Ok, so I am in a 100 player game. There are 10 active players with provinces- 12 actives overall. They have suggested ending the game by retirement so that they don't have to play to reach the VP requirement for a win. How is this possible? I thought retirement was only an option with 3 or fewer actives?
@Pack Rat: Basically, you need a Bytro game operator to end the game for you. All active players must consent to ending the round in writing in the in-game World Herald newspaper. Beyond that, you have to have satisfy whatever the game operator requires.
I hope this helps. Cheers.
Thanks Montana. If that's all it takes, then why not do away with the 3 player retirement and make it available to be done anytime without a GO?
There are thousands of active games at any given time, and only a handful of available game operators. By necessity, almost all game endings need to be automated.
Also, I think most folks want to encourage games to be played to conclusion. It's also one way to discourage over-size alliances.
I'm all for the automated end- and the huge coalition is what happened. They formed a 10 player coalition (including their four or five alliance members) and then decided they wanted to end the game when all the other players were eliminated. Now they want to appeal to a GO to retire the game so they won't have to break up their massive coalition. Only two players are even a third of the way to the VP total.MontanaBB wrote:
There are thousands of active games at any given time, and only a handful of available game operators. By necessity, almost all game endings need to be automated.Also, I think most folks want to encourage games to be played to conclusion. It's also one way to discourage over-size alliances.
Our group caught flak from them during the game because we wanted to play to the intended end even if we beat them. A lot still needs to be done to the game mechanics to change victory possibilities.
@Pack Rat: I understand that sometimes the over-size coalitions have a reason beyond a group deciding they want to overwhelm everyone else with strength of numbers. One of my several second-place finishes happened when I organized five other players in an anti-spammer alliance against a player who was churning out ridiculous numbers of units from a relatively small industrial base. Once the other players realized what was happening, everyone felt threatened and started providing support to myself and another ally. With the added resources and tactical assistance of my new allies, I was able to launch a tactical air campaign using my allies' air bases to hit the spammer from multiple borders while he was sleeping. The spammer had deep pockets to churn out units, but a rather simple grasp of tactics. I consider that second-place finish more satisfying than several of my outright victories, especially given that I lost several of my core provinces and was nearly out of the game on Day 15.
At the end of that campaign, the members of the anti-spammer alliance had bonded over a period of several weeks and no-one wanted to fight it out against allies with whom they had been closely cooperating. I offered to go inactive, but no-one thought that was appropriate because I had been the alliance leader, so the fourth, fifth and sixth-place survivors volunteered to go inactive and we used the 3-surviving-players option to end the game.
Please log in to post a reply.
