That Whole, "Skip a turn, get more men" Thing...

[Slip_Kid]

So What's the point? Doesn't it just cause needless conflict if someone misses a turn? All you hear after that is how terrible you are because you MUST just be trying to rack up armies. I guess I'm just asking why the administration has that feature in the game.

Any insight would be appriciated. I'm just a dumb noob.

[Timminz]

because sometimes people legitimately can't take their turn, and anything less would be unfair to the vast majority who only miss turns occaisionally, and by mistake. Just be thankful you weren't around when people got to deploy all their deferred armies BEFORE they attacked.

[Ditocoaf]

Yeah... since these are only armies you'd be getting anyway, there's no harm. You should pretend that they are still playing, and just building up those armies--better attack now, while you can! In fact, if you destroy a bonus, you're doing double damage, since if they had collected those armies instead of missing the turn, they would have had an extra turn with that bonus.

So missing a turn hardly is an advantage. In fact, the deferred armies don't completely make up what you lose by missing a turn.

[kerntheconkerer]

Yeah... since these are only armies you'd be getting anyway, there's no harm. You should pretend that they are still playing, and just building up those armies--better attack now, while you can! In fact, if you destroy a bonus, you're doing double damage, since if they had collected those armies instead of missing the turn, they would have had an extra turn with that bonus.

So missing a turn hardly is an advantage. In fact, the deferred armies don't completely make up what you lose by missing a turn.

not necessarily, but it can change the game. Take for example someone securing a bonus then missing a turn. They miss another turn...the opponents assure they're gonna deadbeat and then play at the last second...throw everyone off, as well as be cheap.

[oVo]

The trick is... kill their bonus before they return. Ha Ha Ha frivolous fun ensues.
Best practical joke ever,

[Timminz]

The trick is... kill their bonus before they return. Ha Ha Ha frivolous fun ensues.
Best practical joke ever,

Very true. Honestly, sometimes, it can be hard to do, if they're really strong or you get really bad dice, but if they're that strong and/or your dice are that bad, they still would have done more damage having not missed the turn(s)

[Elijah S]

The deferred army change was a step in the right direction, but, as someone who is currently in a game where another player skipped a turn on purpose, knowing that no one was in a position to break his bonuses, I think even getting deferred armies should be changed to getting nothing from the turn(s) you miss.
My comparison is easy...
Let's say you're a tennis player and you become too sick to participate in a tournament.
Do the organizers schedule a "make-up" game? -No.

I fully appreciate that there are valid, understandable reasons a player may miss turns, but coming back to get deferred armies is a little too generous, and this tactic has become methodical by many players... Perhaps even moreso in team games, when, after missing 3 turns, the teammate acquires his partners armies, often placing him in immediate possession of a bonus without having to even take out the dead-beating partner's armies.

There is also the option of allowing another player or friend to make moves for you.

This granting of deferred armies rule should be changed in order to stop rewarding, or overextending a degree of "compassion" to players who miss turns, whether or not their reasons are valid.

[detlef]

Yeah... since these are only armies you'd be getting anyway, there's no harm. You should pretend that they are still playing, and just building up those armies--better attack now, while you can! In fact, if you destroy a bonus, you're doing double damage, since if they had collected those armies instead of missing the turn, they would have had an extra turn with that bonus.

So missing a turn hardly is an advantage. In fact, the deferred armies don't completely make up what you lose by missing a turn.

not necessarily, but it can change the game. Take for example someone securing a bonus then missing a turn. They miss another turn...the opponents assure they're gonna deadbeat and then play at the last second...throw everyone off, as well as be cheap.

Whenever I'm in a game where somebody is about to miss their 2nd turn in a row, I usually suggest to the board that, if they do, we all observe a one turn cease and simply build. If their armies go neutral, certain players are bound to benefit more than others. This allows everyone to set themselves up a bit for that possibility without the risk of attack from another player and, more importantly, doesn't allow the player missing a turn to benefit at all from that.

If they continue to play just often enough to not get booted but continue to miss turns, I think the board should just turn on them and knock them out of the game.

Honestly, I think deadbeating gets a bad rap compared to someone who just keeps missing turns but not to the extent that they ever get kicked out. It is understandable if something comes up and you are unable to continue to make your turns. If you just apologize and announce that you're going to deadbeat, the other players can plan accordingly and get on with the game. This is vastly superior to dragging the thing on by missing two, then taking one, then missing two, etc.

[gdeangel]

Whenever I'm in a game where somebody is about to miss their 2nd turn in a row, I usually suggest to the board that, if they do, we all observe a one turn cease and simply build. If their armies go neutral, certain players are bound to benefit more than others. This allows everyone to set themselves up a bit for that possibility without the risk of attack from another player and, more importantly, doesn't allow the player missing a turn to benefit at all from that.

If they continue to play just often enough to not get booted but continue to miss turns, I think the board should just turn on them and knock them out of the game.

Honestly, I think deadbeating gets a bad rap compared to someone who just keeps missing turns but not to the extent that they ever get kicked out. It is understandable if something comes up and you are unable to continue to make your turns. If you just apologize and announce that you're going to deadbeat, the other players can plan accordingly and get on with the game. This is vastly superior to dragging the thing on by missing two, then taking one, then missing two, etc.

I agree with you entirely and I like you idea for the 1 round cease fire... or if it's flat rate cards, let everyone take a "1" so you all get extra cards and the deadbeat will be at even more disadvantage.

I've only had a habitual deadbeat in one game, but it would be nice that you get booted if you either miss, say, 3 consecutive or some total non-consecutive (I'm thinking 4-5 is the right number).

[detlef]

Whenever I'm in a game where somebody is about to miss their 2nd turn in a row, I usually suggest to the board that, if they do, we all observe a one turn cease and simply build. If their armies go neutral, certain players are bound to benefit more than others. This allows everyone to set themselves up a bit for that possibility without the risk of attack from another player and, more importantly, doesn't allow the player missing a turn to benefit at all from that.

If they continue to play just often enough to not get booted but continue to miss turns, I think the board should just turn on them and knock them out of the game.

Honestly, I think deadbeating gets a bad rap compared to someone who just keeps missing turns but not to the extent that they ever get kicked out. It is understandable if something comes up and you are unable to continue to make your turns. If you just apologize and announce that you're going to deadbeat, the other players can plan accordingly and get on with the game. This is vastly superior to dragging the thing on by missing two, then taking one, then missing two, etc.

I agree with you entirely and I like you idea for the 1 round cease fire... or if it's flat rate cards, let everyone take a "1" so you all get extra cards and the deadbeat will be at even more disadvantage.

I've only had a habitual deadbeat in one game, but it would be nice that you get booted if you either miss, say, 3 consecutive or some total non-consecutive (I'm thinking 4-5 is the right number).

I would propose a floating ratio. For instance, if during any stretch of 5 turns, you miss 4, you're out. Something like that. An overall total wouldn't work for really long games. I mean, how many turns would you need to miss in a 80 round game? Five? Even if they're really spread out? That could be a bit severe. However, if you miss a bunch in a row, that's another thing entirely.

[gdeangel]

Good God Man... 80 rounds! I've played one game that took 2+ weeks, and that was so long everyone started to lose interest... and even that went only about 16 rounds. How many 80 round games are people playing??

But regardless, other than trying to figure out on the fly whether missing a turn is going to push you over the DQ edge, I don't see any reason why total miss turns woudln't work out as be higher for longer games... makes sense to me. Only wrinkle would be if you had someone miss, say, 5 turns in the first 10 rounds and get DQ'd, but then the game goes 80 rounds and everybody else misses 20 rounds but doesn't get DQ'd... if I were the first guy I'd be a little anoyed.

[wicked]

Hey guys, this has already previously been discussed at length and a decision reached by the community to have it how we have it now. This is a casual game site, and as such people will occassionally miss turns. There's no advantage to doing so, and everyone should be fully aware of the deferred men their opponent may receive. If you want to risk it and assume that person is never coming back, then that's just it, a risk, part of the game. I don't see this changing anytime soon, if at all, since it was just recently changed to what we have now, which many think is much fairer than what we had previously.

[detlef]

Hey guys, this has already previously been discussed at length and a decision reached by the community to have it how we have it now. This is a casual game site, and as such people will occassionally miss turns. There's no advantage to doing so, and everyone should be fully aware of the deferred men their opponent may receive. If you want to risk it and assume that person is never coming back, then that's just it, a risk, part of the game. I don't see this changing anytime soon, if at all, since it was just recently changed to what we have now, which many think is much fairer than what we had previously.

Believe me, I very much approve of the new way it is done and am more than happy to enforce my version of what should happen to players who habitually miss turns in the very, very infrequent instances where I'm forced to deal with them.

Sorry to help sidetrack the discussion.

[detlef]

Good God Man... 80 rounds! I've played one game that took 2+ weeks, and that was so long everyone started to lose interest... and even that went only about 16 rounds. How many 80 round games are people playing??

I currently have two games in the high 70s, and one that is way beyond that but in all fairness, they're all no-cards and one of them has slipped into a build/stalemate mode.

I did recently finish a flat rate game that took 121 rounds and people attacked each other every turn.

I can also recall plenty of other long games.

[owenshooter]

I don't see this changing anytime soon, if at all, since it was just recently changed to what we have now, which many think is much fairer than what we had previously.

i don't think anyone was asking for a change. he is a new guy and was wondering why it was as it is. and since he probably doesn't know about the search features of the forum, people were kind enough to answer and give some insight. jeez... go easy on the noobs!! you vanish for a few days, all is nice and quiet, and then you come in trying to stir us all up (:-^ )...-0

[wicked]

And who said I was referring to the OP? Geez, I take a break for a few days and you forget how to read.

[jangler3]

The whole deferred army thing is a joke. I'm playing a game now, 5rd, guy missed a turn comes back with 32 armies and took over the whole map, almost. Not very fair to the people who are there every round loosing troops. As far as I'm concerned it's legal cheating. And I thought CC didn't like Cheaters!

[Thezzaruz]

I'm playing a game now, 5rd, guy missed a turn comes back with 32 armies and took over the whole map, almost.

If he gets 32 armies by round five (while having missed one) then the rest of you fecked up.



In general I do think that if you are ignoring a player after the first turn he misses then you are naive, if you get surprised (and crushed) by him coming back and continuing the game then you need to rethink your tactics. The only issue I have with players deadbeating turns is that it slows the game down, anything else is fair play.

[detlef]

I'm playing a game now, 5rd, guy missed a turn comes back with 32 armies and took over the whole map, almost.

If he gets 32 armies by round five (while having missed one) then the rest of you fecked up.



In general I do think that if you are ignoring a player after the first turn he misses then you are naive, if you get surprised (and crushed) by him coming back and continuing the game then you need to rethink your tactics. The only issue I have with players deadbeating turns is that it slows the game down, anything else is fair play.

To a degree you are correct. However, as others have mentioned, you do run the risk of wasting attacks on a player who's going to end up deadbeating out of the game. Then won't you feel stupid. What could have been a nice stack of neutrals on one of your borders is now no longer there at the expense of your armies.

The uncertainty of what is going to happen is the hard part and, short of my suggestion that everyone just sort of chill for a round while we wait and see what's going on, there's not much else to do rather than having the board equally gang up on the guy (which is a bit severe unless they continue to miss turns but not the extent that they get kicked out (say 4 of 5 or something).

[jangler3]

If he gets 32 armies by round five (while having missed one) then the rest of you fecked up.
[/quote]
Believe me. If I could have gotten to him I would have tried.

I think the hard part is finding out who is legitimately missing and who is doing it to gain an advantage. It is amazing how many people starting having CPU problems when Deferred Armies started. I think you should get your armies, just not on the next turn. That way you get penalized for missing.

[brandoncfi]

Yeah... since these are only armies you'd be getting anyway, there's no harm. You should pretend that they are still playing, and just building up those armies--better attack now, while you can! In fact, if you destroy a bonus, you're doing double damage, since if they had collected those armies instead of missing the turn, they would have had an extra turn with that bonus.

So missing a turn hardly is an advantage. In fact, the deferred armies don't completely make up what you lose by missing a turn.

not necessarily, but it can change the game. Take for example someone securing a bonus then missing a turn. They miss another turn...the opponents assure they're gonna deadbeat and then play at the last second...throw everyone off, as well as be cheap.

Never assume anything and you'll be ok

[gdeangel]

The problem is that when you've got somebody who is missing a turn whose not the leader, that frees up the troop leader take out any units of the deadbeater that threaten them, and then pound on everybody else. On the other hand, the guys getting pounded who are trying to recover can't afford to waste troops on the deadbeater, so, other than units they have that threaten the leader, or a single bonus block position, they basically get ignored... every one but them commits to the front, that is assuming they can't work out a deal to gang on the deadbeater, or have a temporary cease fire...

And then comes the oportunistic 3rd move with the deferred armies, the person will come back on turn 3 and, here's where you tell the honorable players who accidentally deadbeat and aren't looking for advantage from the other ones - do they try to go after the weak player ... for cards, or cheap points in terminator... or just for kicks ... or do they take on the leader.

You could have a rule that if you missed two turns, you can't get any cards in a take-out, and also don't get any points in terminator, until you've actually played some minimum number of consecutive turns... would that be too complicated??? Or that your deferred armies will be doled out over the next three consecutive turns, so that if you again deadbeat, you might even lose them the same as if you failed to end your turn within 1 hr...