League play I assume?

I think Figle has made it clear that draw votes are sort of pseudo-out of the game and thus aren't subject to as strict meta-gaming laws.

If its a stalemate then it should be drawn. If not, then he can do what he likes.

Yes, league play

i thought the ghostmaker said no cross-board gaming like this in the leagues.

Someone was trying to call for a draw in the second game which is still a fair game. I just said (and yes, it was me) that I wasn't drawing unless both were drawn. This was not cross-gaming in the sense that I knew ThomasB and DJ would not draw in that game as they have the upper hand with England having one sc and running renegade in Russia's backfield, turkey gone missing, and austria and italy eliminated. It just left Russia (ThomasB), Germany (DJ), and myself, the unfortunate ally to the missing Turkey.

And in fairness, it was the seriously crippled England (Maniac) in Game 2 that suggested the draw. No one was taking it seriously, so I posted that for fun as I knew it wouldn't be taken seriously either. But then again this is DJ we are talking about...

Why do you need to make it personal Draugnar? You have some bone to pick with me, I'm not sure why. I intentionally left your name off of the post, I've said nothing bad about you in either game, so what's the problem?

I took it to mean that since he had a player go on voluntary CD, and a draw was suggested in one of the games, that the player wanted to have the same outcome for both open games that were affected by the CD.

I'm not sure if this thread serves any constructive purpose other than to stir up Draugnar.

Dingle, I respect that you hid the names, but the situation should have been given. Just by the quote it leads the reader to think that a stalemate was being used to force a draw in another game.

Nothing personal DJ. You could have mentioned my name (I was happy to), but you clearly wanted to stir up the pot knowing I would read that and see you trying to stir public opinion against me. Had you gotten tacit approval from "the audience" that someone was breaking the rules, you may well have taken it to TGM. I prempted that by admitting I said it and telling my side of the situation, that is, that I knew Maniac was desperate and that no draw was going to happen so I had a little fun with it.

It wasn't an attempt to hide the situation. I thought the quote spoke for itself, regardless of the situation. Sometimes people go CD, its part of the game.

I'm not trying to stir public opinion against you. I wanted to find out if what you were suggesting was kosher. I have no desire to take it to TGM. (Frankly, with all the troll and multi witchhunting going on, I figured no one needed to chase after another red herring.

And if it isn't personal , I'm not sure I understand the "But then again this is DJ we are talking about..." line.

Sorry, I need to use emoticons more. The "this is DJ we are talking about" was based on my earlier post where I sadi I considered you a friend even if we butted heads alot (like on motorsports [nope, don't go there :-)] and in game).

Seriously, I consider you a friend. I will try to use more emoticons (gawd I hate that word) in the future when I am laughing and having fun with my comments. sorry, DJ.

And I don't plan on drawing either game until the conditions are such that I think I'm at the best I'll be and everyone who is left wants the draw.

hmm, I don't know the positions at hand, but unless the draw is forced by a stalemate, I'd say that this player just dug his own grave. Go forth and ally with everyone to gang up on him.
Those who don't want to draw have to be forced, either by a stalemate or by impending elimination

Which probably means there won't be one in Srping 2009 League D1 Game 1.

grrrrr Spring 2009...

@Akroma, as I previously said, the draw was suggested by the one and only player in a position to benefit from it. He about to lose his last home SC (and no, it isn't DJ) and, while he holds a couple in scandanavia, he will be eliminated soon enough. No one there was planning to draw this early in the game.

oops, didn't read the threat before posting

though I would still say that it might have been better if you were more subtle on any cross-game things.
you can see how people reacted

@Akroma - It wasn't a threat <grin> ("oops, didn't read the threat before posting")

oops again, I meant to say thread

damn you english and your poorly distinguished words

LOL!

DJ - I think small level of cross gaming is to be expected concerning the leagues. Isn't that the point behind the leagues?...that your outcome combined in all five games determines your placement for the next one?

Your game five strategy will have everything to do with the past four games. In fact, I can attest to that first hand...after splitting my first two League games last year with someone else...I had no chance in the last two or three games. Everyone ganged up on me...and I don't really blame them.

I'm not saying Draugnar is right, however. I just disagree with your assessment that the quote spoke for itself regardless of the situation.

Darwyn,

I disagree... and if I understand Draugnar correctly, he does, too and wouldn't repeat such a statement.

As soon as you make the make the actions in Game A dependend on the actions in Game B (or state an intention to do so), you are crossing the line.

You can't help forming an opinion about a player's style - but that's something entirely different, from making conditions that involve more than the game at hand.

DJ, here is how I see it. We are allowed to consider league standings when making decisions in each game.

If "the player" is eliminated in game 1, then a draw in game 2 is less enticing, especially if one or more others are getting both draws.

But if "the player" is included in the game 1 draw, then a game 2 draw is appealing, especially if both draws are shared with one or more other people so he isn't the tall poppy or at least the only tall poppy.

So there is a thought process under which that statement would be kosher, at least from my interpretation of the rules.

Well, normally I would agree with you. But we are talking about (and DJ referenced a quote from) League play here, where the outcome is dependent upon the combination of each game. That makes the Leagues different from individual games.

Forming an opinion about a players style is different from trying to stop a player from gaining that last SC that allows them to win your league.

I cannot imagine a situation where anyone would NOT keep mindful of the results of games 1-4 when strategizing about game 5.

I must admit, I don't know much about the leagues. I did not read the original posts about the purpose of the leagues; when Ghostmaker asked for some substitutes, I joined up. I didn't realize so much value was placed on winning, rather than enjoying, games. I just figured it was an attempt to play the same people 5 times and see who is best based on an average of 5 games.

What Alderian said +1.

if this came up in the league you should complain to Ghost directly

And the leagues will have four games this season, not five, at least that was the original announcement.

Hi Darwyn,
Fair - I didn't consider it this way since no game has finished, yet. But you re right. It makes sense if you put it like that.

Had that been genuine, which from Draugnar's post it isn't, it would not be permissible.

Judging by Draugnar's style of writing, I didn't believe Draug was doing anything other than joking around and showing his frustration at the likely outcome of Game 1. Game 2 is in such an early stage that nobody, except the presumably-soon-to-be-doomed England, would really consider a draw!

So the conclusions are, based on posts by Draugnar and Ghostmaker,
1) Draugnar was not serious
2) If he was, it would have violated the league rules

Yes?

I respectfully disagree with you on this TGM.

We are allowed to have the standings affect our decitions.

"Player X" might feel like he doesn't truly benefit from a draw at a given point. But the same draw might be better for him if he was already part of a draw in the first game.

He's not asking for quid pro.

He's stating that, with the standings as they are, he will not draw the game, but in a different positoin (IE: if he takes part of the draw in Game 1) he might do it (He hasn't even said he'll definitively draw #2 if #1 is drawn, he just said he won't draw #2 as long as #1 is not drawn.)

All of this in the hypotetycal event that it happened for real, I agree that in this case Draugnar wasn't being serious about it.

Well, really, this is diplomacy we are talking about here. Your or my assessment as to whether he was joking or not isn't really the case.

His statement is the case. And I don't think he'd have violated any league rules.

If he did violate them, I'd like to hear the argument as to why.

I understand what you say, Xapi, but it is one thing to try to eliminate a player who is leading or a direct rival, and quite another to force an essentially unfinished game into a draw in this way. That isn't something I would be pleased to see happen.

I normally wouldn't do this, but this is the global chat leading up to my statement and includes my statement.

07:59 AM would we have more chance attracking another player if we drew this one (and maybe the other one)? This has nothing to do we me been virtually wiped out in each game :)
07:59 AM /draw
07:59 AM GameMaster: Maniac has voted for a draw.
Voted: Maniac ,ThomasB,Taelisan Remaining: Captain Dave,ag7433,Draugnar,DingleberryJones.
08:01 AM The only way I draw in this game is if the other game draws first. If you want to call that metagaming, fine. I call it fair play.

So, I was wrong when I said only Maniac had voted, but he was the one who made the first statement about the fairness and attracting a new player (and suggested drawing both to begin with). If I'm guilty so is he for suggested the double draw. And the simple fact is, I wouldn't even consider a draw under these circumstances unless both were drawn. why is this not metagaming? Because this league is already corrupted and the first game totally altered by moves that took place because a player, through no fault of his own, went missing.

I stand by the idea that if the second one (in the early stages) is drawn both MUST be drawn in fairness. We had a good fight going that was fun. Suddenly I'm faced with the prospect of spending up to two movement pahses (at that time we knew nothing about forcing the player into CD) without my ally and being swallowed up through circumstances outside the game (a form of meta influence if you will), not some brilliant play or stab in the game.

If TGM wants my resignation, he has but to ask.

Are you saying that a country going into CD corrupts the game? That the league is corrupted because a country falls into CD?

Chill guys, chill. No one should resign from the leagues over this misunderstanding.

Even if Draugnar was serious I don't think it is as clear cut and issue as everyone makes it out to be.

"Are you saying that a country going into CD corrupts the game? "

I'd say it does, at least some times.

Friendly Sword,
I think everyone is calm. As the OP, i can say I don't think anyone should be ejected from the league. I am also discussing the matter privately with Draugnar, rather than airing league laundry in public.

I don't believe a CD corrupts the game. Its part of the game. Its an unfortunate part, but its a part and its luck of the draw. It may indeed change the outcome, but I believe corrupt is the wrong word to use. And it has a precedent, when Russia promptly withdrew from WWI

I shan't be taking any action, but please make sure you tread carefully. Basically I want games not to end prematurely on the influence of another game needing a draw.

Just out of curiousity Ghostie, do you have the authority to take action?

In the end game (which Game 1 is in) when it is a clear 2 on 2 fight, yes.

Hey! I still have one SC left...
And TGM only has the authority to say 'you can't play in the league any more', or similar, as he's not a Mod. Even though there was that petition to make him one!

That's why I said all he needs do is ask... And yes, as long as you have one SC, you have hope. Keep running around their backfield and playing hard to get. ;-)