09-10-2004 14:12									#121
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Merely a strategically sound decision. Real champtions aren't concerned with being seen as scared, as they know they will ultimately prevail. You might learn some day.

	10-10-2004 03:36									#122
	Remove this text

I think I learned when I kicked yer ass the last time we fought.

	10-10-2004 03:41									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yes, unfortunately there is no way to remove the luck element from the game.

	10-10-2004 03:47									#124
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Lucky for you.

	11-10-2004 23:34									#125
	Suffering from ads?

Eh, so, no orders from Sheep, as far as I can tell. Should we replace him with Sparrowhawk or let pure chance do its bidding?

	12-10-2004 00:11									#126
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

* Sparrowhawk understands Drogue's concerns about replacing Sheep with a human player, so if you opt for the random number generator that is perfectly acceptable (and as I am now GMing Nuclear War, maybe volunteering wasn't such a good idea anyway) though if you still request a replacement player I would be happy to fill in for the remainder (which given the standings should be the final three matches of this round )

	12-10-2004 00:14									#127
	Tired of ads?

Give the hawk a chance.

	12-10-2004 00:21									#128
	Increase Your PM Length

Of course, we could remove all trace of any of Sheep's games, and have Sparrowhawk fight EVERYONE in Round 3. How about it? You'd all have to add in orders for your battle against him, then. That would eliminate any possible advantage gained from the player switch.

	12-10-2004 00:39									#129
	Inflate your Upload Space

Kassi, let him in and he'll need to fight everyone to make it fair.

	12-10-2004 00:53									#130
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

While that idea may be fair to all it would totally invalidate the matches which have already been complete! Sounds like a lot of extra work for everyone to replace a player that has all but been eliminated from the game.

	12-10-2004 00:58									#131
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: While that idea may be fair to all it would totally invalidate the matches which have already been complete!

That's the whole point.

quote: Sounds like a lot of extra work for everyone to replace a player that has all but been eliminated from the game.

I don't think it'd be too much work, not for me at least. I think it'd be the only fair and square solution to the situation. Maybe you'll even make it to the semis!

	12-10-2004 01:40									#132
	Tired of ads?

Well personally as someone who fought and beat Sheep I don't want to fight someone else to get my 3 points. I and the others who won did so fair and square. The others yet to fight him may not have won.

The random orders doesn't work, since it's easy to beat random orders.

Equally I appreciate others may not want to fight Sparrow instead, although this is the 'best' solution IMO since Sparrow and Sheep have the same level of experience.

It's just really hard when someone drops.

How about I send 5 sets of different orders to Kass, and he chooses randomly between them for all matches involving Sheep?

	12-10-2004 02:48									#133
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Brilliant

Sparrow, join the next game


EDIT: And I accept your late acceptance of my offer. It's a draw

	12-10-2004 03:11									#134
	Support Apolyton

doc, you are looking at it the wrong way.

Sheep is out and so are all of his matches regardless of wins or losses. Sparrow is in and needs to catch up.

So I see the choices as:

1. Drop sheep and all his matches.
2. 1 and add sparrow to the mix.

	12-10-2004 03:16									#135
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I'm not looking at it the wrong way at all. I beat a player. If Sparrow replaces him and I have to play him instead I may beat him, draw or lose.

If you just drop Sheep's games (or replace him with the match being replayed) those that played him (and won) are clearly disadvantaged, since those yet to play him may not have won had he not been a whimpering little girl and left.

Hence a solution that 'keeps' Sheep and requires the remaining players to fight him properly is the fairest outcome. That's why I suggest random orders, selected from a group sent by a player.

	12-10-2004 06:05									#136
	Tired of ads?

But random orders is not fighting Sheep! (Hey lets add 15 more gladiators to fight and give them random orders, yeah..random gladiators). We should make it standard practice in this game...as we have done in the past...that when a player leaves, drops, or whatever, that his matches are dropped from the schedule.

	12-10-2004 06:12									#137
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Whatever the decision, it has now been 5 days since the last round and the semi's could be on by now if the game continued (regardless of the option chosen). It seems it falls to Kassiopeia to decide which way to go and implement it (not everyone is going to be happy regardless of the option chosen).

As for myself, I was offering to fill in with the hope of keeping the game moving along, but it seems to have had the reverse effect of stalling it further. I would happily join in the next game if it means this game moves forward sooner.

* Sparrowhawk

	12-10-2004 06:19									#138
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'm going to have to agree with what Spaced has said on this one. Those who won Sheep will have an equal chance like everyone else to win, but against Sparrowhawk.

So everyone, please send orders for a battle with Sparrowhawk as well, and send your actual orders too, of course. I'll check my PM box to see who the slackers are this time.

Sheep's battles are now removed from the record. And Sparrowhawk, I'll be needing seven sets of orders from you. Let's get the game going again, so we can get to the semis before the next weekend,

	12-10-2004 06:21									#139
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Sparrow needs to pick armor and weapon stats....my orders versus sheep stand for sparrow....so sent already.

	12-10-2004 06:33									#140
	Inflate your Upload Space

Oh, yes, Weapon and Armour, anything from 0 to 20, the sum of both must be 20.

	12-10-2004 06:51									#141
	Get a bigger avatar today!

W10 A10

(for a number of reasons that I don't need to get into here )

Edit: Sent 7 sets of orders, only one round of orders for each however, not sure if you wanted me to send 7 x 2 sets of orders or not

Last edited by Sparrowhawk on 12-10-2004 at 07:39

	12-10-2004 11:55									#142
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Kassiopeia I'm going to have to agree with what Spaced has said on this one. Those who won Sheep will have an equal chance like everyone else to win, but against Sparrowhawk.

That's totally irrelevant. This ruling favours those who haven't played Sheep over those who have. It doesn't matter that we all have equal chances against Sparrow, it matters that winners against Sheep have been robbed of their 3 points. Maybe the others would have won too, making it irrelevant, but maybe they wouldn't. There is no way they can lose from this decision, and lots of ways they can gain at our expense.

For the others to fight against Sparrow (or some artificial mechanism) *instead* of Sheep is also slightly unfair I agree, but it's much much closer to being the right outcome. Any ooutcome that replicates the chance of winning or losing that we who played Sheep faced is best, not just handing those who haven't played him a no-lose card.

Please reconsider before continuing. I'm not sending orders yet, and may wish to review the ones I've sent.

	12-10-2004 16:27									#143
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

The situation looks so much clearer if you just allow yourself to think that "hey, Sheep actually never existed". If you can just let yourself ignore those battles, the situation will seem much better. The battles with Sheep should be considered a freak accident, things that have no relevancy to anything any longer. Battles you had to fight because of Sheep's decision to join, and battles that are now erased because of Sheep's decision to quit.

I suppose this is simply a vast difference of viewpoint on the matter, I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. I could bring it to a vote of the player I suppose, but that might bog the game down even further.

I'm sorry, but this is the only way I can see for us to solve this situation. Saying you're being robbed of three points is one way to put it, yes, but IMHO that's spinning it a bit too much.

I know this is hard, and I am definitely not happy to make this decision (curse you Sheep! we need to express it very clearly next time that if there's even a slight chance of you having to drop out, do not under any circumstances even consider joining), but I see it as the only choice that is even slightly fair to the most players. Just.... try to pretend Sheep never happened.

	12-10-2004 17:00									#144
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

So what now? Is Sparrow replacing Sheep and replaying his matches?


This situation reminds me of something. You are too young to remember this, so let me tell you all about it from the beginning. It was in year 1984 that a World Championship match took place in Moscow between Karpov (the ruling champion) and Kasparov (the young challenger). The match was played until one of the contestants scores 6 points, draws were not counted.

At first Karpov scored 4 quick victories out of ten games, he got his fifth point in the twenty first game and everybody expected he would easily win. The match dragged on however, Karpov avoiding complications and risks because he wanted a flawless victory and Kasparov offering draws even in better position. Finally he started winning and after the forty eighth game the score was 5:3. The match was interrupted then and a new match was scheduled for next year.

Kasparov consented to the rematch, while Karpov objected strenuously he had been robbed of his 5 points and a match ball. However, since the FIDE chairman supported the head referee's decision to discontinue the match, Karpov ceased objecting since he was a man who respected authority (remember, Karpov was from Soviet Union and a member of their Politburo).

A new match was held next year and the match ended with 6:4 in victories for Kasparov with 16 draws, but Karpov led with 2:1. Now, has Karpov been robbed of his victory or not? I think yes.

Are you, Kassiopeia going to rob DrSpike and me and the others of our victories against Sheep? I think yes.

	12-10-2004 17:29									#145
	Inflate your Upload Space

But I am not having you play against Sheep again, like Kasparov and Karpov played each other twice. You're going to play against Sparrowhawk, all of you. The comparison would work better if it was a tournament, Kasparov had to quit mid-tournament, and someone else would step to take his place, and everyone would replay against this new player.

Again, Sparrowhawk isn't replaying Sheep's matches. Sheep and his games are stricken off the record, and a new player is brought in to fill the gap.

	12-10-2004 17:32									#146
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The only proposals so far that I've seen from those of you who played against Sheep would be grossly unfair against those who have not played against Sheep.

The best way to solve this IMO is to have Sheep wiped clean from the record and having Sparrowhawk fill the gap. Sparrowhawk can't in any way act as a bona fide replacement, and I don't see how the five random sets DrSpike proposed would work as a viable replacement for Sheep either - again, that'd be unfair towards those who haven't played against him yet.

Last edited by Kassiopeia on 12-10-2004 at 17:39

	12-10-2004 18:03									#147
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Obviously you didn't understand the situation.


Suppose I lose to Sparrowhawk and finish fifth. I'm out because you annulled my victory against Sheep. It's the same like in the second match. Karpov led 2:1. It would have been 6:4 had the match been continued with the result 5:3, but Karpov's 5 victories were annulled and he lost the match.

The same applies to DrSpike and the others who won against Sheep.

You are grossly prejudicial towards us who won against Sheep fair and square.

	12-10-2004 18:25									#148
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I understood the situation, but not what you were trying to say with it.

quote: Suppose I lose to Sparrowhawk and finish fifth. I'm out because you annulled my victory against Sheep.

You are out because you lost to Sparrowhawk. I am not annulling only victories, I am annulling EVERYTHING. The fact that all those games happened to be victories doesn't figure into it. I'd act the same whether or not you lost or won over Sheep, it does not matter.

Again, I ask: Why not simply forget Sheep's existence? Do you believe that the victories over him were earned with such toil and difficulty that simply removing him from the entire tournament and replacing him with someone else is beyond imagination?

	12-10-2004 18:45									#149
	Get a bigger avatar today!

But those who won their victories now have to fight for their 3 points again. That is unfair.

And you are only annulling victories cause Sheep has zero points (he lost all four matches). Or rather, perhaps he didn't lose them, but was cheated as he stated.

Who knows now. Anyway, if I count him in, you have managed to cheat 5 out of 8 players.

	12-10-2004 19:37									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Of course, there is no way to resolve this fairly, and I'm not going to argue for any course of action in particular, but I will point out that in the past this situation has been handled simply by removing all results of the given player, and so I don't think it's reasonable to object to that. Personally I object more to the addition of Sparrowhawk than the removal of Sheep - Sparrowhawk is placed at a significant advantage because he has far more information about our tactics than we have about his, and, AFAIK, this action is unprecedented. But I don't think it's a significant problem, in particular it's not especially unfair on me since I fought Sheep in the first round anyway.

Unless Sheep makes a miraculous return, it's pretty clear that no outcome will satisfy everyone, but we have GMs to make these kinds of decisions for us. Whatever happens, the most important thing is that future GMs explain what they will do in advance, which should effectively prevent argument.

So, orders sent.