 4 ...

[Reveilled]

Bah! I assure you it was nothing of the sort.

 

It was Firefly

 

Anyways, I guess I should do it now. *yawn* Though I'd much rather go to bed.

Edited November 12, 2005 by Reveilled

[jaguars4ever]

Anyways, I guess I should do it now. *yawn*  Though I'd much rather go to bed back to Civ 4.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Reveilled]

Anyways, I guess I should do it now. *yawn*  Though I'd much rather go to bed back to Civ 4.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll have you know that I'm perfectly capable of using CivIV responsibly. I mean, okay, I may find myself staying up all night on occasion, and I might miss the odd week of university, but I assure you that I have my addi--err, I mean my moderate use of CivIV, entirely under control.

[metadigital]

I can quit anytime I want.

 

 

I just don't want to right now.

[Bokishi]

*does dance*

[Reveilled]

Sorry, sorry, entirely my fault.

 

Alas, I have little time to adjudicate the turn right now, so I hope it'll be okay if I just list the orders. It's not like the map is much changed as a result, anyway.

 

Build A Bud

Build A Vie

 

Build A Par

 

Build F StP(nc)

 

The removals are listed in the first post already.

 

 

Sorry about this.

[metadigital]

Um I don't understand.