Longturn Forum

I hesitated a long time if I should join a team game, especially because the admin
seems to favour 2 teams, and I think 2 is always your last resort.
I didn't want to comment on a running game, but given the ongoing discussion it
doesn't make sense to wait longer.
It turned out to be wrong to take in everybody, lots of players not known or not
knowing longturn level of game-play or concept of team game at all.
LT44 was decided before it started. There were too few regulars on Blue, too many
players that didn't show at all or too late, and too many players that don't have the
slightest clue what to do, too many players silently walking away, too few players
understanding what a team game is, too few players willing to contribute the necessary
amount of time.
Though I've seen only blue part of map I think Blue started in a superior
geostrategical position. We probably had larger part of landmass at our disposal,
and outnumbered the enemy on all frontiers. dim was isolated and could had been
contained by 2 - 4 blue players, vlad was facing 2 - 3 blue players, and nirti
was facing 2 - 3 players. In most cases the blue players prefered not to take notice of
possible presence of the enemy but sent their explorers to the mainland. They didn't
listen or care to my frequent admonishing from start. Except zoltan no frontier
player had the slightest chance to stand the enemy. Later the players prefered not to
secure the coastlines.
This game was effectively decided in T0. I regret I did not quit then out of a
false loyalty.
The decision to give 2 players from outside 2 nations of the so well "balanced"
teams on each side -- moore the jamaicans and silesians, arkan the inuit and vodot --,
was wrong. moore built cities in more or less attractive places and went away,
arkan stayed. It's about putting weight into the wrong scale of an already decided game.
Taking in new players after start shouldn't be allowed at all, and the game should be
canceled if a certain amount of idlers is exceeded.
It is plain wrong if regulars maintain team games per se would be the best opportunity
to "learn how to play". The precondition for learning is to have somebody you can learn
from. If there are too few regulars, that won't work, and it puts too heavy a load on those
that are willing to give advise.
In a team game, every new player needs a regular for advise, and of course the new
player needs to be willing to learn.
I especially thank zoltan to make the necessary and correct decision to quit the game,
encouraging myself to do it also.
I also enjoyed being teamed up with wahazar, xandr and joy.

All that is clear and square. Maybe the teams were unbalanced. There is never - ever - a way to be completely sure.

What I have an issue with is that the few of you decided to throw in the towel while the rest of your team seems to be fighting and biting the whole time. If your surrender was official, it seems some did not get the memo nor had a say in this "surrender".

Your and Hans_Lemurson's concern is team red and not team blue.
That's the whole concept of a team game.
If you want team red to be thisanthat for example deciding unanimously
on thisanthat that's your problem.
You and Hans are overstepping the whole time, and you lack the
self-reflection to recognize it.

Fair enough.

So, what you are saying, we continue to play regularly, because an official surrender did not happen?

I'm fed up with your permanent self-contradictions.
I didn't throw any towel, I stopped playing. As did malo, joris, tuvo etc pp
As you announced on discord you would delegate to arkan and probably
won't come back.
And the only guy whining here in past days is Hans_Lemurson himself.
So I leave that forum to your 2 self-righteousness.

fran wrote:I'm fed up with your permanent self-contradictions.
I didn't throw any towel, I stopped playing.

I... rest my case...

fran wrote:I hesitated a long time if I should join a team game, especially because the admin
seems to favour 2 teams, and I think 2 is always your last resort.
I didn't want to comment on a running game, but given the ongoing discussion it
doesn't make sense to wait longer.
It turned out to be wrong to take in everybody, lots of players not known or not
knowing longturn level of game-play or concept of team game at all.
LT44 was decided before it started. There were too few regulars on Blue, too many
players that didn't show at all or too late, and too many players that don't have the
slightest clue what to do, too many players silently walking away, too few players
understanding what a team game is, too few players willing to contribute the necessary
amount of time.
Though I've seen only blue part of map I think Blue started in a superior
geostrategical position. We probably had larger part of landmass at our disposal,
and outnumbered the enemy on all frontiers. dim was isolated and could had been
contained by 2 - 4 blue players, vlad was facing 2 - 3 blue players, and nirti
was facing 2 - 3 players. In most cases the blue players prefered not to take notice of
possible presence of the enemy but sent their explorers to the mainland. They didn't
listen or care to my frequent admonishing from start. Except zoltan no frontier
player had the slightest chance to stand the enemy. Later the players prefered not to
secure the coastlines.
This game was effectively decided in T0. I regret I did not quit then out of a
false loyalty.
The decision to give 2 players from outside 2 nations of the so well "balanced"
teams on each side -- moore the jamaicans and silesians, arkan the inuit and vodot --,
was wrong. moore built cities in more or less attractive places and went away,
arkan stayed. It's about putting weight into the wrong scale of an already decided game.
Taking in new players after start shouldn't be allowed at all, and the game should be
canceled if a certain amount of idlers is exceeded.
It is plain wrong if regulars maintain team games per se would be the best opportunity
to "learn how to play". The precondition for learning is to have somebody you can learn
from. If there are too few regulars, that won't work, and it puts too heavy a load on those
that are willing to give advise.
In a team game, every new player needs a regular for advise, and of course the new
player needs to be willing to learn.
I especially thank zoltan to make the necessary and correct decision to quit the game,
encouraging myself to do it also.
I also enjoyed being teamed up with wahazar, xandr and joy.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU for giving your report and summary! I really do appreciate this, no sarcasm.

Up until last weekend I hadn't even found all the Discord channels where apparently this was all discussed, and I was leery of diving into the discussion archives to try to figure out what went wrong. My first warning that anything was wrong in the game was hearing that Zoltan was threatening to quit after Turn-32.

fran wrote:Your and Hans_Lemurson's concern is team red and not team blue.
That's the whole concept of a team game.
If you want team red to be thisanthat for example deciding unanimously
on thisanthat that's your problem.
You and Hans are overstepping the whole time, and you lack the
self-reflection to recognize it.

Yes, my concern is from a Red Team perspective, and I do not deny it. I did not know the details of Blue Team's woes, or how long their grievances had stood.
Blue Team also should try to understand Red Team's perspective, that the game was ending abruptly with no warning and no discussion or messages on the forum. Until I wrote my first post about "Blue Team Morale", you could look here and not even know that the game's legitimacy was being called into question, and that protest-resignations were imminent.

fran wrote:I'm fed up with your permanent self-contradictions.
I didn't throw any towel, I stopped playing. As did malo, joris, tuvo etc pp
As you announced on discord you would delegate to arkan and probably
won't come back.
And the only guy whining here in past days is Hans_Lemurson himself.
So I leave that forum to your 2 self-righteousness.

To be honest, I was hoping to find some Blue-Team Whining on these boards so that I'd have some information about what was going wrong. I really appreciate your posting here.

...

I think the biggest problem is ambiguity over what constitutes a "Public Announcement".
Is it saying something on a Discord channel? (Which channel, by the way?)
Is it discussing it amongst your own team, then one person passing it along?
Is it making a post on the Long-Turn Forums?

I'm inclined to favor the latter, since Forum-posts are organized and long-lasting in a way that a Discord chat-stream is not, and everybody has access to the Forums. You can expect people to check the Forums for news, but you can't similarly expect them to dredge through 200+ chat messages in hopes of finding the few important items.