If you cant win, change the game options

This noob stole me 80 min.
its would be an easy game for me. but this allyfags (all vs me) are cheaters too!!
After they took my important cities, the changed the time back to 4min

screens removed by VRIL

Sad to see stuff like that is stilll happening... I guess we were afk.
Screenshots were removed since pillory is unwanted.
You can PM and I will take care of it.

Hugo proposed some time ago, that over 50% of each team must accept a change. Many people agreed him, but nothing happend

This was implemented exactly as hugo suggested and this is how it works now.
But now people try to work around this.

But i was alone (so my own team) and i declined any gamechanges....

I think unanimous changes should be needed for any change more than 1 minute from the original timer. I've had it happen before and it can be circumvented by people allying "unofficially" to gank you.

作者： notserral, 19.07.2013 at 02:49

I think unanimous changes should be needed for any change more than 1 minute from the original timer. I've had it happen before and it can be circumvented by people allying "unofficially" to gank you.

Time is a rule of the game as important as all the other rules you accept since the beginning (otherwise, you would not join).
Many players are used to accelerate cheating noobs and/or other players needing more time for many different reasons.
So, in my opinion, ALL the time changes (Pulse: from 3 to 2, from 2 to 1, there is only a min., but what a dramatic change can be!) should be accepted unanimously.

Maybe not unanimously but definetively vast majority (+75%).

作者： Nostromo, 19.07.2013 at 11:40

作者： notserral, 19.07.2013 at 02:49

I think unanimous changes should be needed for any change more than 1 minute from the original timer. I've had it happen before and it can be circumvented by people allying "unofficially" to gank you.

Time is a rule of the game as important as all the other rules you accept since the beginning (otherwise, you would not join).
Many players are used to accelerate cheating noobs and/or other players needing more time for many different reasons.
So, in my opinion, ALL the time changes (Pulse: from 3 to 2, from 2 to 1, there is only a min., but what a dramatic change can be!) should be accepted unanimously.

I thought about that. That's why I mentioned the original timer. So, no matter what the current turn time is, if it isn't +-1 minute from the original, it should be unanimous. For example:

Game starts with 4 min.
People change to 5 min. (not unanimously)
Then someone proposes to 6 min. (since it's 2 minutes more than the original, it needs to be unanimous)

作者： notserral, 20.07.2013 at 13:54

作者： Nostromo, 19.07.2013 at 11:40

作者： notserral, 19.07.2013 at 02:49

I think unanimous changes should be needed for any change more than 1 minute from the original timer. I've had it happen before and it can be circumvented by people allying "unofficially" to gank you.

Time is a rule of the game as important as all the other rules you accept since the beginning (otherwise, you would not join).
Many players are used to accelerate cheating noobs and/or other players needing more time for many different reasons.
So, in my opinion, ALL the time changes (Pulse: from 3 to 2, from 2 to 1, there is only a min., but what a dramatic change can be!) should be accepted unanimously.

I thought about that. That's why I mentioned the original timer. So, no matter what the current turn time is, if it isn't +-1 minute from the original, it should be unanimous. For example:

Game starts with 4 min.
People change to 5 min. (not unanimously)
Then someone proposes to 6 min. (since it's 2 minutes more than the original, it needs to be unanimous)

Interesting! Could work.

引句:

引句:

Game starts with 4 min.
People change to 5 min. (not unanimously)
Then someone proposes to 6 min. (since it's 2 minutes more than the original, it needs to be unanimous)

I would try to be more perspicous.
There is an important principle (the rules you accept TOGETHER with ALL the players of a game before starting; why and how allow a majority to change rules that was established unanimously? That's a false democratic way, indeed - by the way - that's how every kind of fascism usually get the power).
And, linked to the principle, there is the major problem that your examples ignore, Pulse: I don't want to write a novel about it, but when from 3 min. majority accepts 2 min., or worse accepts from 2 min. to 1 min., these reductions are a real violence upon noobs and players with problems. The opposite samples, when majority accepts 5 from 4 or 6 form 5 (can I say that I never saw such increases, but I saw many reductions?) would probably be annoying and nothing else. Anyway, applying the rule of unanimity in any case, also this problem would be resolved. Sorry for my English.

引句:

引句:

作者： Nostromo, 20.07.2013 at 14:33

Game starts with 4 min.
People change to 5 min. (not unanimously)
Then someone proposes to 6 min. (since it's 2 minutes more than the original, it needs to be unanimous)

I would try to be more perspicous.
There is an important principle (the rules you accept TOGETHER with ALL the players of a game before starting; why and how allow a majority to change rules that was established unanimously? That's a false democratic way, indeed - by the way - that's how every kind of fascism usually get the power).
And, linked to the principle, there is the major problem that your examples ignore, Pulse: I don't want to write a novel about it, but when from 3 min. majority accepts 2 min., or worse accepts from 2 min. to 1 min., these reductions are a real violence upon noobs and players with problems. The opposite samples, when majority accepts 5 from 4 or 6 form 5 (can I say that I never saw such increases, but I saw many reductions?) would probably be annoying and nothing else. Anyway, applying the rule of unanimity in any case, also this problem would be resolved. Sorry for my English.

I did not quite follow you, but in the case of a game started with 3 minutes, only the change to 2 wouldn't need to be unanimous. But I agree with you - a simpler and easier solution is to require unanimity for all options.

作者： Guest, 20.07.2013 at 14:46

I could see players getting past this by each turn proposing to go one minute shorter in time...

I know, but the original time would never change, it would be the time that started with the game. Not the current timer.

A similar thing I have happening often are games with the victory condition captur whole country. Two allied people split up the cities in the last conquered country and refuse to eiminate the last opponent. Then they want you to rep them or to quit the game so they get more SP. If you refuse, they vote turn timer to 12 minutes or 24 hours.it is fucking annoying and just now lost me two hours again..

Somtimes I wonder what is wrong with this gamers community, such rude stuff seems to be pretty normal... I just regret I payed for this game already...

作者： Lemonade, 18.07.2013 at 14:46

Hugo proposed some time ago, that over 50% of each team must accept a change. Many people agreed him, but nothing happend

here i also proposed good suggestion, dont be mad,this happand to evryone.
http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=8004

Hmm, this is a flaw in the system i thought about. If you have 1 player against 4, and the 4 decide to 'un-ally'; they can change the game settings and ally again. Keep in mind that its already working that you need 51% (not 50%) of all voters. I saw some comments where players don't seem to understand how it works now. But indeed, it needs to be fixed.

CD's suggestion to make it 75% will help, but not be the solution. It will have the same problem if you have more players in your game.
Pulse's suggestion with only giving a option to change 1 minute will lead to less game options for gamers, and it still leaves a problem in big world games; because 3 or 2 minutes can make the difference between losing and winning.

Other options could be:
1) Time rules can only be changed if ALL players in the game agree on it.
2) Any other suggestions?

People! That's the game.
Strategy, Tactics, Politics, Economics, Settings.

Locked.