[Rules] Vote to kick

[webdevil]

I dont like ideas that limit the level of access of players.
But i would agree to something that related to experience... IE games played/turns missed ratio... to give accurate missed turn ranking... or something like that.

Nothing that 'excludes' newbies... again we want more 'active' players to join and play... i know i would have been turned off when first starting if i only had limited access to play certain places.

[Ishiro]

Its a bad idea, and my suggestion is to keep it how it currently is. Unless you completely freeze out new players, you can't prevent people from coming to the site because they think its a good idea one day and forget about it the next. The best thing you can do is not to join public games. Start a private game, then post the password on the forums, you can at least guarantee anyone who joins will be dedicated enough to read the forums and likely not to deadbeat.

Deadbeat happens... its annoying, but it happening is so far head and shoulders better than any prevention system anyone has proposed.

The only people who really have any ground to stand on for wasted time are people who are not premium members. If you are a premium member, just join more games if you aren't getting enough action. If you are not a premium member... its only $20 for a year. Totally worth it to be unrestricted in number of games.

[EvilStickMan]

How about this:

Instead of offering the "vote" to kick them after a single missed turn, offer the vote at the end of two consecutive missed turns - if they're going to deadbeat anyway, why wait the extra 24 hours?

Also, I agree with one of the above posters - remove the armies received for deadbeat turns. If you don't take your turn, you shouldn't benefit at all.

'course I haven't yet completed the required games to make it to private, so I guess I'm part of the "problem"