The MVL Rulebook

Published on October 19, 2007 By Mumblefratz In Metaverse

This is where we will keep all the rules used for the Metaverse League (MVL). The point is to have a single place where all rules are defined and so there's a single place where people can refer to resolve all question.

I will continually update this OP to reflect the current state of rules that we have all agreed to. The point is to make this as simple and concise as possible. As we have seen argument and upset occurs when different people have different interpretations of what has been agreed. Keeping these rules as simple and short as possible will help reduce potential conflict.

Rule 1) Rule changes are not allowed in the middle of a round. If an unanticipated situation develops in the middle of a round all effort should be made to deal with it as consistently as possible based on current rules and precedent. In the hopefully rare cases this is not possible the Commissioner will make an arbitrary ruling on how the matter will be resolved for the current round. Once the round is over then the issue can be revisited and a more permanent solution can be decided by the members of the League. Note that this arbitrary ruling can only be made by the Commissioner. Also the Commissioner is the only person that can grant an exception to any rule, but this power should be used judiciously.

Rule 2) Team Size. People may join the League and start playing at pretty much anytime. In the middle of a round a new player should be randomly assigned a new team by either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner. The only limitation is that at any point in time no team should have more than one more player than any other team.

Also people may have to announce that they can't submit during a round. This can be treated using the scoring rules related to non-submission or if it's early in the round the teams could be re-balanced by the Commissioner. The decision to re-balance or not, and if so who to move, is soley the decision of the Commissioner.

The ideal team size is 5 since it provides some protection against an unforeseen non-submittal without being too unweildly. Team size at the beginning of a round should never be less than 4 or more than 6.

Rule 3) Honor System. Each round of play consists of a game (or games) of randomly selected settings and victory conditions. Very few of the required settings can be verified, namely galaxy size and victory condition. The fact that all other settings cannot be verified requires the league to operate on the honor system.

From time to time various versions of the game may exhibit a bug that temporarily allows some particular exploit. When and if this happens people should make sure the league is aware of the situation but no rule will be made to prohibit the particular exploit other than the same honor system that ensures everyone is playing the same game.

A final point about the honor system is that abuse of the honor system doesn't debase a single game played by a single player but debases every game played by every player. When seen in this light I'm sure that no one would be tempted to risk shaking the foundation of the league just to gain a miniscule benefit by intentionally bending a setting or rule. Also everyone should realize that honest mistakes do happen and if occasionally someone makes a mistake in a required game setting that it's no real big deal.

A corollary to the fact that only galaxy size and victory condition can be verified, along with the practice of taking a game submitted to the metaverse but not submitted to the league as a persons "intended" league submission, results in the rule that people should not have games submitted to the metaverse under their league character that might be confused with a legitimate league game. Note that clearly once a player has made a submission for the current round there can be no such confusion.

Honor System Addendum

The deliberate and determined use by a Player, with full knowledge and intent, of repeatedly and excessively, exploiting bugs, quirks, or other miscellanea in a game to achieve an outcome not normally possible is hereby prohibited in the MVL.

Rule 4) Reported Difficulty Levels and Race Customization in MVL Games

Every MVL player is honor bound to ensure that the effective difficulty of any game they submit is accurately represented by the games posted difficulty. To support this requirement the following guidance is provided.

External modification of any game related files are prohibited in MVL games.

In-game modification of opponent characteristics is prohibited in MVL games. The only choices allowed are the selection of opponents from among the default standard races and default custom race and the selection of their difficulty levels.

All opponent starting relations must be set to "Unknown".

DA games must be set to Allow Surrenders.

Rule 5) MVL Member Behavior

In the case where a MVL member has been found to be cheating, being overly disruptive, or detrimental to the League in some form, the commissioner is free to levy the following punishments as he deems necessary and appropriate. Such punishments may include; the loss of a team Captaincy or other MVL Administrative Position, the loss of the Player's points earned in a particular Round, forcing the Player to sit out a Round, or any other temporary punishment deemed appropriate.

For anything deemed worthy of a permanent ban from the league then besides the recommendation of the commissioner it should also require the consensus of the captains and other MVL administrators to make the ban permanent. Once banned then continued disruption of MVL threads and activities will be appropriately reported to forum authorities.

Scoring

A team's score consists of the sum of "base" scores plus individual and team bonus points.

Base Score

A player's base score is simply 2 points for a win of the designated type, 1 point for a win of the wrong type and 0 points otherwise. A team’s base score is the sum of the four top player base scores submitted. This is done so that a team having more players has no advantage over a team with fewer players.

There are two types of rounds that are treated slightly differently. One is a “Single Victory” type round where all players play for the same victory condition. The other is an “All Victories” type round where each team must submit at least one game of each of the 4 different victory types.

Non-Submission

In the Single Victory round if a player neglects to submit a game then there is no issue as long as the team still has at least four other players that submitted a game. However, if the team only had four players to begin with then they would be missing one potential contribution to the team’s base score. If this non-submission is pre-announced (this is highly encouraged), then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select another member of the team to submit another game to count towards the teams base score.

In the case where no notice is given, if the player has a single game that fits the rounds criteria as to date, galaxy size and victory condition posted to the Metaverse but not yet submitted to the league then that game will be presumed to be submitted "automatically" to the league during the last minute of the round. If there are more than one qualifying game posted to the metaverse under the players MVL character than the game with the highest score/year ratio will be the game submitted to the league. If two or more games have identical score/year ratios then the submitted game shall be randomly selected from these games by the commissioner or vice commissioner whichever is not a memeber of the team in question. Note that players should make sure that any games that "appear" to match the current rounds criteria posted to the MV do indeed satisfy all the current rounds criteria. This can always be accomplished by simply waiting until your official has been made before posting a game to the MV that might otherwise be confused with the current MVL game.

In the case where no notice is given, and if other members of the team have other games that satisfy the round’s criteria that have already been submitted to the metaverse then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select one of these games to count towards the teams base score. In this case the team should identify *all* such games that satisfy the round’s criteria for possible selection not simply the *best* such game.

If the non-submission is not pre-announced and the team has no “extra” qualifying games then the team gets credit only for the number of base scores properly submitted.

Note that a team of 5 players with two players that failed to submit a game would be in a similar situation as described above and the same rules apply. The same is true with 6 players and 3 non-submissions, etc. It is also possible for a team to be more than one submission short of the required total of 4 in which case the same rules can be applied to possibly allow the team to make up for more than one non-submission.

Finally these same rules apply in the case of an All Victories round but with an extra qualification. This extra requirement is that in an All Victories round each team is required to submit at least one game of each victory type. In this case the team may be required to use an “extra” game as described by the rules above that duplicates the victory type of an already submitted game. In this case for base scoring purposes that game would have to be considered a 1 point victory of the wrong type. Note that such a game could still receive individual and team bonus points based on the correct victory category.

Individual Bonus Points

In the case of a Single Victory round a single bonus point is granted for the 4 top scoring games and the 4 fastest games.

In the case of an All Victory round a single bonus point is given to the top score and the fastest game in each of the 4 different victory conditions.

The fastest games are determined by the number of years reported by the metaverse. Game speed ties are broken by score and score ties are broken by speed. Any games tied in both speed and score will be left unbroken and both players will receive the identical bonus.

Team Bonus Points

All team bonus points are based on the average of the team’s submitted games. Just as in the individual bonus point case only wins of the correct type are counted. The 1st place team receives 2 points and the 2nd place team receives 1 point in the following categories.

Team Score

Team Speed (speed of game reported by metaverse)

Team Submission (number of days into the round before game is submitted to the league)

Any teams tied in any team bonus category receive the same bonus. However, any fractional result is not subject to rounding and any tie must be exact.

MVL Voting Rules

1. Any MVL member can call for a vote among any number of competing proposals which must be seconded by two other MVL members to be considered official.

2. All votes will occur in the Galciv II Metaverse Leagues forum at the Core and notice must also be given in the current MVL Round thread.

3. All votes should run for a period of time specified in the OP of the voting thread. This period should be no shorter than 1 week or longer than 3 weeks. It's encouraged but not required that votes should be completed before the start of the next round of play if at all possible.

4. A valid vote requires participation by at least 50% of active MVL members. An abstention counts as participation. A proposal requires 60% or more of the cast ballots to be accepted. If less than 60% is achieved by any one proposal there will be a runoff between the two most popular options. The winner of the runoff will be the proposal that achieves a simple majority of votes cast with no quorum requirement.

5. Editing of your vote is allowed although any changes should be made in such a way as to make it obvious that a change has occured.

6. Once the time specified for the vote expires the thread will be locked to maintain an accurate record of the vote. The results of any vote are final and can only be changed by a subsequent official MVL vote.

Rules accepted by Consensus

From time to time minor issues may crop up that may not warrent the full attention of the League. In such cases a limited number of members may discuss the issue and come to some agreement. As long as no member of the league voices any objection to such an agreement and as long as such an agreement has been posted in a prominent thread (the current round thread or the MVL Rule thread) for a period of one week then that rule will be considered to be "official" by the league.

Besides any MVL member voicing an objection to the proposed rule, thereby invalidating the proposal, any member could also move to have a vote taken on the proposal which, as specified in our voting rules, requires a vote be taken as long as the motion is seconded by two other MVL members.

Last update Mar 28, 2008. Added Race Configuration Rule and Honor System Addendum

Comments (Page 13)

181

Neilo

on Dec 19, 2007

That's awesome!!

182

Silverbeacher

on Dec 23, 2007

Ok, made some changes; hopefully, this is the finalized version

I was hoping to send this over to Neilo so that he edit the OP to the Metaverse League Pinned Post with this. So let me know if there's anything else I need to do/add/change.

And finally, have a happy and safe holiday everyone!!!

183

Neilo

on Jan 14, 2008

Ok guys we need to resolve any issues arising out of rouond 5 so that we can move on to the nest round.

I know we need to work out exactly how we will deal with a non-submital but when there is a game in that players profile. I was happy enough for the captain to make a determination based on what points strategy that team are aiming for but that game would be the last submitted of course.

Let the chatter begin....

184

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

Like I said in the round thread I see no problem with the captain making what I would call an "obvious" selection. By that I mean any game that is higher scoring than another game with the same or few games years is an obvious selection. I would also go the other way and say that any game that is faster than another game of *about* the same score is an obvious selection as well.

The second criteria of obviousness is a little more subtle because it's very often that two games take the same number of years but "about" the same score is rather vague. For example a 4 year game of 9000 points is obviously better than a 4 year game of 8975 points and this choice remains "obvious" regardless of how little a difference there is between the two scores.

But the other way is when you're trading a lower score for a faster time. This is where I begin to have a problem on the basis that you are beginning to turn something that should be a negative i.e. a non-submittal into a positive i.e. the ability to pick and choose the game based on a strategy. I know that the point of some arguement is that this should be OK but this is where I happen to draw the line.

Again as an example let's take a 3 year game of 8950 and a 4 year game of 9000. I would probably say that the 3 year game was a "obvious" choice. However at what point does this become not "obvious" and merely strategic manipulation? 3 year 8900? 3 year 8000? If you support this kind of maniulation then you have no issue anywhere along this line of reasoning, but I do see this as a slippery slope. I probably would be willing to allow a 10% lower score for a tradeoff of a 1 year faster game and still consider the replacement "obvious". So in the example I gave, a 3 year 8100 game would be an "obvious choice over a 4 year 9000 game but a 3 year 8075 game wouldn't be.

Basically I think that the captain doesn't really come into play at all here. These are all cases where the player has qualifying games posted to the MV but has not submitted a game to the League. As an aside I would like to think that this is a case we should really never have to even be thinking about. I mean I can understand when "real life" gets in the way and you don't get a chance to finish a game, but since we're talking about the captain being able to choose a game, the player has finished *more* than one game and just hasn't bothered or has "forgotten" to come back and submit. I really have difficulty with this. It only takes a minute or two to submit a game versus many hours to play it in the first place. Why in god's name are we even faced with this decision at all? It's really beyond me but it's obvious that we do need to discuss this.

In any case what I support is really not a right for the captian to choose in this case but simply criteria setup up to define how the league "automatically" selects what should be the obvious "best" game the player played as their submission. I also believe that this should only occur at the last second of the round which gives the player every possible moment to come back and make a proper submission. I would like to think that our time is better spent trying to think of ways to motivate the player to make a proper submission than in spending time making it easier for the player to ignore the additional two minutes of work required to submit a game properly, but apparently we don't.

185

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

One other point here that bears discussion and that is in all of these cases we are "assuming" a game fits the rounds criteria based on only two pieces of information the galaxy size and the victory type. In fact in an All Victory round we would have to make this assumption based on only galaxy size.

This has been discussed and is actually mentioned in the foruth paragraph of rule 3 in the OP that no one should have a game posted to the MV that could be confused with the rounds settings, but even so the possibility of this exists. That's why I would prefer some defined criteria to select the game so that it removes a choice from a situation where otherwise the captain wouldn't have a choice.

Certainly the captain may have a word or two to say about which game a player should submit but I've seen a few cases where the player just submitted the game he wanted to and not what the captain told him to and it's well within the player's rights to do so. So in ordinary play the captain has no right to select which game the player submits, so why give him a right to choose when the player doesn't happen to submit.

186

Neilo

on Jan 15, 2008

criteria setup up to define how the league "automatically" selects what should be the obvious "best" game the player played as their submission.

This is the best solution to the issue i feel. It covers all bases, since every captain has the chance now to determine the criteria so as to encompass all situations.

Or we could in the situation of more than 1 game, simply agree on taking the first game or the last, provided there is no clear and obvious selection.

Personally i like random selection by one of the MVL admins too. But after the headache of the auto-selecting debate in the Altmeta thread i don think there would be a great deal of support, though that did in the end win out.

Another proposal, and im thinking out loud here, is to not bother with that persons game at all, but to have a back up game played. This negates the chance that any game that a person has on their profile might not meet the round requirements, which is a valid concern.

187

FireBender

on Jan 15, 2008

I'm sure any player would want the best for his team and the player would be intimate with his team's strategy for the round as would be the captain and their goals would be roughly the same, whether for personal glory or just wanting his team to win.

A player, in my opinion, would not be opposed to his captain submitting for him if he is unavailable. And I speak this from a player's perspective and not from a captain's. Its not any sort of advantage, its still the same game. And if you still want to, the game can still be anulled if the player in question makes another choice or comes up with another game during the time of his absence.

188

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

You know the crux of the matter is that this was a situation that was initially not covered in the rules because no one could envision it ever really happening. The normal assumption was that a non-submission would occur because someones real life interfered with their ability to finish a game during that round. We're not talking about that case.

We're not even talking about the case where a player has posted a single game to the MV but simply neglected to submit the game to the league. The only case anyone has a choice is when the player has posted at least two games to the MV and none to the league. How can this ever legitimately happen? Are people suddenly transferred to Antartica in the middle of the night and don't get the chance to take literally the two minutes it takes to submit a game to the league after having already spent many hours that month actually playing the games? It makes no sense whatsoever. It's an oxymoron. How can you have many hours to finish multiple games yet not have two minutes to submit one of them.

I would really like to discourage this kind of behavior because this is obviously not a matter of real life interfering with their league play but a lack of care and concern on the players part. I can see real life interfering with someones ability to spend hours playing the game but I can't imagine how real life could stop a two minute submission. There's still a part of me that would simply like to deny the team any submission in this case. This is not a real life concern, this is merely carelessness and indifference.

189

Silverbeacher

on Jan 15, 2008

generally, I would agree. I do know that at least in one example, PlayJeff, he really did just drop off the face of the earth. Completely and totally uncharacteristic of him, and he has not logged on since the early December.

In this case, where the behavior is completely contrary to the normal actions of an individual, I would suggest leeway to be granted. Like if you Mumblefratz just disappeared for a month, it would be completely unlike you.

Now however, when does that benefit of the doubt come into play? Some players are not very active, vocally or otherwise, and it gets harder to gauge their behavior.

Still, overall, I prefer giving any player the benefit.

That being said, I am against Captains being able to select a game unilaterally. My suggestion would be that a Captain/Team can present the submitted games to the Commissioner (let's say in the case of Jeff who had 4 games, and Kzinti picked the 3 best) then Neilo would randomly select one. Its not perfect I know, and one could argue intent of the player. But we don't give away medals for just showing up so, sometimes you have to just take one for the team. I guess I'm more pragmatic at these things since I' have actually had to play a back-up game for a team member.

Anyhow, just my random incoherent thoughts.

190

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

Neilo has mentioned that the topic of captain/auto submission has been brought up in the AltMeta MVL thread which it certainly was. However it was also mentioned that there had been some agreement that was reached there but that seems to be a little more difficult to document.

Basically we discussed three issues that seemed to be best summarized in my reply #102 of The MVL and the AltMeta thread.

For historical purposes I'll repeat these summaries here.

AltMetaMVL Submission Method

Each team is to have a separate team submission page which is accessed via a single password generated by the MVL AltMeta administrator and sent via PM on GalCiv2.com to the defined team captain who is required to share this password with any teammate that desires it. A new password must be generated whenever any team member leaves the team.

Automatic AltMetaMVL Submissions

After the round's expiration, software will automatically select the last game submitted to the Metaverse that fits the round's criteria as the MVL submission for any character that has not otherwise submitted a game. If no games fit the round's criteria then that player will be considered to have made no submission.

Usage of AltMetaMVL Characters for non-MVL games

Because we potentially allow the automatic submissions of a game that appears to fit the current rounds criteria, no game should be posted under a MVL character that could be confused with the current rounds settings. This means during Single Victory rounds no game should be submitted of the same size and victory condition as specified by that round unless it meets all of the round's settings. In the case of an All Victory round all games of the same galaxy size are prohibited. Once a valid submission has been made for the current round this restriction is lifted until the start of the next round.

In further discussion these are then simply referred to as 1, 2 and 3. In this thread the only topic of discussion is number 2.

Now comes the difficult part in following the changes to number 2 as listed above that we came to have agreement over. Initially we seemed pretty evenly split on this. A counter proposal was made to allow the captain to select from multiple games but the punishment for the non-submission would be that such a game selected would only give 1 point for base score but be eligible for all bonus for which it otherwise qualified. One thing of interest is this proposal gives tacit acknowledgement by those that support captains selection that there is a benefit to the team in allowing the captian to select which game to submit, so much so that team may be willing to give up a point of base score just to be able to have this option. However, this idea didn't go over very well mainly because it seems like a penalty and we all seemed to agree early on in the league that we didn't want to be in the business of giving penalties.

One interesting technique I noticed FB using was to quote an earlier passage of his own and then agree with it giving the impression that there was more support for something he proposed than actually existed. I don't know if this was actually intentional or not but let's just say that this didn't help any when trying to figure out the level of support for one proposal versus another.

Anyway, I carefully re-read every post of the AltMeta thread from 102 to 182 and I do see cases where there are summaries that tend to mention that we were in some way closer to agreement on number 2 but I really didn't see where that was actually the case. We did seem to go down the path of confusing this issue with idea of the random selection of a teammate to play a backup game in the case of a pre-announced non-submission but this is a totally different case and one that was already specified by rule as the way it should go. When people began to not only disagree on how things should move to the AltMeta but also began to express disagreement to previously agreed to rules was when I began to lose patience with the entire process and suggested that I simply write up a complete summary of how I thought the process should go and then use that as a framework to start the discussion anew.

In any case I am still at a loss of where to go from here. I still stand by the idea that it is unfair for the captain to turn something that is normally a bad thing for the team (a non-submission) into an advantage. The counter arguement is that it's not an advantage because the player could simply wait to the end and make the same selection the captain would have made with the same information that the captain would have had at the time. To that my response is fine, let the player submit his game then and if he doesn't show simply call it a non-submission.

I have said this a number of times and no one has addressed this yet. Please tell me what possible "real life" issue could happen that would allow someone to play multiple games taking many hours and submit these games to the metaverse but be so all encompassing that they couldn't later spare the two minutes it takes to submit a game already posted to the MV. Can anyone explain this to me. Can anyone think that the actual submittal could take more than two minutes of your time. You've already spent many hours and most likely many days playing these games, what legitimate excuse can anyone have for being unable to take the two minutes it takes to submit their own god damn game.

191

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

Silvers post passed mine in the night.

I agree that PlayJeff has been a constant presence on these forums and his sudden disappearance is so totally uncharacteristic that perhaps it is "real life" and perhaps a Commissioner exemption, as was granted, is warrented in such an obvious case. However this is happening way too frequently for this to be the common cause of all of this.

My only objection to captains selection is when it allows the speed/score tradoff. If not for this it wouldn't bother me but this is precisely why the proponents of captains selection support it.

In the round thread I supported the selection of an "obvious" game. When a player has two 4 year games and two 5 year games and one of the 4 year games outscores them all then I think everyone would agree what the obvious choice is. This is the game we selected for PlayJeff. No one could disagree that wasn't the correct choice to make and "random" selection of a game in that case could accomplish nothing but punishment and no one really likes that.

I still draw the line at allowing the captian to select the 4 year 11K game over the 1 year 2K game or vice versa. I would support nelio's suggestion of randomly selecting between the best score game and the best speed game in such a case. I would be fine with that but I believe allowing the captain complete freedom turns a disavantage into an advantage.

192

Neilo

on Jan 15, 2008

Where there is the "obvious" choice, then captain selection is fine by me. Barring that then random selection of any games that meet the round criteria IMHO is the fairest way to address what is essentially a non submital.

I see 2 ways that are mentioned to resolve this,

1) Random selection of available relevant games.

2) Treat it as a non submission.

But then, does number 2 allow for a backup game to be played?

In any case there does not seem to be much attention being paid to this discussion so perhaps we don't have as big of an issue as we thought.

I'm not sure that with just the 4 of us we can agree on something that has consequences as this would. But if all 4 of us can have an accord we at least have some kind of justification should the situation arise again.

193

Mumblefratz

on Jan 15, 2008

1) Random selection of available relevant games.

2) Treat it as a non submission.

But then, does number 2 allow for a backup game to be played?

Really whatever we do should be a simple extension of the case where the player has a single game submitted to the MV but no game submitted to the league. In this case the whole concept of random selection, automatic selection or captain selection is moot. There is only one game to select from so there's no choice. Clearly it's in the best interests of the league to allow the single game that was played by the correct player with apparently the correct settings to be considered the current rounds submission.

To then say that because we can't get our act together and agree on what to do when there happens to be two or more such games is kind of lame. The only difference between these two conditions is whether or not there is a choice and how that choice is made. I see the desire for the captain to get to choose whatever game he wants as a bit selfish. I think the concerned captain should be happy that the league has some reasonable criteria to select a decent game to submit in this case instead of being so hung up that the absolute most perfect game possible for the team will always be selected.

Let's get the priorites straight. We're trying to meet you far more than halfway but you're insistent on the absolute best possible outcome in all cases when it's someone on your own team that has left you out to dry.

Again I don't really want to confuse the issue with the "backup game" selection criteria. But agree with it or not it is currently on the books as an approved rule. In the case of a pre-announced non-submission we have the random selection of a teammate to do a backup game. The reason the selection is random is because if left up to the captain he will always select his best player to do the backup game and that has been deemed as not fair.

By analogy we have a similar situation where something negative happens to a team, the negative thing in this case is the pending non-submission where the player actually has multiple qualifying games submitted to the MV but not to the league. So the League says we'd like to help you out and allow one of the players games to be selected by some predefined criteria to be automatically submitted to the league but the response by predominately captains is no that's not good enough because the criteria might not select the perfect game in all cases.

I'm willing to go 95% of the way to your position but I am adamant about that final 5%. I don't care what the predefined criteria is. Certainly everyone in the league is welcome to help define it but I am not willing to give captains carte blanche to pick the absolute most perfect game first time, every time, one of his teammates falls on their face and neglects to fulfill the most minimal requirement of submitting their own game.

194

Silverbeacher

on Jan 15, 2008

I have to agree with Mumble, a carte blanche to the captains is not in the best interest of the League.

while i too am willing to find a relatively agreeable compromise, i must say that i would not vote for captain's choosing games as they will, whether it be my team or not.

195

KzintiPatriarch

on Jan 15, 2008

We're not even talking about the case where a player has posted a single game to the MV but simply neglected to submit the game to the league. The only case anyone has a choice is when the player has posted at least two games to the MV and none to the league. How can this ever legitimately happen? Are people suddenly transferred to Antartica in the middle of the night and don't get the chance to take literally the two minutes it takes to submit a game to the league after having already spent many hours that month actually playing the games? It makes no sense whatsoever. It's an oxymoron. How can you have many hours to finish multiple games yet not have two minutes to submit one of them.

The situation from the last round with PlayJeff actually is not encompassed in the possibilities you have imagined. I think you are being a bit harsh on people in general, by thinking in a way in which to punitively influence players' "behavior" as you said. In my opinion, that's not in the spirit of the league, and I think you will likely end up turning-off some people if you project that attitude. In fact this situation that apparently seemed unimaginable, has legimately happened, and here's how: PlayJeff played a number of games, trying to get the best result, but was not satsified with what he had done so far. We had been talking in our team forums about whether he would submit one of the games he already had completed, or keep trying with new games. We decided he should continue and try to get a better result. Then somehow, real-life intevened...maybe his computer blew up, maybe he was abducted by aliens, who knows? But the fact is, he has been MIA for whatever reason, and has not completed any more games, submitted one to the league, showed up at the Core, or here.

In any case, the majority of people seem opposed to the idea of the captin choosing a game to submit, so I think that idea should be discarded. I sort of like the idea of another member of the team playing a back-up game to submit instead. One problem I see with this though is that obviously the team choose their most capable member to do the back-up game, thus skewing the power-balance of the team. I'd like to hear thoughts from other people, because I'm on the fence about that idea.

I dont think we should use multiple contingencies, like....captains choice, except in the case of etc etc. I think we need one clearly defined method.

Sentient species taste better...

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!