Turnplay Deadline

Drogue · January 13, 2004, 10:06

Some teams seem to be having problems keeping to the turnplay deadline. PEACE currently have the turn, and have had it for 59 and a half hours. We voted first that the deadline was 48 hours, and that if not posted still punishment wouldbe inacted 12 hours after the deadline lapsed. The punishment for a first offence would be a warning, and the second and subsequent ones would be punished be Googlie pressing "end turn" and posting the save for the next faction. However, with fewer members, is more time needed?

This poll is for information gathering, and for the Gods to do what they see fit with it. Basically I want to know if people think we should give a longer timelimit, change the punishment or keet it as is. This is for unauthorised late posting. If there is a reason, please post in the turn thread or PM Googlie for an extension.

Article 1 relates to the timelimit itself. Should it be kept at 48 hours, plus 12 before punishment, or should it be lengthened by a day to 72 + 12 hours?

Article 2 relates to the punishment for late posting. Should it be increased, decreased, or kept?

You have 5 days. Please discuss.

Drogue · January 13, 2004, 10:19

Voted to keep them both. I think we were right before about the punishment, a warning for first offence, and subsequent offences are punished by Googlie pressing "end turn" and posting the turn. Other options put forward range from Googlie playing the turn with orders given (a lot of work for him) and elimination of team (very drastic and hard to do).

I am prepared to be swayed about needing longer time. Drones have never had a problem with late playing, and PUT now played as a PBEM means that when Archaic is back it should revert to his usual PBEM playing speed of under 24 hours, so I'm presuming they won't have problems keeping to the 48+12 hours. But what about the Hive and PEACE? The Hive has undergone an upheaval, and so may need more time until a regular turnplayer emerges (without Kody). PEACE seem to have lost some of their active members (is that correct?) and because of the war are having difficulties. Do either of these factions wish to extend the period?

ATM it is too slow, and the punishments are not being enforced. If it is a long term problem, then IMHO extending the deadline is the best. If it is short term, than would those factions be able to stick to the old time limit?

Obviously how this is used it up to Googlie, but I wanted to see what other people's opinions were, in case they have changed since the start.

Impaler[WrG] · January 13, 2004, 10:49

I would be ok with a time extension if these delays are legitimatly caused by PEACE's need to constantly re-evaluate its position each turn as the war progresses. We do the same to an extent with our military as these matters are so unpredictable compared to the simple mathimaticaly perfect work of being a peacefull builder faction. Beyond a rather simple plan the whole external plan needs to be compiled and evaluated in that 48 hour time span.

Perhaps if we add an adendum to the rules

"Teams engaged in major Wars or Internal Political upheavals recive an additional 24 hours to their time limit"

This would seem a fair means of flexing the time limit up when a Faction is under major preshure but keeps the original time limit on most of the teams most of the time.

Drogue · January 13, 2004, 11:05

Possibly a good idea, however getting things moving faster would be nice. 60 hours should be enough time to formulate a plan.

Jamski · January 13, 2004, 13:24

You would think so...

COME ON PEOPLE get PLAYING!

-Jam

Enigma_Nova · January 13, 2004, 16:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
Hive has undergone an upheaval, and so may need more time until a regular turnplayer emerges (without Kody).

Don't you worry, guys. We posted the poll and we'll have a new player before the turn shows up.

Watch for an Enigma turn or a Dacole turn.

Nubclear · January 13, 2004, 22:05

One of the problems I percieve about this is the lack of the ability (or at elast allowance) to enforce the deadline.
In the past Googlie left "command" up to me, and PEACE was getting very late. So I warned them that I would have to post their turn for them if they dont post it soon. The reaction?
Hercules told me to back off, and I had someone come up to me and tell me "Googlie doesn't actually enforce the deadline...You shouldn't either."

I was confused, but if that was the peoples will then obviously I would not do it.
The point is though.....People said they want the deadline, but then began biting at me when I was hinting that I was actually going to enforce it.
So if you guys are going to vote to enforce it, then I will. Just make sure its what you really want

MrWhereItsAt · January 13, 2004, 23:06

I think we will be enforcing it from now. As long as we decide in this poll to enforce it, then there should be no holding back - if a particular team is slack and then tells a God to 'back off', they'd better have a damn good reason for being allowed some extra time. The lack of organisation and irresponsibility for any individual team should not be allowed to impact on the rest of the teams who are waiting to play.

GeneralTacticus · January 13, 2004, 23:22

Keep the same deadline, and keep the punishment the same.

Nubclear · January 14, 2004, 00:14

Alright....When this poll becomes law, I'm sure everyone can agree that while special exemptions will be granted, if a faction (and I wont name names

) is repeatedly couped over and over and over again or if their turn player is gone again and again and again, then soon those extensions won't be granted.

Kody · January 14, 2004, 00:17

Quote:

In the past Googlie left "command" up to me, and PEACE was getting very late. So I warned them that I would have to post their turn for them if they dont post it soon. The reaction?
Hercules told me to back off, and I had someone come up to me and tell me "Googlie doesn't actually enforce the deadline...You shouldn't either."

It was different back then. At that stage of the game everyone was going overtime except the drones (the cycon had played 3 turns in a row late). The majority of the Hive didn't care enough to hurry up the turn as the hive was inactive. Drones being the introverts they are weren't going to get involved.

Also Googlie hadn't enforced the rule at all. Googlie had to first enforce the rule (which he has done now) otherwise you may have gotten far too many complaints.

Circumstances have changed though....

Snowflake · January 14, 2004, 00:32

I agree with Function Impalor. Extensions have been granted to factions when initial contact was made. I feel that factions at war may be given the same relaxations of the rules and 24 hours more sounds like a reasonable time of extension.

I agree for factions that has not met the 48 hour deadline the moderator should press end turn for it.

jtsisyoda · January 14, 2004, 02:07

I voted to keep the existing rules. Some leniency is ok, especially for war or other circumstances, but in general we should keep the game moving.

Googlie · January 15, 2004, 09:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Kody
Googlie had to first enforce the rule (which he has done now) otherwise you may have gotten far too many complaints.

................ and I struggled long about whether I should even do this, as IIRC there was no "enforcement" ability granted to the Gods - just wrist slapping

So what I actually did was to interpret the PUT turn orders (such as there were) in moving the turn forward - in most cases nothing was so far committed that turn that Archaic couldn't undo it the next turn when he took over as a sole-playing PBEM faction

Given that I didn't have a mandate to execute a penal "turn complete" I felt that was the best compromise.

It will be interesting to see what this poll produces by way of a mandate

G.

Drogue · January 15, 2004, 09:49

Well, currently:
9 for "Keep punishment as the same (Google ends and posts turn)"
1 for "Reduce punishment for not meeting the deadline"
1 for "Increase punishment for not meeting the deadline"

As for your mandate:
Turnplay limit,
First offence punishment,
Second and subsequent offence punishment.

That is what we voted for, as I have mentioned above. It is obviously all at your discretion, but this is your mandate for pressing end turn for a second late turn, if you wish. I can't find part two of the poll (if anyone else does, please post) but that was the one that said punishment should be enacted 12 hours after the deadline.

Main_Brain · January 17, 2004, 08:16

With Fewer Players Turns should be completed faster!
;=)

Googlie · January 17, 2004, 13:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
That is what we voted for, as I have mentioned above. It is obviously all at your discretion, but this is your mandate for pressing end turn for a second late turn, if you wish. I can't find part two of the poll (if anyone else does, please post) but that was the one that said punishment should be enacted 12 hours after the deadline.

Well, as I recall, the whole issue foundered on whether these matters should be decided on a "one faction-one vote" or "each participant-one vote" basis.

In any event, I used discretion that only time I did end the turn, and had no cry of outrage from Archaic, so presumably Tass and/or I will have a similar acceptance should it be necessary again

G.

Nubclear · January 17, 2004, 19:06

Three days have passed, and as such this is now LAW!

Enigma_Nova · January 17, 2004, 22:04

So now what the hell do I do about Archaic? I posted the turn in the thread, but what if he doesn't show up to get it?

It's his bad luck, I guess!
(Come to think of it why aren't my Hiverian colleagues getting the end turn from there?)

Googlie · January 18, 2004, 02:15

Quote:

Attachment: enigma_2153.zip
This has been downloaded 2 time(s).

And the two downloadas are prolly Tass and me (I'm definitely one of them)

G.

Enigma_Nova · January 18, 2004, 03:35

You know where archaic's e-mail addy lies?
I'll bet that second one is not Tass but GeneralTacticus, eagerly viewing Archaic's turn.

I reckon the main failure is getting this turn to the SMAC PBEM man himself.