Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Requesting replacement players
| Requesting replacement players |
Mon, 13 March 2006 14:22  |
|
 Kelzar |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 112
Registered: January 2006
Location: Ohio, US | |
|
A discussion in one of the private forums has emerged regarding attempting to find replacement players or not and at what point do you make such attempt.
There are a number of possible setbacks that any replacement player MIGHT face, most of which are highly likely.
Without going into too much detail as to the why the replacement is at such disadvantage I offer a suggestion for when a host is faced with such a decision. This suggestion is primarily offered for a host who is NOT playing in their own game. Below is the excerpt of my own post.
My suggestion... the weakend position that you as a group are asking for a person to fulfill needs to be compensated in some manner (i.e. No one is allowed to INIATE warfare against that race for between 1X to 4X the number of years of unsubmitted turns based upon the host's assessment of the replacement's setbacks), otherwise, just accept that the game is now unbalanced in favor of the neighbors of the now dormant race(s).
Maybe we could establish a set of "replacement rules" as a general guidline?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Mon, 13 March 2006 16:20  |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
the weakend position that you as a group are asking for a person to fulfill needs to be compensated
|
Some of us enjoy a fight from behind challenge, and replacement player has excuse of it wasn't his setup if he can't make it work. I remember Ken Mitchell in Transformers game who perhaps could have won game by staying out of a big war among former friends but he was tired of our game, he instead wanted to focus on a different game 'Primative' where he was badly outnumbered, his SD had no chance of winning but he had a fun fight holding back his enemies.
I personnally took over an ultra-quick start in Twin world wonders game, the guy had missed 4 turns after unsuccessfully attacking his neighbours before 2420. It was fun, and I did suprisingly well.
I suggest you see what replacement player wants, and other players want if replacement wants a bit of help and let host make final call (or neutral third party if host is playing).
Sometimes the replacement is more advanced which by itself can keep game balanced.
[Updated on: Mon, 13 March 2006 16:27] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Mon, 13 March 2006 18:47 |
|
| Marduk |
 | Ensign |
Messages: 345
Registered: January 2003
Location: Dayton, OH | |
|
I have only been a replacement player once, and there was plenty of warning. I'd played against and allied with the exiting player often enough to know his style, and was included in discussions between members of his alliance while watching his turns for over a week. Stepping in under those circumstances was easy, and I highly recommend that kind of replacement! 
The biggest reason I haven't been a replacement other than that one game is that I most enjoy designing a race and running the early build up phase. Why should I step into a game that has had the most fun part (for me) already pass by? There really is no answer to a problem like this. I stepped in when I did because I liked and respected the fellow, his race designs and play style were good, and his RL reason for needing to drop out was indeed much more important than a commitment to a game.
The second biggest reason is that typically the race to be replaced has skipped turns. Sometimes the game doesn't stop while a replacement is sought, meaning that the race falls farther and farther behind. If I'm to take over someone else's race I want to be able to win. It may be very hard, but I want it to be possible. There's a big difference (to me at least) between sticking it out when things turn bad and hopping into a hopeless situation.
And what about alliances? If the race has skipped turns, maybe his allies aren't interested in continuing the alliance. They'll have the inside scoop on you while you are fighting in the dark.
Your notion of a protected status for the replacement player does help allieviate the 'no chance' complaint, and gives the player time to learn about the other races including any previous allies. But what defines 'initiate warfare'? Are people allowed to destroy his scouts when they come calling? If not, he can get a lot of information that the original player might never have managed. That information could be used as a bargaining chip to forge new alliances. Well and good, but somewhat unfair to race whose secrets are being revealed.
Or, what if the race is part of an alliance? Supposing they're in some trouble... can they transfer some worlds to the replacement to keep them intact? That seems to be something of a cheat. Or the alliance partners go all-out assault, trusting the replacement player's fleet to protect their systems because he doesn't need to hold any back for his own. Not really a cheat, but a game-changing situation.
This is why I much prefer a non-playing host who keeps track of the game, including keeping copies of all the turn files. When a replacement is found, the host can fill in the new player and give him the whole history of the race. Ideally, a non-playing host would be cc'd in email exchanges. I started this in one game because I figured the host would have fun watching how the diplomacy developed. And after all, the players owe a non-playing host for running the game without getting the fun of joining in. Besides, it also helps for a smooth transition to a replacement player. I'd be a lot more willing to act as a replacement, even in a poor position, if I were given good and fairly complete information.
In a game where the race to be replaced isn't in an alliance, I'd say your suggestion would work well enough to balance things out. It might not give the new guy even a chance to win, but at least he'll have time to get his feet under him.
However, where an alliance is concerned I'd have to say it would be better to avoid protecting the replacement. Or at least limiting it to only a turn or two.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Wed, 15 March 2006 00:17 |
|
|
|
I'm not a big fan of the idea of putting races into a 'protected' state. Why? I see three main scenarios where a player has dropped:
1) In most of the games I've been in, a player dropped either immediately before, or during, an attack from another player. To the winner should go the spoils. A player may have sacrificed much to defeat their opponent, and for them to be prevented in this way from making their deserved gains seems inappropriate. If the war is too one-sided then don't bother getting a replacement... If there is a decent chance of survival, then it'll be a fun game for the replacement, if perhaps a short one 
2)
If a player gives fair notice, obviously they can tutor their replacement for a couple of turns to make the replacement fairly seamless. On the only occaision that I've ever had to drop from a game I spent about 2 weeks working as a team with my replacement, to ensure he was clear on the current state of play and strategy. After I finally left he played differently to how I would have done, but he certainly didn't suffer in the usual way a player would from coming in to a big game half way.
3)
If a player has dropped unexpectedly (presumably due to some sort of RL emergency,) and no information or even history files are available, then I can see some argument for 'protecting' the race for a few years. Even so I think as a host I would stll make the decision NOT to restrict the other players' options, but simply ask them to welcome the new player and help him get up to speed.
Conclusion:
Never forget, we are seeking the replacement to increase the enjoyment of the game for the overall benefit of the remaining players - so to limit those players actions seems counter productive to my eyes.
Just my 2c 
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Wed, 15 March 2006 11:55 |
|
| Kelzar |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 112
Registered: January 2006
Location: Ohio, US | |
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Wed, 15 March 2006 00:17 |
I'm not a big fan of the idea of putting races into a 'protected' state. Why? I see three main scenarios where a player has dropped:
|
Well in this particular case, I came in on year 2437, the player stopped submitting for 6 turns, no .hst files, no idea why he stopped submitting, no idea of NAPs, borders, alliances, battle history, zilch. Year 2439 arrives, (yes 2 years later) I get visited by cruisers, bombers etc. and the press onward from same neighbor has continued. Never had a chance to even get to my feet. The part that really smelled badly of "smear the n00bie" was there was no PM, email, or ingame note, to the effect of "No hard feelings but, I've had my sights set on your race since before original owner dropped." He and I have shared our perspectives and hopfully no other bad juju comes from it, but it did get me thinking about how to better attract replacements coming into a really lousy situations. In a tranferance of control with little to no skipped turns, I see very little reason to make any adjustments.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Thu, 16 March 2006 02:28 |
|
|
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Wed, 15 March 2006 22:28 |
Hmm, yes, your example certainly sounds nasty... Perhaps if the replacement had been sought earlier things might have run better. It sounds as if the race wasn't under attack when it dropped. :/ Certainly quite rude of the other player to not even communicate with you (not even a 'welcome to the game') Even so, I don't see direct host intervention as appropriate, but thats just my opinion.
|
C'mon... what did you want...? Welcome to the game! I'm planning on attacking you next turn, but still wanted to extend my greetings!!
More often than not, things aren't going really well in the game when people decide to stop turning in...
Replacements should be ready for anything.. this is Stars!, not a tea party. And if a newbie joins an experienced game, the better player does not need to feel obligated to "take it easy on the n00b"
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Thu, 16 March 2006 11:15 |
|
| mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Ptolemy wrote on Thu, 16 March 2006 04:12 |
Aww now Ash,
ain't you being just a little too hard?
|
I think not. Stars! is a war game.
Sometimes I take on lost cause races, just to get squished. I have always tried to negotiate or fight my way out of getting eliminated, but I have never expected the party to stop. That's just rude and self centered. Don't wreak the party. Put on your party hat, and grin.
Also, i've learned more getting squished, then dominating. Something to think about, for all those who drop at the first hint of trouble.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Thu, 16 March 2006 18:15 |
|
|
|
Yeah, I love getting squished! I'd never have seriously considered Jihad DDs as a viable option, until someone took my HW out very early with a surprise attack of about 80 of them... They were pretty easy to kill a few years later, but my HW was levelled in the meantime...
That game is also an example of stepping on a replacement... The CA -f race that killed my HW went into total war against me, and wiped out about 6 developed worlds. I fought it to a standstill, crippling my economy growth in to rush tech (IS race, emptied all my orbiting freighter fleets way too early, instead of growing.) Once I out-teched him I built a large number of Juggernaught BBs (to fight w14 beam cruisers) and when these started arriving at his (my) worlds he dropped. This may have been a coincidence - his situation was far from hopeless, but the war had clearly turned. About 7 or 8 missed turns later a replacement was brought in and we were all told by the host that we couldn't attack the race for a number of years. Naturally I was not too impressed by this, since I'd sacrificed so much to get the upper hand in the first place, and had LFs overflowing with pop orbiting his worlds, which did not even have enough fuel to make it back safely to my worlds. I begrudgingly acceded to the request (not very graciously though) and accepted the 2 year ceasefire. The replacement only uploaded one turn. I guess the situation was even worse for that race than I had suspected.
I guess the big problem in that particular case was that too long was allowed to pass before a replacement was sought. If one had been found after, say 3 or 4 missed gens, then the incoming player would've had more of an opportunity to recover and a host-enforced-ceasefire would have been irrelevant.
If the dropping player had just warned us first  then it could've been the optimal NO missed gens... (I was worried for the player's safety for a while, since he dropped so suddenly, but he's popped up again, to my relief.)
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Thu, 16 March 2006 21:01 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Thu, 16 March 2006 17:15 |
Yeah, I love getting squished! I'd never have seriously considered Jihad DDs as a viable option, until someone took my HW out very early with a surprise attack of about 80 of them...
|
Yea! Someone agrees with me.
| Quote: |
I fought it to a standstill, crippling my economy growth in to rush tech.... when these started arriving at his (my) worlds he dropped. This may have been a coincidence
|
Good job! I hope you learned a lot of delaying tactics while fighting back from the brink of destruction.
| Quote: |
About 7 or 8 missed turns later a replacement was brought in and we were all told by the host that we couldn't attack the race for a number of years.
|
Now, that is just wrong. The host should have jumped in earlier than that, to find out why the person was skipping turns, and to get a replacement. Then he compounded the error, by placing restrictions on you as the *attacking* player...really made your position more vulnerable. You paid your dues, you deserved a free hand at aquiring worlds of your enemy.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Thu, 16 March 2006 21:56 |
|
|
|
Well, I wasn't all that hard up though by the time the restriction was applied, although I think there was one world it prevented me from attack that was actually originally mine, lol... It certainly all worked out in the end - despite my worries... Got the worlds, won the game.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Fri, 17 March 2006 03:27 |
|
| NingunOtro |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 105
Registered: September 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium | |
|
Well, it was not written to fit in this thread directly, so then maybe the cryptic thing about it is that it needs to be read from a different viewpoint than you assume if you think it logically fits in the thought process of this one thread.
My point of view is the caring players one, being fresh startup or replacement. I argue about the need of honest skill assessment in order not to end up being disruptive to the game development. Of course game mechanics, luck and slight differences in skills make us perform more or less in any given setting, but overall compatibility makes progress balanced and extends game life.
In a six player setup as this one, everyone is grossly supposed to grab 16,5% of avialable space and oppose some sort of resistance if being forced to do with less. This is also why at universe setup you roughly estimate how many planets should statistically be available for every player, as a gross rule of thumb.
Any player that grossly overestimated his capacity to compete at a given skill level, will inmediately benefit his neighbors and give them an unfair advantage at the expense of those further away who can not take a fair share of that relatively cheap resource and territory grabbing. Those that face fair pressure at their borders are at an uncalled for disadvantage against those that get the unexpected freeride into almost abandoned territory.
Underestimating has the opposite effect, neighbors get less than their expected share of territory, while the benefits, other than to the underestimating player, go to those who have the luck of not being inmediate neighbors.
You are wrong assuming I blame any host for allowing a too wide fork of player skills in, because there is no way a host can know everyones average skill level without active "scouting" of signups. Other than clearly stating what range of players you want, it is up to the players themselves to decide if they fit.
But you as a host, and here it is I talk about both starting and replacement players from the point of view of this thread, have a responsibility towards the game you host.
Two issues need to be adressed:
1) Whether players that apply have the required skill level. You know what you ask for, but those that apply can only grossly estimate if they will fit. They might have no clue about their real skill level, because there is no objective scale they can calibrate against (other than the fairly inaccurate 24kby2440 rule).
2) The commitment of applying players to ethic rules of fair play that will make the game enjoyable for all until the very end. You can not leave this judgement in the applying players hands. Far too often they only care for their own fun and are willing to apply to more than one game with the intention to play only the one where their luck is best and quickdrop out of the others as planned. Far too often they do not care to play along if they do not have acces to competitive positions without putting the necessary effort to acquire them. They drop searching for easy fun elsewhere, leaving you with a spoiled game without giving a damn.
Lack of skills to be competitive and lack of real commitment to the game are the main reasons why you as a host face dropouts and needs for replacement. Somebody with the right skills and the right commitment will search and instruct a replacement player way before the dropout deadline is reached. In fact, the only news the host should be aware of is a formal communication from the dropout that he has handed his race over to somebody else so player data can be updated on the Autohost game screen.
These are optimal conditions. As a host, you should prepare to deal with far worse situations.
Some preliminary measures:
1) non-playing host or third party screening of submitted races to see if design choices for the pretended game setup fit competitivity desired and skill levels asked for.
All too often dropouts failed these preliminary assumptions, and asking for a replacement player is absurd because nobody is willing to take over a
...
If we were esteemed intelligent 'enough', they would have contacted us.
If we can not find them, either we are not smart enough, or they are smarter at hiding.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Fri, 17 March 2006 09:56 |
|
| BlueTurbit |
 | Lt. Commander
RIP
BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 |
Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002
Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
| m.a@stars wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 03:52 |
I couldn't agree more, as *ALL* the multiplayer games I have been in (AH or outside) have been drastically altered or even wholly ruined by dropouts.  
I don't plan to ever enter another game where I don't trust the level of commitment of at least 80% of the other players. 
So, I support extending player rating to include not only victories-defeats but also dropouts. 
|
 Your problem isn't the games, it's you. I mean just look at the smilies you used: evil, whip, wallbash, mad. All we need here is an attitude adjustment. Love is all you need.
Chillax, take a deep breath, kick back, enjoy, play, it's a game dude, don't take it so serious, have fun, the world won't end if you lose or things don't go perfect in this imperfect world, life goes on, smile, don't worry - be happy
I just want to celebrate another day of living.
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Fri, 17 March 2006 11:24 |
|
| m.a@stars |
 | Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| BlueTurbit wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 15:56 |
Chillax, take a deep breath, kick back, enjoy, play, it's a game dude, don't take it so serious, have fun, the world won't end if you lose or things don't go perfect in this imperfect world, life goes on, smile, don't worry - be happy
|
tell that to the players who lost because I was the quickest to profit from said dropouts. 
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Requesting replacement players |
Fri, 17 March 2006 12:19 |
|
| BlueTurbit |
| Lt. Commander
RIP
BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 |
Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002
Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
| m.a@stars wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 10:24 |
| BlueTurbit wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 15:56 |
Chillax, take a deep breath, kick back, enjoy, play, it's a game dude, don't take it so serious, have fun, the world won't end if you lose or things don't go perfect in this imperfect world, life goes on, smile, don't worry - be happy
|
tell that to the players who lost because I was the quickest to profit from said dropouts.
|
Well, in those cases, go ahead and quote me, twisted. And add: shoot happens, that's the way the cookie crumbles, that's the way the ball bounces, and good times, bad times, you know I've had my share.
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 12 17:42:53 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
