Defection

Nubclear · May 9, 2003, 06:07

What will we do if someone wishes/does defect?

Jamski · May 9, 2003, 06:30

Depends which direction. I doubt some factions will take back defectors though

-Jam

Micha · May 9, 2003, 06:39

The hive, for example, will never have the problem of defection. Our citizens enjoy the best life possible. It´s just that accidents tend to happen suddenly, here and then...

GeneralTacticus · May 9, 2003, 07:16

If someone wants to quit one team and join another, they should immediately quit the team they wnat to leave and wait on joining another one until any inside knowledge they might have becomes useless. Anything else is simply unfair.

Maniac · May 9, 2003, 07:21

But when does inside knowledge become useless? I mean, even if the traitor has to wait a month, probably only six turns or so will have passed. I doubt there will be much change in that short period. I'd propose that defections are only allowed if the faction to which the person defects already has infiltrated the faction from which the person defects. Anything else is too unfair for the victim faction.

GeneralTacticus · May 9, 2003, 07:23

Yes, I agree.

Micha · May 9, 2003, 07:35

Me too.
But best would be if there weren´t any defections at all. I mean, that´s why everybody had been given the opportunity to chose where to participate...

Alex · May 9, 2003, 10:50

I hope there are not defectors. But if it happens, then Maniac's idea seems fine to me.

Voltaire · May 9, 2003, 10:56

The Hive would welcome any oppressed peoples seeking refuge in our great communist nation.

Comrade Micha, anyone who defects from the Hive is not a true communist by a capitalist lapdog spy! The imperialists seek to destabilize the State for they know that it is truly the rule of the people, and they fear the people. But not to worry comrades, the will of the people will prevail.

Static Universe · May 9, 2003, 15:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
But when does inside knowledge become useless? I mean, even if the traitor has to wait a month, probably only six turns or so will have passed. I doubt there will be much change in that short period. I'd propose that defections are only allowed if the faction to which the person defects already has infiltrated the faction from which the person defects. Anything else is too unfair for the victim faction.

I would say that long term strategic planning is the more valuable info that a defector will take with him, regardless of infiltration-type data. Six turns probably won't put a dent in that's value, or at least will force major changes in gameplay on the part of the faction defected from, which isn't really fair.

I say disallow it completely or take it on a case by case basis if it must happen.

Edit: for clarity

AdamTG02 · May 10, 2003, 16:50

If you disallow defectors completely, you rule out a lot of interesting role-playing potential. Say I'm a member of the University and one of our cities has been taken by the Consciousness. I decide that I want to have been "assimilated" by the Consciusness, and after discussing it OOC with the players from both teams, make that a reality. This allows us to role-play transitions between factions. Now, I don't claim this should be a normal occurence, but once or twice per game is fine. Within the limits of Maniac's proposal (which seems a sound way to prevent unbalance by premature sharing of information), I think defection should be allowed.

Maniac · May 10, 2003, 17:06

Should we allow someone being a spy for another faction?

For example a potential defector could point out a weak spot in the probe defences of the defector's current faction, giving the future defector's faction a chance to infiltrate and "rescue" and take away the defector to his future faction. Just an idea...

What of course should be unallowed is telling the password of a certain team, or creating DLs to act as spies.

Method · May 10, 2003, 17:09

nah, i don't like that

as for DLs, we can always count on Ming the Merciless to keep us safe from that

Maniac · May 10, 2003, 17:12

Perhaps Tassadar could poll it, with a few of the limitations provided above as options to vote on?

GeneralTacticus · May 10, 2003, 21:13

Regarding spies: NO WAY. This would basicaly mean that any team, at any time, could have their most secret plans exposed withotu any warning and without being able to do anything at all about it. It simply isn't fair.

Mr. President · May 11, 2003, 04:31

Maybe people who defect should be forbidden to talk about issues of policy. How to enforce it, though?

GeneralTacticus · May 11, 2003, 04:32

It can't be enforced; it would just have to be a matter of honesty. However, really, I wouldn't trust anyone not to let things slip, even if by accident, or allow their knowledge to contaminate team policy.

Zero · May 12, 2003, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Micha
The hive, for example, will never have the problem of defection. Our citizens enjoy the best life possible. It´s just that accidents tend to happen suddenly, here and then...

We engineer our citizens so that they do not wish to defect.

(remember the gene jack quote by yang

)

Drogue · May 12, 2003, 18:06

And we are so perfect, severing the link to the collective could damage the individual. I say be realistic, if someone defects, they are wanted by others because of the info they carry. Let them defect and use that knowlegde, but you can only defect to a faction you've had relations with (thus you know they exist) but you're free to share info then.

This could be very stupid, but I think most of us are happy with our teams, and want to stay. But realistically, if youn defect, you have that knowledge, and if the other faction wanted to use it, they would. To be honest, I'm not really sure, but either could be fun.

Zero · May 12, 2003, 18:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
but I think most of us are happy with our teams...

I think Ive been nerve stapled enough times by Yang to get
free will" out of my system...

Static Universe · May 13, 2003, 05:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Calc II

I think Ive been nerve stapled enough times by Yang to get
free will" out of my system...

Nah, you build up a tolerance to it after a while.

Drogue · May 13, 2003, 05:54

Using pain to instill obedience... how... logical, yet something in my neural nets seems to give a strange feeling at that opinion

"Could there be more to a person than logic?"

Of course not!

Extract from "Meditations on Logic" by Prime Function Drogue Beta-8

Nubclear · May 13, 2003, 06:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
Using pain to instill obedience... how... logical, yet something in my neural nets seems to give a strange feeling at that opinion

"Could there be more to a person than logic?"

Of course not!

Extract from "Meditations on Logic" by Prime Function Drogue Beta-8

Logic without emotion is not logic at all, just as emotion without logic is not emotion at all.

Drogue · May 13, 2003, 06:45

An interesting thought, Comrade Tassadar. So would blind love, that causes one to harm their intended lover, not be an imotion, as it is devoid of logic? Would the hatred of another, that causes one to commit crimes, ending up killed or in prison, be not emotions, for they are illogical and irrational? Do you disregard Hume's position that

Quote:

Reason cannot give rise to moral judgments

(that emotion can) or Stoicism, which states that

Quote:

Morality is simply rational action, of reason alone

? Both of those would seem to believe that you can have logic while not having emotion, and vice versa.

As the CyCon leader, I speak of Stoicism with much reverance, even being incapable of illogical emotion.

"Questions and Answers about Meditations" by Prime Function Beta-8

FlameFlash · May 13, 2003, 10:40

Arrr... just have ye robotic minions walk the plank and watch as they short circuit Drogue... there be no mutany then.

Corellion · May 13, 2003, 21:21

You seem to be mistaken about our nature. Though we do include cybernetic, electronic implants in our systems, they are not designed to allow for short-circuiting. Considering our organic components contain copious amounts of water, it would be illogical to design components that can be short-circuited.

Hercules · May 17, 2003, 08:37

Perhaps it is time to make some rules regarding defections.

First: Change password.
Second: Second post Citizen Registry. Tass is a well known poster but some new acdgers are not. Most people post their intention to join a faction but I haven't checked if they've signed on elsewhere ( I don't think any have)
Third: There has to be an agreed gap period before the defector can join another faction. A month has been suggested but maybe 20 turns. This would be a big disincentive to defect as the game develops, as the turns become more involved.
Four: We have to recognise there are some areas we can't legislate for.
Five: Alternatively maybe there should be an all faction panel including Googlie or other Mod to adjudicate to agree conditions per each individual case. For instance say we had a serial defector.

Just some thoughts

Frankychan · May 17, 2003, 08:56

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
Arrr... just have ye robotic minions walk the plank and watch as they short circuit Drogue... there be no mutany then.

typical Pirate attitude.

Googlie · May 17, 2003, 09:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Hercules
Perhaps it is time to make some rules regarding defections.
First: Change password.

If any other CMN's have found a way to do this I'd be delighted.

I don't believe it's possible to change a password once a PBEM has started.

G.

mark13 · May 17, 2003, 09:23

Surely this can't be a serious discussion. Defections? Surely not! You're saying that a player who's been an active member of a faction can *defect* and join another if they happen to be losing? This is ludicrous!

If allowed, players defecting when they see a sea change is going to decide the game, and it'll spoil the game. In addition to the passwords business (it's not possible to change, btw) you've got all manner of strategies and tactics that will become worthless. It's taking the soul out of the game.

My vote would be to do exactly the same as in the Civ3 demo game, and say simply that a player is not allowed to be a member of more than one faction throughout the game full stop. Anything else will ridiculously unbalance a game we've all spent countless hours playing (and also trying to make fair and balanced).