[quote]I'll try to salvage what I can and apply what I learned to my next game.[/quote] Which will be a glorious battle in the name of the ToE i assume....(points Doom Ray at head) ;p
I lose no sleep to seth's departure. Everything was in fun and he got no more than he dished out. Geez, if the amount of taunting he recieved was excessive...then KP would have left the forums long ago. I don't think anyone receives as much shit from "us" as the Kzinti do..... As for his remarks of a more personal nature, i can't ban him from this site, but i had my own litte immature victory, i banned him from the ToE site. [img]http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5247/minidevils
Indeed it does. Well...it did change..or i have been into the liqor cabinet and didn't realize....:P
Thanks for the heads up GalenEvil. We hope to have you back in the league soon!!!
Exact-a-mondo DA...give the man a Cigar....
Oh my whole post was with the assumption that you submitted a game in distress as RL had interfered. And then later on once your RL issues were played out and solved you had an opportunity to play a "real" game, not a quick dis-interested game, then we could allow the re-submital. I guess i assumed that this was the case with FB, and i really shouldn't just assume anything. Sorry will post my thoughts better in the future. Edit - Not in the ALTMVL thread, it is long enough, and
[quote]i'm still in favor of teams being able to pick which game will be the submission, including any optimization they might desire.[/quote] Just to highlight the compromise. This, as Dystopic has said, is a good strategy and may be how many teams play. This is fine, the players and captain can all agree what type of games they will play and then the captain has an idea which games to select from his player pool to submit. So as long as this is done before the end o
Another summary, We seem to be all in agreement of point 1. The captains system over the individual system. Point 2 is still up in there air, but perhaps the compromise will gain some following. Point 3. Is a slight restriction reasonable to players?
[quote]There is no reason to be this restrictive. There's no problem playing a small when the round is a medium, there is no problem playing a medium tech win when the round is a medium military victory and once a game has been submitted then there's no restriction at all until the beginning of the next round.[/quote] Quite true, for those that disagree with point 3, does this solution not solve the issue? [quote]After the fact in case of a non-submission I favor the "random" g
[quote]The first question is, would it severely unbalance the game if the planetary surveyor module was available immediately (or at Sensors I) at low cost?[/quote] That was why i thought it might be best to have it later on, but on smaller maps i guess it would not get used at all. Perhaps it's size could be increased so as not to make it too powerful. Perhaps this could be given at sensors 1 and the survey module moved to sensors 2, since anomolies re-spawn now that would not
As for future rounds, it does have some merit, to allow say, 1 re-submital if you manage to do a better game. As always i will go with the majority of the players.
[quote]We should probably have a ruling from Neilo on this and discuss whether this is something we should consider allowing for future rounds.[/quote] Hmmm since we have always followed rules and precedents, i don't think we can allow this. we saw a similar situation in one of the earlier rounds where someone tried to re-submit their game and that wasn't allowed so neither could this. Sorry FB, but barring an overwhelming response in your favor by the players, that above game