[Rules] How to kick cheaters out of active games

[Fuzzylogic99]

sure he can and prob will

[karelpietertje]

Thanks for your replies all!

Well I was in a dubs with Scarlet. All teams were down to one player and pretty even. She got kicked. My view is I should have gotten the troops instead of them going neutral seeing how it was a team game.

Yes, the going neutral wasn't the best at all because it really fudged the teammates over.
The way things are now, you got her troops right? As if she instantly deadbeated. problem with that though, is that bonuses can get combined. So the way things are now, depending on the situation, either team can get fudged over by a kicked teammember.

Basically with this suggestion you're trying to preserve the game the way it was before the player got banned.

What if they were busted with one another?

I do love the idea though, Misser Kazoo

Ah, an issue. well, I suppose if all teammates are busted they just forfeit the game?

but yeah, I see there are some difficulties with the plan:

Points of discussion: (will add these to opening post too)

• What happens if all players are banned together?
  
• Should they simply lose the game?
• What happens if teamplayer B is eliminated and player A is the only surviving teamplayer but gets kicked?
  
• Does player B still get control of player A? This would mean he gets back in the game... possible friction with the 4 game rule for freemium players.
• Should the way people deadbeat be considered? Lack seems to make the rules for banning and deadbeating the same.
  
• Personally I think there's a difference because deadbeating happens in 3 rounds and can be calculated by both opponents and teammates, unlike a ban, which happens instantaneous.

Of course, we are talking about something that only happens incidentally.

interesting idea but I don't see Lacks going for it.

Indeed, that's why we need to come up with a plan that covers all possible situations, so lackattack only has to execute our wishes without much thinking.

Discuss!

[pistebasher]

Yes - I fully agree with this idea

[ManBungalow]

I agree. They should still have separate turns. Great idea.

Implementation:

I think it should just change the kicked player to the next player on the team. So in the example game, karelpieterje would be listed as both players on team 2. No need to list in brackets the kicked player's name, as they are no longer part of the game.

To me, this all sounds like the kind of update that would follow 1 vs 1 team games.
If player 2 is busted then player 1 (on the same team) would just take both turns.

[AAFitz]

absoulutely perfect idea. Im sure the only problem is that it would take some creativity to implement. Ideally, partner could just assume the other color, but almost sure that would cause problems....such as AAFitz eliminates AAFitz from game...AAfitz conqured AAFitz on AA From AB (this is possible on two maps technically)

Other than the programming end of it...it its just perfect...and I imagine it is something lack knew at the time too..but probably couldnt implement it easily.

[tdans]

i like it

[TheForgivenOne]

Question, What would happen in Freestyle Team games?

Say, You're in a Quads Game. Player A B C D. Player D is kicked for violating the rules, and he had a bonus at the time. So Since Player A was the next "player" in line, he would take over Player D. Well, now you have a bit of a problem. Say you wanted to ensure you got the troops for the bonus , in case someone else is waiting to take the bonus away. But since Player A comes before Player D in the order, If you hit "Start your turn" it would play Player A first. Well, how would you play Player D before player A? And what would happen if you wanted to start both since they both have a bonus?

I personally love the idea

[eddie2]

instead of this why not let them put a reserve in to replace them

[darth emperor]

I love this idea.Brilliant

As for the 4 limit games of fremium I dont think it will be much a deal...I doubt that he can get 20 games because all his mates deabeated or got kicked... also you could make it as a new tab next to games...so wont have problems with the 4 limit games...

Question, What would happen in Freestyle Team games?

Say, You're in a Quads Game. Player A B C D. Player D is kicked for violating the rules, and he had a bonus at the time. So Since Player A was the next "player" in line, he would take over Player D. Well, now you have a bit of a problem. Say you wanted to ensure you got the troops for the bonus , in case someone else is waiting to take the bonus away. But since Player A comes before Player D in the order, If you hit "Start your turn" it would play Player A first. Well, how would you play Player D before player A? And what would happen if you wanted to start both since they both have a bonus?

I personally love the idea

Well,that a good question but I think the best one is that you have the game listed twice one for being the player A and for taking the control of player D...
example:
Active games: Game 2(As A) left 21:00h
Game 3 left 5h
Game 1 left 17h
Game 2(As D) left 21:00h
Game 5 left 23:50H



if you want both to start at the same time open 2 windows...true that this can make some abuse...but you can have more abused the way it is currently

[karelpietertje]

Okay, I edited the Specifics and Points of discussion parts in the opening post.
I had a better idea for the way to show that a player was banned, and put some new points of discussion and ideas by myself or others in this thread (thanks for the feedback )

Specifics:

• Let the next player in the team play all the turns.
• For the appointed player it could have a separate "Playing As" page under My Games. (between "Active" and "Awaiting Players"?) Games on this page wouldn't count for the freemium game limit.
• Instead of "<busted player name>" it could just say "<busted player name><team player>"
  
  • So it would say "Captain_Scarlet karelpietertje"

Points of discussion:

• What happens if all players are banned together?
  
  • Should they simply lose the game?
• What happens if teamplayer B is eliminated and player A is the only surviving teamplayer but gets kicked?
  
  • Does player B still get control of player A? This would mean he gets back in the game...
• Should the way people deadbeat be considered? Lack seems to make the rules for banning and deadbeating the same.
  
  • Personally I think there's a difference because deadbeating happens in 3 rounds and can be calculated by both opponents and teammates, unlike a ban, which happens instantaneous.
• What to do in freestyle teamgames where you want to play the two turns simultaneously?
  
  • There would be difference between joining the game from the Active games page and joining it from the Playing As page.
  • Also there would be a 'convert to teammate' button in the game for each ( ) banned teammate when you're playing.

Again, share your opinion

[darth emperor]

Points of discussion:

• What happens if all players are banned together?
  
  • Should they simply lose the game?
  -Well...of course is like all the team has deadbeated... I dont understand why is a point of discussion
• What happens if teamplayer B is eliminated and player A is the only surviving teamplayer but gets kicked?
  
  • Does player B still get control of player A? This would mean he gets back in the game...
  -We can make it like two possibilities
  1.Is like the last player deadbeated so they should loose...If there are not current teammates who are alive to take it,just like now...if you teammate is dead and you deadbeat he wont inherit your troops or spoils(well...I havent seen never this example but I doubt it )
  
  2.Ok,he gets back to the team game...I mean there are teammate that even being death they also see the game post there...share ideas with the team mate to see wich is the best move... so this players we could say that never got out from the game
• Should the way people deadbeat be considered? Lack seems to make the rules for banning and deadbeating the same.
  
  • Personally I think there's a difference because deadbeating happens in 3 rounds and can be calculated by both opponents and teammates, unlike a ban, which happens instantaneous.
  Well...deadbeating...you get kicked(banned) out of the game because you "broke" the rules of that game...so you can consider the samething.But theres a problem...when you get the control of your partner,he just lost 3 rounds...so he could get deffered armies for 3 rounds? in a doubles the maximum would be get deffered troops for 5 rounds(3x5=15) if you are in a triples game you could get deffered for 8 rounds(A deadbeats,B takes the control of A,B deadbeats for himself and there for for A,C get the control of A and B and he misses two consecutive turns,C plays for C and get deferred armies for 2 rounds,C plays for B and gets deffered troops for 5 round(3 lost by B and 2 by C),C play for A and gets deffered armies for 8 rounds(2 lost by C,3 lost by B and 3 lost by A)and if you are in quadruples you could have deffered you could get up to deffered armies for 10 rounds this could make abuse... and now the best idea I got (although a bit unfair)is that no matter how many rounds you loose you only can get upon deffered armies for 2 rounds for each player
  
• What to do in freestyle teamgames where you want to play the two turns simultaneously?
  
  • There would be difference between joining the game from the Active games page and joining it from the Playing As page.
  • Also there would be a 'convert to teammate' button in the game for each ( ) banned teammate when you're playing.

Well the you just should play the first one you think(or open 2 windows)...
Again, share your opinion

Answers in red

[karelpietertje]

thanks darth_emperor
yeah, I guess when they all get banned they should lose the game and points... I was thinking maybe the game shouldn't count, for abusing reasons (have a friend create accounts that are meant to be banned to harvest points or something? would be hard, I know). So I'm not sure.

about the current deadbeating teammates system, you get all their territories and cards, and no deferred armies. however, usually after 3 rounds of missing turns this has no such positiveness like when it happens instantaneously, like a ban.

[darth emperor]

Well...I see it very difficult if that happens...but always after it is implemented if these happens a lot then will change it that part...as simple as that


Yes,I know that the current system you dont have the defferred troops....but because in the current you INHERIT what the player has,and this one you BECOME the other player.So for example in double you are red, and green has lost 3 turns his kicked...and you become red and green,so when you play as green the machine sees that green is playing after losing 3 consecuttive turn so he has to get deffered troops for 3 turns....because who gets it, is the green player,in the actual green changes red,so there's no sense that you get his deferred troops,but if you get the control of that player the normal is that...

[hahaha3hahaha]

-deleted-

[darth emperor]

Bump.


This idea is a nice,without any (or practically any) rejection.There's somethings need to be pulished...but it shouldn't die.

[edwinissweet]

this is old, but very organized, and in its time it had a lot of support. If the support is still there, we can move it along

[king achilles]

Specifics:
* Let the next player in the team play all the turns.

So this idea is basically having 1 or 2 players, suddenly inheriting more than 1 player slot when a teammate gets busted?

Scenario 1
Team
player A
player B - gets busted

Then it will be:
Team1
player A
player A
vs
Opposing Team

Player A gets to play twice in that game since his teammate got busted.

or

Team1
player A
player A
player A
player A
vs
Opposing Team

If player A gets "lucky" he had all his teammates busted.

==========================

Scenario 2
player A
player B - gets busted
player C
player D - gets busted

Then it will be:
Team1
player A
player C
player C
player A
vs
Opposing Team

or

Scenario 3
player A
player B - gets busted
player C

will become:
Team1
player A
player C
player C
vs
Opposing Team

The situation would be, player A gets to play player D's slot since he is the next player to make his turn in the team? player C gets to play player B's slot?

===========================

Scenario 4
player A
player B - gets busted
player C - gets busted
player D

So the encoding will be, player D gets to play player C. How does the encoding go for player B? Will it be player D as well? So it will appear like this?

Team1
player A
player D
player D
player D
vs
Opposing Team

Did I understood this right? If I am, looking at these from some angles, this is still open for a lot of abuse and a lot of complaints coming from the opposing team. Missing turns to get deferred troops will be exploited too much. Think of the possibilities that the remaining player could do if he has 2 or 3 slots to make his turns in a game. Also in freestyle.

[JoshyBoy]

This appears to be long overdue for a "sticky", therefore I have stickied it to hammer out all the details before putting up the final proposal and maybe getting it submitted. Please continue to show your support, and could the person responsible for drafting the final proposal please make themselves known to me?

Cheers, JB

[darth emperor]

Specifics:
* Let the next player in the team play all the turns.

So this idea is basically having 1 or 2 players, suddenly inheriting more than 1 player slot when a teammate gets busted?

To explain better let's put an example Team 1 (red,green,blue) blue gets busted...so actually what happens is that all blue troops become red and it combines...bonuses,spoils,territories armies. This suggestion says that blue still remains in the game (so red doesnt get anything) but red will take blue's turn more or less like he is babysitting blue

Scenario 1
Team
player A
player B - gets busted

Then it will be:
Team1
player A
player A
vs
Opposing Team

Player A gets to play twice in that game since his teammate got busted. [/quote]
Not exactly...the exact would be
Team 1
player A (as red)
Player A (as green)
vs
opposing team. Is like team 1 gets a team of 1 player(like the suggestion) Player plays as 2 different colours

or

Team1
player A
player A
player A
player A
vs
Opposing Team

If player A gets "lucky" he had all his teammates busted.

In this case would be
Red plays (player A has control of red armies)-Pink plays-Green Plays(player A controls green armies)-Cyan plays-Blue plays(A moves like blue and only blue player)-Orange plays-Yellow plays(A moves yellow territories with the option that yellow has to be his turn)-Slate plays

==========================

Scenario 2
player A
player B - gets busted
player C
player D - gets busted

Then it will be:
Team1
player A
player C
player C
player A
vs
Opposing Team

or

Scenario 3
player A
player B - gets busted
player C

will become:
Team1
player A
player C
player C
vs
Opposing Team

The situation would be, player A gets to play player D's slot since he is the next player to make his turn in the team? player C gets to play player B's slot?

Well I would say like actually...the next partner alive gets it

===========================

Scenario 4
player A
player B - gets busted
player C - gets busted
player D

So the encoding will be, player D gets to play player C. How does the encoding go for player B? Will it be player D as well? So it will appear like this?

Team1
player A
player D
player D
player D
vs
Opposing Team

Well remeber Player A- Player D(as green)-Player D (as blue) and so on... the ecoding would be something like the original post said

Specifics:

• Let the next player in the team play all the turns.
• For the appointed player it could have a separate "Playing As" page under My Games. (between "Active" and "Awaiting Players"?) Games on this page wouldn't count for the freemium game limit.
• Instead of "<busted player name>" it could just say "<busted player name><team player>"
  
  • So it would say "Captain_Scarlet karelpietertje"

Did I understood this right? If I am, looking at these from some angles, this is still open for a lot of abuse and a lot of complaints coming from the opposing team. Missing turns to get deferred troops will be exploited too much. Think of the possibilities that the remaining player could do if he has 2 or 3 slots to make his turns in a game. Also in freestyle.

Well I think you did a little mistake...why would take complaints of the oppsing team? it's like he is babysitting his partner
Yes,defered troops is one of the last problems that is pointed:

Points of discussion:
[*]Should the way people deadbeat be considered? Lack seems to make the rules for banning and deadbeating the same.

• Personally I think there's a difference because deadbeating happens in 3 rounds and can be calculated by both opponents and teammates, unlike a ban, which happens instantaneous.

Well...deadbeating...you get kicked(banned) out of the game because you "broke" the rules of that game...so you can consider the samething.But theres a problem...when you get the control of your partner,he just lost 3 rounds...so he could get deffered armies for 3 rounds? in a doubles the maximum would be get deffered troops for 5 rounds(3x5=15) if you are in a triples game you could get deffered for 8 rounds(A deadbeats,B takes the control of A,B deadbeats for himself and there for for A,C get the control of A and B and he misses two consecutive turns,C plays for C and get deferred armies for 2 rounds,C plays for B and gets deffered troops for 5 round(3 lost by B and 2 by C),C play for A and gets deffered armies for 8 rounds(2 lost by C,3 lost by B and 3 lost by A)and if you are in quadruples you could have deffered you could get up to deffered armies for 10 rounds this could make abuse... and now the best idea I got (although a bit unfair)is that no matter how many rounds you loose you only can get upon deffered armies for 2 rounds for each player

Answers in red

But the original poster doesnt seem it as problem....But still the best is that the max of deffered would be 2 turns for player...

[darth emperor]

This appears to be long overdue for a "sticky", therefore I have stickied it to hammer out all the details before putting up the final proposal and maybe getting it submitted. Please continue to show your support, and could the person responsible for drafting the final proposal please make themselves known to me?

Cheers, JB

Sorry to double-post but the message is already very big... If the original poster doesn't come/doesnt want to do... I'll make it...

[lord voldemort]

i know of a few things lack wants to do first that might make this much easier.

[JoshyBoy]

This appears to be long overdue for a "sticky", therefore I have stickied it to hammer out all the details before putting up the final proposal and maybe getting it submitted. Please continue to show your support, and could the person responsible for drafting the final proposal please make themselves known to me?

Cheers, JB

Sorry to double-post but the message is already very big... If the original poster doesn't come/doesnt want to do... I'll make it...

I think it was karelpieterje so I'm sure he'll be more than happy to do it. But thanks.

[edwinissweet]

i thought i was the thread hijacker

im afraid i got lost in KIng A's explination though

[darth emperor]

i thought i was the thread hijacker

im afraid i got lost in KIng A's explination though

I think that he understood that the suggestion was that if a player gets kicked...the other will recieve not only his cards and armies but also his turn that would make that player to move twice in a round. And that would be worst than what is going actually

[king achilles]

Yes, basically, this suggestion is to give another turn for the teammate.

Scenario 1
Team
player A
player B - gets busted

then it would be:

Team 1
player A (as red)
Player A (as green)
vs
opposing team.

Player A takes over what player B had and now plays as 2 different colours or plays two turns.
If you were in the opposing team, which system would you prefer? What we have right now or this one?