Wednesday, April 07, 2021

Proposal: Fourteen days is foreeeeeeeeveeeeeeeer

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 2-5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Apr 2021 11:56:36 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule, called No Pocket Vetoes:

If a Player is a Participant in more than three unclosed Games then they are considered to have Resigned from any Game in which it is their Turn, and that game becomes Closed on the basis that that Player has Resigned. No Player may cease to be Resigned from a game in which they have Resigned.

As we head into the endgame it’s going to make most strategic sense for players to stall games, dribbling their turns out two days at a time to elongate the threshold beyond which their rivals can win. (I believe that this is already what Jumble is doing). I’ve had enough conversations with enough players to believe that this tactic is widely recognised, so rather than being delighted at how cleverly and subtly it’s being used, I think it’s probably best to curtail it.

Note that this rule will sit outside of Environments, so Jumble - you might want to pick up the pace a little.


Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 16:25:54 UTC

this feels a bit harsh.

I think we do need some way to speed up games. but this doesn’t solve the slow play problem if someone just does it in one game. and could catch someone unaware.

I think we should:

1) Make it so you can’t join a 4th game if you’re already in three games

2) Maybe move the turn timer down to 24 hours?

Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 16:31:00 UTC

I’m also not even sure if it works

If you resign, the game is closed, but now the “they are considered to have resigned” clause no longer holds (because they are no longer a participant in 4 unclosed games). So is the game still closed? Or do we get an endless cycle?

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 16:35:55 UTC

I don’t think that’s a problem - a game once closed can’t be un-closed, and it is still the case that the game “is Closed because a Player has Resigned”, so everything will still trigger as expected.

As for harsh - not really - if you can’t finish off three games then we can assume malign intent, I think.

Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 16:43:08 UTC

Why can’t closed games be un-closed?

Does the “A game is closed if” statement mean that if any of these things hold, the game gains the “closed” factor, and keeps it forever? Or that it only has the closed factor if those statements hold?

I feel like “A bear is hungry if they have less than five honey” would mean that a bear that had 4 honey but now has six would not be hungry.

overall I feel like there has gotta be a better way to solve this problem. Under this rule, a group of malicious players go “If Josh wins one more game, he hits 30 magistrelli, so we’ll each slow play one game with Josh in it in order to lock him down from being able to safely join another game”?

I think 24 hour turns + maybe some rule that speeds up pending games once we enter the finale would be good


07-04-2021 16:45:37 UTC

Wouldn’t the other player then have incentive to stall if they notice someone is running out of games?

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 16:47:16 UTC

@Cluicky By what mechanism would a closed game become unclosed? Nothing in the rules says that it can.


07-04-2021 16:55:50 UTC

The game closer isn’t quite “is Closed because a Player has Resigned”, it’s “has Resigned by doing one of the following”, with a list of three resign/sfida/timeout situations.

In this case I think the player will have confirmably “have Resigned” (past tense), but since it’s not by any of “the following”, the game won’t actually Close.


07-04-2021 16:56:35 UTC

There’s nothing saying it can’t become unclosed either

Brendan: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 17:25:43 UTC

Ah, well, since there’s nothing saying I can’t give myself a million pegs…

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 17:25:47 UTC

@Jumble The ruleset doesn’t have negative rights; you can only edit the gamestate as directed by the ruleset.

@Kevan Despite the absence of any clause in the bullet list, I neither that the following paragraph covers the clause in this rule.

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 17:26:12 UTC

(And it’s important that all of this is outside of the Tournament Rules structure.)

Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 17:38:17 UTC

But again, Josh, like I pointed out its not “A game becomes closed if…” its “A game is closed if…”

To me, that means that if the condition no longer holds, the game is no longer closed. In the same way that my bear is no longer hungry if it has enough honey.


07-04-2021 17:41:34 UTC

[Josh] The “If a Game is Closed because a Player has Resigned, then…” paragraph?

If someone’s Resigned by Pocket Veto, “A game is Closed [if a participant] has Resigned by doing one of the following [three things]” doesn’t react to it, so the game isn’t closed at all.

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 17:46:16 UTC

I’m dubious as to this whole argument but I’ve made an edit that will hopefully at least clarify.

Brendan: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 18:20:47 UTC


Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 19:22:07 UTC

hard against as it would enable players to stall out people who are close to 28 from safely joining other games simply by refusing to play in any of their games

Clucky: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 19:27:43 UTC

close to 30 i mean, my brain farted, but overall point remains. get into two games with Brendan and one with Jumble and they both decide “yeah lets just slow play this for the next two weeks” and suddenly you’re locked out of any chance of winning because if you join a 4th game they can simply instantly move and claim the w


07-04-2021 19:29:11 UTC


Brendan: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 19:50:58 UTC

Why did I get tagged there? I’m the one who has spent the entire dynasty trying to make games go faster, remember?

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 19:52:29 UTC

I accept that there are other stalling use cases but my preference is still to fix the one that is objectively strategically the best play for everyone in isolation before worrying about cabal use-cases.

Josh: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 19:53:13 UTC

I used use-cases too many times, in this case.

(Just in case.)


Darknight: HE/HIM

07-04-2021 20:03:47 UTC


lemonfanta: SHE/HER

07-04-2021 23:41:32 UTC

maybe if it forced a forfeit on the oldest pending game instead of the newest?


08-04-2021 17:02:33 UTC



09-04-2021 11:56:09 UTC