What are you looking for? A feature that prevents users who have CDed in a game from returning to the game?

Doesn't that feature already exist?

There's a feature to disallow picking up a *different* power's CD in a game you either CD'd in or were eliminated from. What Al wants is ability to disallow *anyone* from picking up a CD.

I believe it also doesn't let you back into the same game as the same power once you've been force CD'd by a mod.

I think, based on my understanding of his previous posts.
I don't want to speak for Al out of place, sorry if he feels that way.

Valis,

No, you are correct. I could provide a rationale for this...but justified or not, it would be nice to have. I just got into an argument in a game with one of my friends (and a new player) about this and looking back, it seems like kind of a pointless argument to have.

If open rejoins are welcomed, it should be clear. If rejoins are restricted, that should also be clear. If rejoins are prohibited, it should be prohibited.

I think that given that all of the existing functionality is already extant, it would be a somewhat easier change to implement. Of course, manners dictate that I point out that I'm not willing to spare any of my own time to code this, so it's not quite polite for me to call it an easy change. But it can't be all that hard.

If you're asking for a "once a power has CDed, the position cannot be taken over", it's been discussed before and isn't something that we want to add to the site. We've made a conscious choice to keep the number of available game options down, and since we already get many complaints (valid or not) about people "taking advantage" of CDs, I don't think a "no replacements" mode would be popular.

Keeping the number of game options down is an intentional choice to keep our site accessible, and have the number of new things that existing Diplomacy players need to learn low. Sites like the DP Judges and vDip already well-serve the many options/variants cases. This is a change request that might be more welcomed by the vDip team (I don't know).

If you're asking for a "once you've CDed, you won't be allowed back into the game as the same power", that's a change from the current behaviour that is worth thinking about. As above, I don't think we want to make it an option, so a change would affect all games. It would be a bit more draconian than the current situation, but I think there are good arguments both ways.

In the long term plan, we intend to improve the way that NMRs are handled generally, to prevent positions from being damaged while we wait for new players to replace. See this issue for details:

https://github.com/kestasjk/webDiplomacy/issues/143

----

On the difficulty of changes - most small changes are "not hard", but the testing work (setting up games, making sure that all the previous behaviour and the new behaviour works correctly in a variety of different scenarios) is almost always time consuming.

To get the actual functionality Al wants, a no-replacements feature doesn't seem ideal anyway. You'd want some kind of approval/veto process for CD replacements by existing players. But that's considerably more complicated to code.

@Tin Can,

Thank you for your response. It seems that you have either made a ruling, or are close to reaching a ruling. I appreciate the transparency. Also, your patience and candor in outlining your reasoning has exceeding what might have been asked or expected, even though you and I appear to disagree. You seem to have gone further than that to be complimentary of those aspects of my idea that appeal to you.

I'll concede that the points you've made are consistent with your management guidelines and what I understand of the design principles that steer your decision making.

I was tempted to let it go at that, but there was one facet to your reasoning that did not rest well with me, and I felt a response was merited.
You mentioned that you doubted that the feature that I've proposed would be popular, and I think that this statement flew kind of far from the mark.

Take another feature, for example. The "lookup player" feature. Is that a popular feature? I would have to guess that entire weeks would have gone by without anyone using that feature at all, especially during downturns.

But when that feature is needed, boy is it needed, right? If you needed to find one of your buddies to get in touch with them, you'd be pretty glad to have that feature, right?

Insulin is not, as it stands, a very popular thing for a person to inject, but lo how the people who depend on it are happy to have it!

@Lethologica,

I disagree with pretty much every part of your reasoning. I think this is endemic of a widening split between three main pools of players: purists, classicists and casual gamers.

Part of my rationale for requesting the feature is that so that when persons like yourself choose to (or accidentally) find ourselves gaming together, it will help guide the overall purpose of the game.

I don't think that purists understand that different styles of play than theirs are not only valid, but predate the inception of their gaming style by a matter of decades!

I use the "lookup player" feature almost every day.

"I disagree with pretty much every part of your reasoning."

A neat trick, since I didn't provide many-parted reasoning.

"Part of my rationale for requesting the feature is that so that when persons like yourself choose to (or accidentally) find ourselves gaming together, it will help guide the overall purpose of the game."

That being what?

"I don't think that purists understand that different styles of play than theirs are not only valid, but predate the inception of their gaming style by a matter of decades!"

Since I'm not a 'purist', or much of anything with all of 8 games under my belt, I don't know who you're talking to. Besides, if anything, the purist position is insisting that replacements pollute the game and should be disallowed.

@peterwiggin

/r/exceptionthatprovestherule

@Lethologica,

Please understand that you're not doing a good job of selling your position.

Well, from where I'm sitting, it looks like the status quo is doing pretty well in this thread. So I don't need to do much. I look forward to your explanation of why some games need to be password-free and also impossible to rejoin, though!

Can I get a feature that prohibits Al Swearengen from joining my games?

@Lethologica,

Much improved.

Okay, well I think you and I are defining the situation differently. If I had to guess, I think you're defining this thread as, 'here is a problem that must be addressed.'

Rather, I wast mostly just making a suggestion. I'm friends with a couple of the staff members. If it were an important issue I would have contacted them directly. Mr. Tin Can seems to have done a good job of addressing the issue, at least to my satisfaction.

Do we 'need' to have this feature? I don't think so. I happened to enjoy my game here this afternoon without the feature, and happened to enjoy another game last night also without the feature. Thus it so happens that people are enjoying games here without the proposed feature.

I still think the feature would be helpful, but I'd feel like a pest if I pushed the issue.

Take my friend Bohonk, for example. Bohonk is somewhat of a purist. Is puritanism consistent with spirit of the game? I would argue that it is not, however I can remember times in my life when I have been somewhat of a purist about things, even gaming.

One day I had a moment of clarity. I went to my friend and I asked her if I was being a pill. She disagreed that I was insisting that sometimes it is good to have purists around to prevent standards from slipping. Perhaps she was right. Regardless, this conversation (twenty-five years ago) seems to have allowed me to see both sides of the issue. Even though I dislike perfectionism, it doesn't really seem like an undignified way to be.

And in the case of Bohonk, I'm happy to be friends with him even if he and I disagree about things like this. To me it seems that to have friends, one must be open to compromise. To this I'll add that given the choice of being either popular or being forthright, I'd personally rather be popular.

But let us suppose that Bohonk was trying to arrange a match. Perhaps he might title it "Mr. Purists Perfect Game of Orthodox Perfection." Pretty clear, right? Perhaps he might invite me to that game. Probably I would accept. In such a game I would try to conform to the table rules and to the spirit of the game. Among the best ways to make sure that one is invited back to a party, I have found, is to make sure that one blends in.

When I organize games, they are different. When I ball, I play street ball. Perfection ruins this sort of game. Lopsided games are not only more interesting, when one plays in this style, they are more enjoyable. This is what happened to the field of chess, The Old Masters retired when the game became strictly procedural.

In both cases however, I think that clarity is essential to making sure that people enjoy the matches. You need to remember that I am a veteran of the live game scene. In these games, there is no time to settle arguments about rejoins. Expectations need to be set up front.

I think plenty of the younger players fail to understand that this is what the official rules stipulate, that it needs to be specified ahead of time what needs to happen in the even of player attrition.

In other cases, people will want interlopers to pop into a game at random. One poor fellow in our game earlier found himself verbally abused for popping into the game unbidden. Hadn't he only been trying to help? Again, better communication could have prevented needless conflict.

I'll admit that I find it unhelpful when some players try to present their own preferred style of play as the best style, or worse the only style. Who do they imagine they are fooling with this nonsense?

My interpretation of your initial statement regarding this topic was "we should not implement Al's suggestion at all, since the suggestion cannot be implemented perfectly." What I do not suppose you could have known is that I will admit that I am somewhat sensitive about this, since I work professionally around perfectionists.

Their opinions are irrelevant - the rest of us simply have to wait for them to get tired and go home, so that we can implement the project ourselves using duct tape and spare parts.

As stated, there was no way you could have known this, so it was wrong for me to snap at you.

In summary, I think that it would be nice if we could communicate expectations better up front. Gun boat? Pretty clear expectations. School of War? Pretty clear expectations. Other play variants are less fluidly implemented. An easy area for improvement.

You must also forgive that I didn't realize what a relative newcomer you are to the site, given that you are somewhat of a prominent poster. I had gotten used to the idea of thinking of you as an old hand.

Happy Easter to you and your family.

Yours in the Faith,
Al

@2WL,

Weren't you the staff member who locked my account for successfully deceiving another player in a game?

I promise not to join any of your games, if you'd rather me not join.

...as long as you promise to stop sucking so much dick.

You're not a staff member anymore, are you tough guy?

All,

Vigorous discussion is encouraged, but please be nice to each other.

webDiplomacy Admin

AL I have taken the liberty of adding a feature where you can vote Cancel, Pause, Draw or Troll.

The Troll option allows you to complain your way to a win.

VDip's game creation has a series of options for NMR Policy (how many turns to allow NMR before forcing CD, and how many phase lengths to delay for replacement before continuing in the case of CD). These include "infinity and infinity" for what Al's asking for.

Al, if I were a Freudian (which I'm not, but lets assume so for sake of argument), I'd imply that your "oral fixation" is a defense mechanism to protect your subconscious from feelings of guilt and/or anxiety. When an ego defense mechanism gets out of control or grows out of proportion, obsessions tend to develop. In this case, and in many other cases both before, during, and after my admin tenure, you typically default to a projection of your own perceived unacceptable thoughts, despite the acceptance of a homosexual lifestyle as both mainstream and normal behavior.

I attribute this to a repressed upbringing, likely in a very rigid and conservative household, where masculinity was encouraged and keeping up with the Joneses was held up as virtuous to a fault. When the boy next door became captain of the varsity football team, you likely harbored secret homosexual desires for this boy, probably arising from some public display (unintentional, I'm sure) of his sexuality, such as washing a car without a shirt or eating a delicious hot dog at a summer barbeque. These feelings were kept bottled up, but occasionally they rear their head when you get angry, anxious, or are made to look foolish.

My personal recommendation is to embrace these feelings. WebDip is a very welcoming and accepting community. We love all kinds of users, regardless of behavior, but strongly dislike assholes who detract from our sense of community.

ah 2nd, if you'd only put as much effort into modding and the game as you did into trying to get +1's you'd have been a fantastic admin and a top rate player.

"Keeping the number of game options down is an intentional choice to keep our site accessible"

what about an "advance options" section when creating games?

I use the "lookup player" feature several times a day when a Mafia game is in progress.