what zultar said is correct. When you join a game, the previous user information is gone. There is no history of who played beforehand, so it is as if you were in it from the start.

Yes, something probably should be done to keep the history, and people should be given some weight when joining a game.

There is another edge to this sword, though. I've seen games where people jump in at a critical time in a position to be a part of a 3-way draw with 1 SC in a game with people with great GR. That really grinds my gears.

I remember fortnox being furious when I joined the 1 unit Russia to be part of the stalemate line in this high bet and high rated game :D :D

gameID=71751

It was fun doing it, of course I didn't know it effects my GR in the way above, otherwise I wouldn't have done that.

Thanks, just to clarify tho, what was the end result of your GR after joining that game did it go down because you only got a survive?

Or wait, you were defeated, why DID you join that game? Didnt it just increase the pot?

haha FK why would that piss you off? If a slot is available, I would hope somebody fills it - always. We should reward those who join games like that.

Leonidas, I joined it for fun :) It cost me 159 , but it was fun. Also, I wanted to tech a lesson to everyone that abandoned units can wake up anytime. Players usually forget about the simple fact anyone might join any time. I knew I will be defeted, but there was a thin chance of being part of a 4-way draw, making the risk:pay-off ratio 1:10. I simply took the risk :)

I agree with YJ, if a strong position CDs, the other members of that alliance are partially responsible for that broken down alliance and must bare the consequence of a new regime taking over, if the remaining members of a CDed alliance are vulnerable to a new player and get stabbed it's no one's fault but there own...

I see, fair enough, I bet your a good roulette player as well! :)

I hate roulette, pure chances, no need to think at all. All that said, I played once, and I made +70 euros with 5 euro bets. But all that happend in "THE Casino" of Monaco. I guess, it's understandable I didn't want to miss that one :)

"Also, I wanted to tech a lesson to everyone that abandoned units can wake up anytime. Players usually forget about the simple fact anyone might join any time."

Actually, roka, we had agreed to leave that unit in place so that we could see who would join such a high stakes game and resign from it, not having the decency to let anyone know why. We did that on purpose so that we could see their identity and avoid them in the future from high stakes games or understand why they abandoned the game in such an unclassy way.

I say we because I was the sitter for jmeyersd for quite a few years in that game.

None of the players in that game needed to be taught a lesson by you that "units can wake up".

Sarg:
1st) it was an anonymous game, it couldn't be seen from the outside, who are participating, whether they need a lesson or not.

2nd) whatever you agreed is not my business. The rules are above your agreements. Making moves for reasons outside the game is against the rules. If you didn't destroy that unit to avoid player in the future, then you were cheating, and breaking the rules, since it's an outside reason.

3rd) if you had destroyed, you should have seen the player anyway

4) All the above said, it seems to me exactly it was a lesson you all needed, to not to make such agreements.

Sorry about ruining the game, or your objectives, but I have my own agenda, which is also about having fair and good games on this site, but in my view my joining helped ourselves in going forward on that path.

I think he's right, Sarg :(

I don't think he's right at all, YJ.

Roka:

Your '1st Point' does not really add up - it was a high stakes game of 5000 +. One would (and should, quite frankly) assume that people playing in such a high stakes game would not be the kind of players that need to be taught a lesson by rokakoma.

As for your '2nd point' - well, I think this undoes your argument all together. If you do not think the players in the game should have agreed to keep the resigned player active because it was a decision outside of the game itself - then your decision to enter the game "to teach us a lesson" is equally cheating. "To teach a lesson" is not an in-game reason.

You explicitly said that you joined because: "I wanted to tech a lesson to everyone that abandoned units can wake up anytime. Players usually forget about the simple fact" - that is as much, if not more, outside of the game then the decision we made as players directly affected by that person's CD.

I agree, I cheated the very same way, let's cancel that game and gimme back my 159 :D And we all have learned sg. today, and a lesson about how to teach lessons :D

For the purpose of those who might make more of this specific discussion than need be, I shall copy and paste two private messages between me and roka sent in the past 10 minutes:

rokakoma to Sargmacher
05:54 PM
I hope you don't take my comments offensive, it's not meant to be. I respect you as a player, as a member of this site. Despite all of that, I can be mean sometimes, pls don't take it personally, whoever had written those lines in the forum, I would have answered the very same, maybe even worse :) if it's not you :)

Sargmacher to rokakoma
05:55 PM
You sent: No, I don't think anything bad at all! I just wanted to state my side of the reasons why I don't think players should always do that - and why in that situation we were a little bit annoyed. That's all.

I respect you as a player too :)

well I don't know the specific details at all, Sarg, I just don't see why anybody would ever take issue with somebody joining a game to replace a CD. Just because it "screws up set plans" isn't really a legit excuse. But I don't know all the pieces to the puzzle so forgive me if I'm not understanding.

As far as the GR piece is concerned, I am in favor of decreasing the GR buy-in to take over CD positions, but we would then need to record the original players, which the system does not do at the moment. Until the system records those info, there isn't a way to calculate the GR differently.
I am currently advocating for a 1/2 GR buy-in for replacements. This significantly decreases how much GR you will lose, increases how much GR you may gain, and keeps you honest since you do still have something to lose by joining CD positions. I think this will allow people to take a bit more risk with CD games. We are not at the point where this is a viable component though.

@zultar:
If I CD in a game where I'm going to lose, and someone takes over, than I can avoid a GR downgrade? That's not good.

@Sarg:

I just spoke to Vaftrudner, as you know he has a copy of WD database. He can look up who the original player was in a CDed game. We tried it on one of my previous game, gameID=48938, where somebody took over england, as you can see it from the lower bet size, and Vaft could look up who the original player was.

Even though it raises privacy questions, so I might suggest before making such inqueries to Vaft, or anyone, moderators should decide on the practice how such inqueries should be handled, if the should be handled at all.
That would also put an end to your arguments :), if such inqueries will be met. My suggestion is every such inquery regarding original players should be answered, since players would join with bigger responsibilities in the future.

Since it wasn't a practice until now, I would suggest, such inqueries should be answered only on future games, when it's published, such action is possible.

Also, we found a bug with Vaft in the database, gameID is stored in a 2 bytes integer, so any game having ID bigger then 65536 is lost currently. He will notice kestas, and will be solved hopefully. So he couldn't look up, who the original player was in our game, mentioned above.

I want to clarify that I was only testing methods of gathering data, and rokakoma is teaching me SQL. I do NOT intend to actually look up private data from games. I was only testing whether or not I could see if a CD country had been taken over or not. Please do not ask me about games. That is mod business, not mine. The purpose of granting me access to the database is statistics. I'm not going to interfere with how the mods conduct their business.

@rokakoma, I agree with you man. That's why I am advocating that we keep a record of everyone who has played in a game, but the system does not do that at this point.
Vaft CANNOT look up who the original player was (unless he has a different system file than the ones Alderian and I get). He can only see who the final English player is. Once again, due to the system.

Ok, I've been told that I am wrong regarding the record of people who CDed.
Just to be clear, we are not at all ready to talk about doing something different with GR for CDed positions. Please PM me if you have any more questions.

The unit was in a key spot and was going to end up helping us force a draw. When rako took it over, I was livid. It was basically jumping into a draw. Like an auto win (with a monster pot). I had been working on turkey and austria to try to slip into war to maintain myself in the draw, but it broke down because A/T both knew they could hold the russian and with the CD, it was basically a 3-way.

I was upset that rako did no work to get a part of the draw. So I worked with all 3 of them to make sure warsaw was removed with the draw line in place.

Now, I feel it necessary to say that had rako been a part of the draw, I'd be equally as upset as I was when I first found out, but would in no way bring it up to the admins/mods. It is a foundational flaw in the system and rules and no easy way to remove it. It leaves a crappy taste in your mouth, but it is a legal maneuver.