Forum game: The number war discussion thread

[RainDreamer]

Here is a discussion thread for a forum game over there. I don't want to do this discussion over that thread because it would interfere too much in the current round's gameplay, so here we are. If you haven't played the game, come over and check it out, since probably only people who played it will understand the context of this discussion thread.

---update---

New topic this time!

The number war is a complex game, and due to its vagueness (both intentional and unintentional), sometimes there are conflict between the teams that require an official 3rd party arbitration. The game master(GM) is the one handle such things, along with rule update and game progress monitor. As you can see, this game does require some effort to manage despite being just a forum game. Now,I am looking for a person who could be a GM to look after things when I am busy/away. This is on a purely voluntary basis and not binding in any way. I am not expecting you to check the thread all the time as that would be my job, it is just whenever you are free and I am not there and something came up and require a GM.

Being a GM means the following:

- You are no longer allowed to participate in the game to maintain neutrality.

- You have a responsibility to answer questions regarding to rules and help guiding new players with the game

- You must have a firm understanding of the rules and its nuances, particularly on edge cases, and help updating rules/drafting new ones to ensure the game runs smoothly

- Your decisions will be final for all cases of conflict, thus a fair judgement is required.

- You will be aware of the existence of the hidden "team zero", and while you are not allowed to rule favourably for them, you can still post messages of encouragement with this colour: #FAFAFA . PM me with #To the origin as subject if you can read this, and I can tell you more about team zero.

There might be some responsibilities & duty I can't think of now, but mostly it is about player interaction and cases arbitration. Post here if you have any questions.

Being a GM does NOT means the following:

- You have to look for errors. This is the responsibility of the player, as per rule 6. However, keeping track of the general progression and noticing errors when it happens is still recommended to find cases that are skirting the rules and create a precedent. If you find one, talk with me and we can figure things out.

- You have to revert progression with each error: A GM's revert is powerful, and can even null a win if required, so use it only when it is absolutely needed. Let the player spot errors and revert by themselves, while you stand by and check if the revert is valid in case someone brought it up.

- Helping a team in anyway with your GM power. For example: you cannot help a team even if it looks like the other team are winning unfairly - as long as they play within the rules(and even if they are not sometimes), you do not intervene until you are called upon. GM intervention is only in cases where rules are not clear and requires clarification immidiately so people stop doing it.

If anyone is interested, PM me. Edit: Going to take 2 people, as 3 GMs would be able to resolve stalemate decision easier. While there are formal no requirement for this position (cause it is just a forum game, lol) it would be nice if it is a long time player of the game.

New Update: I have got my 2 GMs: Dman979 and Deutherius ! They will act in the same capacity as mine regarding ruling of the game whenever conflicts arise, and in the case I am not available to answer things quickly, please direct PM to them if they are available.

Edited May 28, 2015 by RainDreamer

[Fel]

I think the 1 min window isn't bad; looking back it seems that the problem is that certain people just don't understand that the window exists. If people understood the "timestamps" rule, and only overrode what was actually invalid, then the majority of the big "flip" overrides wouldn't have much ground and people would continue from the last posted number. In this case, it seems that "certain people" just haven't read the rules and are continually using the "timestamps" rule incorrectly.

It's really 3 min before the edit tag pops up?

[RainDreamer]

According to Kasper, yes: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/114039-Quick-question-about-forum-post-edit-function

[Fel]

Sheesh. I was thinking about getting skirmishes in to allow editing within that window, but that only works well during the low times (few posts every few min), if people are boosting, someone posts what looks correct and they keep boosting, it becomes too unfair to expect them to look back to make certain someone didn't screw the pattern; especially if it is 3 min. (There's also the question of what to do if a post becomes invalid because a timestamp pops up).

Idea was, if you cannot enforce it, make it part of the game.

[RainDreamer]

I did think of editing as part of the game (reason why I was saying in that other post about drafting rules for it) but decided against it due to large time window, and also because it is more hassle than it is worth, as it makes things so much harder to keep track of, especially for new players that just see things and want to jump in the game by following the latest post. A great game should be easy to jump in with simple and straightforward gameplay, but gets harder as you start to familiarize yourself with its rules.

[Fel]

I think that perhaps the "rules" should be changed into "how to play"

"Rules" are referenced when something in the "how to play" isn't covered; the more gritty details.

That skirmishing was allowed didn't quite get to me by reading the rules; the rules, being rules, tend to give the impression that you aren't suppose to break them.

But take a look at this

The rules EXPLICITLY say that you cannot post the wrong number and must perform a valid operation. Floppster's post is completely invalid, there is no relation to the previous posts; but this is a PERFECTLY valid tactic. He created an override point that could have been missed, and was reward a 10 posts revert for it!

I think that, as a tactics game, this really is much more enjoyable. People often express confusion about the tactics because they generally only see "Add or subtract one" but they too could leave a small timebomb and let the game drop back down to zero; so when they have the numbers, issue the revert and push to the end.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Fel

[RainDreamer]

Well, yeah. You are not supposed to break the rules, because breaking them makes your post nulled. But knowing them well enough and intentionally break them to null your own post to your advantage is indeed a viable tactic.

It is like the law. You are not supposed to break them. But you find loop holes in them and use those to your advantages. I think i will just call them rules but leave people to figure the true gameplay behind it after playing the game a bit. Lots of hidden stuff in this game, after all.

But lets get back to the original topic: rule 7. Anyone else have an opinion on it? Keeping 1 minute window or keep it in the same minute?

[Deutherius]

Personally, I would leave the rule as it is. Perhaps give it a clearer explanation and/or an example so people know what exactly is meant by the "give or take a minute". I also don't think it would help against the editing issue all that much... One can easily wait until the end of the page during a rush hour, post a valid number, let the spamming people continue from it onto next page... And just change it to something not valid within 3 minutes. How many people will bother to look back when there is so much action going on on the last page?

As for the spam problem... I think that changing the rule to "within the same minute" would cause the same ammount of spam, just concentrated in pulses at the end of each minute. Sounds interesting to observe, but... Meh, I dunno.

I may or may not be heavily biased because of the way I like to play this game, though.

[Fel]

I was trying to point out that the idea of skirmishing wasn't actually represented by the rules very well; I feel the rule is continuously misinterpreted as a one min window because rules tend to make it feel like you're not suppose to break them, hence a fast accident. Getting people to look at the rules as tools meant to be broken would result in more closely examining the rules looking for loopholes to exploit.

It's the difference between explaining the "sprit of the law" to the judge, and hiring a lawyer who knows how to manipulate the law. The person who doesn't understand that the spirit of the law isn't what "the law" actually is, gets confused; perhaps even misuses the law...

*** Mostly, I am considering this from the confusion aspect... WHY people were having a problem, more or less... and less about if we should change the rule because people are confused about it.

[RainDreamer]

Hmm, I can explicitly mention that overriding another overriding attempt is possible in the rule, so people can be aware of that possibility

[Dman979]

I would like to see a "within the same minute" rule. Otherwise, something could go like this:

10:03 (a) 6

10:04 ( 7

10:04 (a) 8

10:04 ( 9

10:05 © 6

And the number gets pushed to six. The tactic which I can see happening is for people to type their number, and wait until the end of the minute to post it. This seems like a fair but also unsporting tactic to use, and I hope that it can be eliminated, as I think it will turn people off from playing.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Dman979

[Deutherius]

I was trying to point out that the idea of skirmishing wasn't actually represented by the rules very well;

7. In the case of two or more posts from two or more different people being posted at the same time(give or take a minute) trying to subtract/add to the same number simultaneously , the post that appearslast on the thread counts toward the change in the current number.

I dunno, the part that says "or more posts from more different people" kinda implies that no matter how many different people post within the discussed timeframe doing a + or - 1 to the first number, the one that did the last operation wins.

I would like to see a "within the same minute" rule. Otherwise, something could go like this:

10:03 (a) 6

10:04 ( 7

10:04 (a) 8

10:04 ( 9

10:05 © 6

And the number gets pushed to six. The tactic which I can see happening is for people to type their number, and wait until the end of the minute to post it. This seems like a fair but also unsporting tactic to use, and I hope that it can be eliminated, as I think it will turn people off from playing.

You are misinterpreting the rule. The valid number would be 9, because, as the rule states,

trying to subtract/add to the same number simultaneously

user C would not be subtracting/adding to the same number as user B. User C would just be too damn late.

[Dman979]

Yes, I was misinterpreting the rule. Thank you for clarifying.

If I understand correctly, then this is valid:

10:08 (a) 6

12:03 ( 7

12:04 © 5

Correct?

Anyway, I still think that the rule should be changed to "within the same minute"

[Deutherius]

If I understand correctly, then this is valid:

10:08 (a) 6

12:03 ( 7

12:04 © 5

Correct?

Yes, that would be correct and user C would override user B.

[Dman979]

To me, that seems like a user is changing the number by two.

[RainDreamer]

To me, that seems like a user is changing the number by two.

It would be the same if the time limit is on the same minute. The idea is that mulled posts are basically ignored by the game, so what player c in your example is doing is just subtracting 1 from 6, not subtracting 2 from 7. Note that this is also why player a can't change the number, because it would mean they are effectively posting twice.

[Fel]

Might be better to do this so that it receives a little more attention, no?

[Fel]

What signature picture?

Some people have a signature picture saying that they fought in the number war.

Oh, you mean Windows'? He made his. Nice piece of work, too.

I suspect most of those are self made

Also, any signature pictures are self made, there is no official award for fighting in this war.

There should be....we could make a few different ones. One like window's, for positive, one for negative, and one +/- for those who switch.

We could also have one for those who have actually posted the winning number.

If you want to make one, run it by RD. See what she thinks.

What about Team Zero and Team Revert? The arts stuff is neat to see for a kick or two.

Just moving an offtopic convo here, if it still wishes to go on.

[Endersmens]

Just moving an offtopic convo here, if it still wishes to go on.

If anybody wants, I can make all the sig badges. Anybody interested?

[Dman979]

I would like to see them, yes. And while you're at it, can you make one for "For The Stealthiest" please?

[Endersmens]

I would like to see them, yes. And while you're at it, can you make one for "For The Stealthiest" please?

You mean like a little ninja head icon with "for the stealthiest" at the bottom?

maybe with a F-117 background if possible?

[Fel]

I would like to see them, yes. And while you're at it, can you make one for "For The Stealthiest" please?

That actually could be interesting; like Deutherius would get a badge "King of Reverts"

Or perhaps, they'd be handed out after each win O.O

[Dman979]

You mean like a little ninja head icon with "for the stealthiest" at the bottom?

maybe with a F-117 background if possible?

Yeah something like that. Or a black apple, and paris in the background. (JK) (Although the apple would be nice, if small.)

That actually could be interesting; like Deutherius would get a badge "King of Reverts"

Yes. He could wear it proudly with his GM badge. But it would get dusty.

[Deutherius]

That actually could be interesting; like Deutherius would get a badge "King of Reverts"

I aways had the "BACK TO THE FUTURE" logo in mind, with the "FUTURE" changed to "LAST VALID POST"

Yes. He could wear it proudly with his GM badge. But it would get dusty.

Sounds like my sig will need a major overhaul before it can recieve not one, but two badges, damn.

Also, technically speaking, nothing prevents me from pointing out a mistake to remind people of the rules...

If it just so happens that one side is about to win...

I'm not saying I will (yeah, I won't )... But I could

[Dman979]

I won't, either. But the possibilities are endless!

Will this do?

I'll need to shrink it, of course.