I can't speak for anyone else, but it wouldn't suprise me if players in these paused games use the refusal to unpause as a tactic to frustrate.

This is a fast game yet it has been paused twice, and one player requested that we pause so he could go away for the weekend.

Its not as if we are waiting for the banned player to be replaced.

Italy won't unpause because we wouldn't pause whilst he went away for the weekend, oh and he's being spanked in the game.

People like that spoil online communities!

Barry, if that where true, I'd tell you to suck it up.

If you didn't have the common courtesy to pause for him, why would he have it for you?

I'm sick and tired of all these pauses. Its supposed to be a fast game.

There are 7 in the game and one decided to go off to the mountains for the weekend. Well I say to him suck it up and go into CD if you can't be at the computer within the phase times.

Sure, but now you need something from him.

And you most likely won't get it.

Phase times are known before the game starts, if you don't like it then play a longer phase time.

The game will eventually be unpaused by the mods, and in my opinion there should be some sanctions against players who deliberately try to spoil the game for others.

Bet he wouldn't be leaving it paused if he had 10 supply centres instead of the 2 he has!

Barry:

In my book, when you don't pause a game when a player needs it, you are spoiling the game for others.

If there were a sanction, both him and the players who refused to pause ahouls receive it.

'should' receive it.

Not to mention this is a game where patience plays a vital role in long term and committed games. I would love a 72 hour phase game with high end people and the patience to analyze each move and move with intent. If I went away for the weekend in a 72 hour game I would want the courtesy to pause. Even the longest setting doesn't cover individual timelines.

It should be a democracy. When he wanted to go away for the weekend it was 1 for and 6 against.

When the game was paused (for no good reason apart from the default response of the software to a banned player) the votes are 7 for and 1 against.

At the end of the day this is a free site where you play for fun and kudos. The game in question is a 12 hour/149 ppss game. If you 'decide' you want to take a nice little trip to the mountains its no hardship to give up the small amount of points on offer.

Its just plain selfish to expect the other 6 players to adjust the game around you. If it was a 72 hour game or anything close to that then I might have considered the pause, but in this case he was asking for a pause of 6 or more phases.

Excuse my language, but thast just taking the piss!

should have been 6 for 1 against!

I am in the game as well, and I don't want to comment on it because I think it is improper to speak about ongoing games. If I did/could comment on it, I would say a lot.

I would like to ask a mod to unpause the game, though. Thank you.

I didn't want to comment either until he put the sarcastic comment about the delayed pause.

He has operned the door, not me.

I believe this game is called "Diplomacy". In other words, you have to give to gain. If I was in your game, I would do my best to destroy you, and never deal with you, because your action in the pause votes proves you're not even reliable enough there, so would make a terrible ally.

@OMGNSO: who are you directing that at?

If you are directing it at me the can I point out that there are 7 players in the game and I am part of the 6 player majority.

Barry, I think you need to relax.

to get back on topic, Chrisp can you unpause the game please, its clear that the remaining player will not unpause on his own

I'll unpause it because it was paused simply because a player who was already eliminated was banned. The pause shouldn't have happened in the first time.

In the future, votes require more than the majority, they require unanimity. Abstention is equivalent to a veto.

Unpaused.

Thanks chris.

I do think that there is a fundamental error in the software though. Firstly that a game gets paused even if the reason for the pause does not affect that particular game. And secondly that someone can use the vote tactically.

I would suggest that the following change is made. If a game is paused, then a unanimous vote is required for 2 complete phases. After that, a sliding scale of majority could be used. For example, 3-4 phases would require a 75% vote, 5-6 a 50% vote etc.

Totally disagree. If a game is paused it is paused and can be dealt with. Suppose I said I was going away for a week and you generously agreed to pause. Then, after 2 days it would be possible to resume without my vote, despite me telling you I was away and agreeing it.
I do think it would be nice to have draws for a certain length of time, but just how this is implemented still needs to be thought through

I think that if you join a game with a certain phase length then you should commit to it.

Obviously there will be times when something unforseen happens, which is why I suggested the 100% vote for 2 phases.

Giving 2 phases would allow you to be AFK for upto 3 full turns.

Barry

if your were playing FTF with your friends on 15 minutes turns, and one of them got an urgent call which meant he would be away for an hour, would you wait? Especially if you knew it would be an hour, no more?

The same principal applies here - it's a game, and real life gets in the way sometimes. Pause ettiquette is part and parcel of the game.