Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Two Rooms and a Boom» Forums » Play By Forum

Subject: Alternative for random sends? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Sander Engels
Netherlands
Utrecht
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have read the previous PBF game, and have also read about the controversy of sending random people when no orders are submitted. I completely agree that random sends are bad for the game. On the other hand I also see that waiting for orders is not an option if this takes more than a couple of minutes, otherwise games can last for much longer than intended.

My suggestion (not entirely thought through, just an idea):
* Keep SIC rules, because they are important in case the current leader knows they will not be around for a while.
* In case there are no valid orders from the room leaders, SIC orders are in effect.
* In case neither room leader nor SIC has valid orders submitted (or if there is no SIC and room leader has no orders submitted): the person who is second in votes to become leader and also has sumbitted orders will have their orders executed. You can even extend this if you wish: of all players who have submitted orders, execute the orders of the player with the highest vote count in case neither leader nor SIC has given orders.

Example:
In a room, person X has 6 out of 9 possible votes. Person X is made leader and appoints person Y as SIC. Person Z has 3 votes.

* Orders from person X are valid.
* Orders from person Y are valid if either (a) person X has not submitted orders, or (b) person X has granted person Y the authority to override orders.
* If neither X nor Y has submitted orders, person Z's orders are in effect.

The reasoning is that in most cases (exceptions are always possible), the "followup leader" is of the opposite team as the actual leader. It is therefore in person X's interest to submit orders in time, and it is also in person Z's interest to also submit orders in case there are no other valid orders. This makes sure that, in most cases, the team that does not submit orders is punished to the benefit of the other team.

Any thoughts?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seen wrote:
I have read the previous PBF game, and have also read about the controversy of sending random people when no orders are submitted. I completely agree that random sends are bad for the game. On the other hand I also see that waiting for orders is not an option if this takes more than a couple of minutes, otherwise games can last for much longer than intended.

My suggestion (not entirely thought through, just an idea):
* Keep SIC rules, because they are important in case the current leader knows they will not be around for a while.
* In case there are no valid orders from the room leaders, SIC orders are in effect.
* In case neither room leader nor SIC has valid orders submitted (or if there is no SIC and room leader has no orders submitted): the person who is second in votes to become leader and also has sumbitted orders will have their orders executed. You can even extend this if you wish: of all players who have submitted orders, execute the orders of the player with the highest vote count in case neither leader nor SIC has given orders.

Example:
In a room, person X has 6 out of 9 possible votes. Person X is made leader and appoints person Y as SIC. Person Z has 3 votes.

* Orders from person X are valid.
* Orders from person Y are valid if either (a) person X has not submitted orders, or (b) person X has granted person Y the authority to override orders.
* If neither X nor Y has submitted orders, person Z's orders are in effect.

The reasoning is that in most cases (exceptions are always possible), the "followup leader" is of the opposite team as the actual leader. It is therefore in person X's interest to submit orders in time, and it is also in person Z's interest to also submit orders in case there are no other valid orders. This makes sure that, in most cases, the team that does not submit orders is punished to the benefit of the other team.

Any thoughts?


don't like it at all. i'd rather call the game a forfeit for the team who violated the rules.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lemon
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Who took the Bomp from the Bompalompalomp? Who took the Ram from the Ramalamading dong?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That's a very good punishment for the leader not submitting orders. I think I like it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hypothetically, the red team controls the room and wants to see who the blue team might send to the other room. so the red team votes the blue team into power. the blue team intentionally doesn't give orders and the selections falls back to the red team, defeating the purpose of voting for the blue team in the first place.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nolemonplease wrote:
That's a very good punishment for the leader not submitting orders. I think I like it.


not fair for the rest of the team. apparently some people miss orders for stuff out of their control.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lemon
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Who took the Bomp from the Bompalompalomp? Who took the Ram from the Ramalamading dong?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mfl134 wrote:
hypothetically, the red team controls the room and wants to see who the blue team might send to the other room. so the red team votes the blue team into power. the blue team intentionally doesn't give orders and the selections falls back to the red team, defeating the purpose of voting for the blue team in the first place.

Ugh. You're right, though. This system could start getting played easily.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Neil
United States
San Francisco
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
This is even harsher for the team that doesn't submit orders than the previous rules. Honestly, the only two options are:

1. Allow a little slack for people to submit orders.

2. Send people determined by some other method if orders aren't in, which will inevitably be bad. Hopefully, people learn the hard way.

I think it wouldn't hurt to allow 10 minutes of unofficial dead time between the end of a round and the deadline for orders (in case someone gets unexpectedly elected), but other than that, how much can you do?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
RedScharlach wrote:
This is even harsher for the team that doesn't submit orders than the previous rules. Honestly, the only two options are:

1. Allow a little slack for people to submit orders.

2. Send people determined by some other method if orders aren't in, which will inevitably be bad. Hopefully, people learn the hard way.

I think it wouldn't hurt to allow 10 minutes of unofficial dead time between the end of a round and the deadline for orders (in case someone gets unexpectedly elected), but other than that, how much can you do?


one method would be suspensions for those who violate the rules, but I don't think that is a good answer either.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawna
United States
flag msg tools
also not a robot.
badge
Fun fact: mathematically, it's equally likely to either im- or ex-plode.
Avatar
What about this possibility?
Everyone is encouraged to submit orders. Regardless of if they are leader. Assuming leader and possible SIC has not submitted orders by the deadline, the moderater randomly selects a member from the same team as leader who has submitted orders and those are executed.

I don't think it's right to punish the entire team for one person being absent, especially when it may have been out of that person's control.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawna
United States
flag msg tools
also not a robot.
badge
Fun fact: mathematically, it's equally likely to either im- or ex-plode.
Avatar
I don't think the moderator should post whose orders were executed in case it is not yet public knowledge who is aligned with whom.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Rqthstar
United States
Laurel
Maryland
flag msg tools
Come together, together as one
badge
Perhaps in a perfect world, the ring would be a symbol of happiness
Avatar
mbmb
does anyone know how often random transfers occurred in the last ~38 games...?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dr. Byron Orpheus
United States
Columbus
Ohio
flag msg tools
Master: Necromancer
badge
And mine is to perceive and control the delicate arrangement of the cosmos
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If I had to guess? An average of one random transfer every 3-4 games because some games had the lovely honor of multiple random transfers. shake I don't know.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Contig
United States
flag msg tools
(this is not a hint)
badge
(this is still the old picture and I am too lazy to update it)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think what the last game showed is the punishment shouldn't be harsh. I consider not submitting orders on time a more minor offense than other things that could happen.

First of all, make it clear that you can submit orders early and secretly and change them later, but that the deadlines are tight. If the leader (as well as any second in command) hasn't submitted orders, I agree it should fall to the next player with the most votes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Contig
United States
flag msg tools
(this is not a hint)
badge
(this is still the old picture and I am too lazy to update it)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In addition, the person whose transfers got used would become leader. So if the majority wants to see what the minority would pick, the majority could just vote for the other team to become leader.

Which brings up an interesting note -- the punishment shouldn't be harsh enough that a majority vote for an opposing player who isn't available in order to force that punishment on that player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sander Engels
Netherlands
Utrecht
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It also makes a lot of difference when the random sends take place. If it is the first round, it's still bad, but not nearly as bad as after round 4.

Now that I've thought some more on it, I'm not sure I like my idea from yesterday either. But I thought it would still be good to think and discuss what the options are.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
shawnad2006 wrote:
What about this possibility?
Everyone is encouraged to submit orders. Regardless of if they are leader. Assuming leader and possible SIC has not submitted orders by the deadline, the moderater randomly selects a member from the same team as leader who has submitted orders and those are executed.

I don't think it's right to punish the entire team for one person being absent, especially when it may have been out of that person's control.


that person may not know somebody on their team, so you can't allow that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seriously, the solution is to put in the rules. "It is a violation of the rules if you don't submit conditional orders each day in the event that you are leader. Before your last post of the "day", submit conditional orders to the mod."


I would also note, if you don't feel like you can do this each day, you should probably skip that particular PBF.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent Emme
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Next trip: Ireland!
badge
Phelanpt Feb 11, 2:15 PM: evils have mostly stood by and watch goods fall. except for emme. she's spinning them round and round.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Or just don't ask to be leader.

In my opinion, if you are stepping up to be leader, you are saying you are responsible enough to meet a well-established deadline.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawna
United States
flag msg tools
also not a robot.
badge
Fun fact: mathematically, it's equally likely to either im- or ex-plode.
Avatar
mmazala wrote:
Or just don't ask to be leader.

In my opinion, if you are stepping up to be leader, you are saying you are responsible enough to meet a well-established deadline.


I agree with all this but it doesn't change the fact that things happen...real-life issues arise, people forget, etc. etc.

Yes, it's a violation of the rules to not submit orders in time. But what should be done when it happens anyway? If I wasn't mobile, I'd create a poll. Just wait? Start over? Stick with random transfers? What else?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.