#Tournament. teams/assassin / #Awol ->#Sidegame

[AuraCraft]

If you join a tournament, you want a fair chance at winning the prize, right?

There may be rounds of teams games, then it's almost impossible to win if one of the team members had already quit playing (check their profile "last active ...")
A sidegame is a possible solution. Another solution would be that a member of the opposing team chooses not to play his turns until the awol returns (making sure both teams get the same number of deferred troops if and when they do. In case of 3 teams, this might get complicated so a sidegame might be preferable)
So one team has 1 member less than the other. This problem can be resolved in 2 ways
1 the team with the awol invites a friend to join them in the sidegame
2 the team without the awol chooses someone not to join the sidegame. so either someone volunteers not to join or the team decides who won't e.g. if a non-team player happens to have joined the tournament

The side game should have the same settings as the original game unless all players agree on different map and settings (but every player would have veto rights in this case)

what games qualify for a sidegame? criteria?

tournament games only (and forum games with extra bonus points?)
it makes no sense to demand a sidegame for a casual game, but if all players agree, by all means, play a sidegame!

1 team games only?

2 no crusade sidegame;
2.1 to join a tournament, strategist class suffices. to join a crusade side game, all 24 players would need to be commander class.
2.2 even if they were; try to get 24 players to join a sidegame

3 perhaps assassin games too?
if either your assassin or target is awol you're far more likely to win. not fair.

4 only if the awol was absent when the game starts. If a player goes awol after playing a few turns, no sidegame?

5 a sidegame is to be requested in this topic, so independant players can confirm it meets the criteria


etc
etc

you gotto fill out a form first^^

 

[Cardinalsrule]

I'm OK with your solutions, but only if it's unanimous; every player in the game has to agree to a sidegame. Otherwise, the game has to continue as-is.

 

[haWD96lz]

I still am a no on these ideas. Someone sitting out is not fun for them in the real game or side game. Also, making exceptions for crusades does not make sense if fairness is the goal.

I appreciate the goal of making things more fair, but I prefer not to make them more complicated. Also, as others have pointed out if the AWOL team wins then this has to happen all over again...

 

[AuraCraft]

@Cards -
I assumed the desire for fair play is unanimous... (so I'm astonished about the amount of vitriol I received since I brought this up in the other topic)
It might seem self serving that I started this topic but I've gone neutral in games with awols in enemy teams, much to the appreciation of opposing teams.

@Hawdz -
1 no active player would need to be left out.
2 crusade - I would need to upgrade from Strategist to commander (pay the $5) to be able to even join a crusade game. You can't expect that just for a sidegame. Also, 24 players are not gonna join a sidegame. If one of the non-awol team doesn't communicate much or at all (there are such players) then they won't join the sidegame and you can't play the crusade sidegame. That's a problem you don't have with any other number of team members; if there's a mute in a sixers tournament round, you just make the sidegame a fivers game instead of sixers. Problem solved. Or if one of the non-awol team is a notoriously bad team player, the rest of the team could decide to drop that player as compensation for the awol. Not "fun for them" but a non-communicative player screwing their own team is far more not fun to the team than it is to the mute one being left out (if the mute notices at all).
3 only if the next round is also a team game, there would have to be a subsequent sidegame.

 

[Number2]

seems fair to me

 

[brianstheman]

@Hawdz -
1 no active player would need to be left out.
…..Or if one of the non-awol team is a notoriously bad team player, the rest of the team could decide to drop that player as compensation for the awol. Not "fun for them" but a non-communicative player screwing their own team is far more not fun to the team than it is to the mute one being left out (if the mute notices at all).

A sub-sidegame could be set up to decide who drops. Assassin, whoever gets eliminated sits. Unless the game ended because a player hit a target other than their own, in which case the person who killed the other's target sits.

If one of the players in the sub-sidegame AWOLs, then a set of sub-sub-sidegames will be constructed, 1v1 round-robin.

And while everyone else loses track, the original AWOLer will probably return and run the board because they weren't paying attention to the chat. Game over, problem solved!

 

[Sebrim]

A sub-sidegame could be set up to decide who drops. Assassin, whoever gets eliminated sits. Unless the game ended because a player hit a target other than their own, in which case the person who killed the other's target sits.

If one of the players in the sub-sidegame AWOLs, then a set of sub-sub-sidegames will be constructed, 1v1 round robin.

And while everyone else loses track, the original AWOLer will probably return and run the board because they weren't paying attention to the chat. Game over, problem solved!

+1

That's my kind of solution!