Page 1 of 1

Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:58 am
by MajorMitchell
I'm suggesting that players already in a game should have the choice of switching to a country that has no player because it's gone into Civil Disorder, or the mods remove a player. Other players outside the game get to join for free now, no extra points going in to the pot. Why shouldn't players already invested in the game get the option of switching from their country to the one without a player ?

Re: Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:31 am
by ChippeRock
I disagree with your opinion. However, if your already defeated in the game you should be able to join as the available country.

Re: Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 7:13 am
by ubercacher16
It gives the person who joined slightly more information then everyone else. If you have access to all past messages from two different nations then you can use that to your advantage even if only on nation is still alive.

At least that is what someone else told me. Not sure how much of an advantage could be gained from that, just putting it out there.

Re: Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 8:43 am
by Kremmen
CD situations should be handled to try to minimise, not maximise, the chaos and disruption to the game. This would cause chaos.
Imagine (esp. in a World game) when a major player is removed. A smaller nation might then take over, abandoning their nation. So a smaller nation then moves to that nation. And so on. You could have 6 or 7 players move countries. Then they'd all have information about who'd been lying to whom before the move as well as the information about their new country's communications.

I do however agree that even the usual disruption used to at least be mitigated by the extra points going into the pot when new players had to pay half to join. Reducing that to zero did more harm than good.

Re: Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:14 am
by Octavious
ubercacher16 wrote:
Sat Jan 13, 2018 7:13 am
It gives the person who joined slightly more information then everyone else. If you have access to all past messages from two different nations then you can use that to your advantage even if only on nation is still alive.

At least that is what someone else told me. Not sure how much of an advantage could be gained from that, just putting it out there.
A huge advantage. Surely this is obvious?

Players switching is an awful idea. A CD disrupts the balance, but this kicks the scales on to the floor. Not wishing to sound overly negative, but there's not a single redeeming feature to this plan.

Re: Civil Disorder..players in a game should get the option of switching from their country to one that has no player

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:45 am
by Mercy
I agree that it is a bad idea to allow players already in the game to take over CD spots, for the reasons mentioned before. I also agree with Kremmen that it would be better if players taking over CD positions would pay at least a small number of points. That way, people have invested a bit in their position and will play it more seriously.

I'd like to add that I think that there should be a way that GR takes into account CD's taken over so that taking over CD's won't hurt or inflate your ranking too much. Also, it would be excellent if players who NMRd in the first turn of a game would be kicked immediately and the phase got extended to give other people the opportunity to take over the position.

All of this exists on vDiplomacy (where there is vRanking instead of GR), so to me, vDiplomacy has a far superior CD system.