Idler

Archont · Post by **Archont** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:52 am

edrim wrote:I dont know if manual delegation is good for the rest of a game, we have set it because somebody could go out before delegation system works good, now when player is going to vacations his duty is to set delegation for any of other team members. ... We are creating another exploit of this system.

I see. But you can hardly call this "vacations". Actually, el_perdedor asked me (using capslock) to stop sending him any emails, because he is OUT OF GAME (exclamation marks follow). I may ask him for making this delegation, but I do not know, whether he will comply or not.

Moreover, I talked already with akfaew and he agreed to make this delegation, if I describe the situation on forum. If something is still not clear, I can develop this point further.

Well, anyway. El_perdedor begun to practice his own politics and destroyed some unguarded city of another player though he was clearly told (at least twice) to not to do so. I had a talk with Leader of team that suffered and we came to agreement that we, Shriekers, will rebuild the destroyed city and will left it to be taken by the player who lost it. But since all my nations in vicinity, except for Teutons, are already engaged in battle, I need this delegation to fulfill my obligation. And that is the point.

mrsynical · Post by **mrsynical** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:59 am

Archont wrote:After some serious troubles with cooperation inside the team, el_perdedor quit the game in anger. I ask for a delegation of Teutonic nation to myself.

What if he is no longer angry in a couple of hours time? Surely it is part of this game, to work (together) as a team... Seeing he has started the game, it would be good if he posted something himself?

Archont · Post by **Archont** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:20 am

Sure, he still has his Longturn account, so if he wants, he may speak freely and defend his case. But I doubt he will do this. He simply moved to Greatturn, where he plays too.

kevin551 · Post by **kevin551** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 5:11 am

Kryon wrote:
Can you please delegate Dimitril to Elrik and Kes of Kobo to Marduk.

... I'll be away from Monday ..

Manual delegation is being abused. Kes of Kobo has been manually delegated once. Why should he be done again. Idler cities should be transferred to another player on the team using city trading.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 11:09 am

MOTION TO REMOVE IDLERS:

I do not think it's good to leave an idler's capital city to continue for the rest of the game: As it grows it will take tiles from other cities close by and since that city is still 'part of our team' we'll have no way of taking away tiles for production by another city. I would prefer it if we could somehow transfer the capital city also.

SUGGESTED MOTION:

Deadline for delegation of idlers (e.g. T15), followed by one turn, when these idlers are made into AI (T16) and then next turn they are removed (T17). This would allow us to leave city empty under delegation (city size at least 2 by T15), then invade AI city next turn (T16). Actually, if people really take the city, then the AI is RIP, so no need to remove it, but if for some reason people miss the opportunity, then the AI is removed in T17.

Anyone who seconds this motion?

Follow-up question: regarding team bulbs being worked out... somehow it is related to the no. of players in the team, right? If an idler gets killed how does this affect our research?

Dimitril · Post by **Dimitril** » Mon Jul 15, 2013 1:09 am

Yeah sorry about that. I only had a day to decide what I would do about LT32. My teams didn't answer my mail so I just gave the delegation to Kryon.

elrik · Post by **elrik** » Tue Jul 16, 2013 4:46 am

I didn`t know that this delegation is still on. Probably as other people in our team. Hench is with us and plays by himself. So please change Hench to Kes. I will ask Hench to remove this delegation anyway.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:57 am

So, what will we do with the idlers? At least let's agree to something, so it is clear. Nobody replied to my post below... maybe not of concern?

Xercise wrote:MOTION TO REMOVE IDLERS:

I do not think it's good to leave an idler's capital city to continue for the rest of the game: As it grows it will take tiles from other cities close by and since that city is still 'part of our team' we'll have no way of taking away tiles for production by another city. I would prefer it if we could somehow transfer the capital city also.

SUGGESTED MOTION:

Deadline for delegation of idlers (e.g. T15), followed by one turn, when these idlers are made into AI (T16) and then next turn they are removed (T17). This would allow us to leave city empty under delegation (city size at least 2 by T15), then invade AI city next turn (T16). Actually, if people really take the city, then the AI is RIP, so no need to remove it, but if for some reason people miss the opportunity, then the AI is removed in T17.

Anyone who seconds this motion?

Follow-up question: regarding team bulbs being worked out... somehow it is related to the no. of players in the team, right? If an idler gets killed how does this affect our research?

kevin551 · Post by **kevin551** » Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:54 pm

I agree lets remove the idlers.

det0r · Post by **det0r** » Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:36 am

There is an issue with removing idlers - teams who have an idler far away from other teammates are at a disadvantage, because once they trade cities they will have very high corruption. I have no issues distributing Deragh's cities amongst my teammates, but if edrim has to give topyli's cities to someone they will probably all be useless at size 1/2 because of corruption/waste, making those cities much easier for my team to kill. This is good for my team, but I don't think it is very fair for edrim's team.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Mon Jul 22, 2013 11:24 am

Good point Det0r; if this is indeed an issue, then the only solution would seem a 'player swap'... meaning someone takes over the player that is far away (capital and all) and their old cities are re-distributed instead. I would imagine that this is within the admins capability to arrange, no?

mmm2 · Post by **mmm2** » Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:38 pm

please give us advanced notice so we can swap cities before this happens. now that game has begun not many players are checking the forum anymore, so your best bet would be to send a chat message instead of posting to forum!!

Lord_P · Post by **Lord_P** » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:16 am

Can we re-open sign ups and get some new players in instead? Maybe theres still a few that read this forum and want to get in the game...

det0r · Post by **det0r** » Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:39 am

akfaew wrote:Xercise, you want to avoid the bother of /taking a second nation and instead distribute the cities to players at the cost of losing one nation in your team, is this correct?

As I understand it, Xercise is specifically against idlers who are permanently delegated.

Lord_P wrote:Can we re-open sign ups and get some new players in instead? Maybe theres still a few that read this forum and want to get in the game...

Team Leaders were against this in case somebody got a good player to join (e.g. if we asked bli to come and play for Deragh). In my case, someone said they knew Deragh and would ask him, but I haven't heard anything since?

Personally I think we should continue with delegations. If Xercise thinks this is unfair then I guess the only fair solution is to go with what was proposed from the beginning - idlers trade their cities via diplomacy and are removed from the game.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:49 pm

akfaew wrote:Xercise, you want to avoid the bother of /taking a second nation and instead distribute the cities to players at the cost of losing one nation in your team, is this correct?

I am not too worried either way; I can keep playing Chuck I suppose. If we decide NOT to remove idlers, then those who permanently are delegated that nation, should be able to take on one more delegation temporarily (due to holiday or sickness of team mate for example). I.e. I vote to set 'delegation limit' to 2, if we keep the idlers.

I agree with the others above, whatever we decide to do, we have to send out a clear message on many channels, so everyone knows what's going on.

mrsynical · Post by **mrsynical** » Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:35 pm

Xercise wrote:
akfaew wrote:Xercise, you want to avoid the bother of /taking a second nation and instead distribute the cities to players at the cost of losing one nation in your team, is this correct?
I am not too worried either way; I can keep playing Chuck I suppose. If we decide NOT to remove idlers, then those who permanently are delegated that nation, should be able to take on one more delegation temporarily (due to holiday or sickness of team mate for example). I.e. I vote to set 'delegation limit' to 2, if we keep the idlers.

I agree with the others above, whatever we decide to do, we have to send out a clear message on many channels, so everyone knows what's going on.

The point of delegation is to balance out the game when people are unable to play (or don't even bother turning up). It should not be used for strategic play.

Surely your team has other people who can take a delegation when somebody is on holiday? Why do they have to delegate to you?

i) If you think you can do a better job than other players in your team is not a good reason.
ii) If more than half of your team is on holiday, I think tough luck ... your team has to go idle for a couple of nations.

I think we have pissed with delegation enough. I think we should just lock in the current situation. Delegation limit is 1. Idlers are managed by 1 person (permanently). If that person goes on leave, they delegate their nation, and idler's nation to 2 separate people.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:04 pm

There is one logistical problem... if player X controls an idler and then player X himself goes on holiday, he must ask admin to change the delegation of the idler. Are admin up to that? If not, then we should get rid of the idlers, but like I said above, for me personally it's ok either way. I am not commenting here to get some sort of advantage, I just think we should sort it out so that it's simple and not complicated.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 8:28 am

OK, good. In that case, we can just leave the idlers then. /X

edrim · Post by **edrim** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:54 am

Xercise wrote:OK, good. In that case, we can just leave the idlers then. /X

What about if someone went idle without seting delegation, just for being idler?

I am asking for setting elpollodiabolo delegation to mrsynical, he is idler for 5 turns and all can see it in nation page.

mrsynical · Post by **mrsynical** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:24 pm

As mentioned, elpollo has gone idle and probably won't be back (maybe he found marduk was too tough an opponent?). I have manual delegation.

edrim wrote:
Xercise wrote:OK, good. In that case, we can just leave the idlers then. /X
What about if someone went idle without seting delegation, just for being idler?

I am asking for setting elpollodiabolo delegation to mrsynical, he is idler for 5 turns and all can see it in nation page.

Xercise · Post by **Xercise** » Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:12 am

Houston, we have a problem:

I was controlling Chuck our idler until I went on vacation from the 2-4 Aug. Akfaew transferred control of Chuck to Pamplina during my vacation, but forgot to change it back afterwards. Now pamplina is on vacation and our idler really is completely idle since two turns (I have tried to get a hold of akfaew, but it turns out he is away for several days). I do not blame akfaew - the admin has a lot on his plate and he too has a real life of course, I know. But, I wonder if:

1. Can as a community create a second admin with all privileges? This would be especially good if more serious issues arise.
2. Does anyone have the ability to change delegations right now? If yes, can you please let me know and transfer control of Chuck to me, Xercise.

Thanks.