Sub questions

This is the home for suggestions for site improvements, changes to house rules, and new variants.
Forum rules
It's okay to suggest new rules variants in this forum, but proposing new *maps* should be done in the linked "New Map Variant Proposals & Voting" subforum.

Sub questions

Postby drillbit » 14 Sep 2019, 11:32

I've substituted for players in a couple of games now and have a couple of questions.

1. The games I've subbed in don't go into My Finished Games once they are completed. I realise this is because they weren't actually my games :) . It would be nice to have a record of them somewhere tho. Also, when you're subbing you have access to the messages of that country. It would be nice to be able to access these messages for reference once the game is finished as the sub has played a part in that country's fate. Is this possible in any way?

2. One of the games I subbed in, the player I subbed for stated he had no intention of returning to the game but he didn't want a surrender on his stats (I've seen this situation advertised more than once). I managed to get this fella a 3-way draw. I see where he is coming from as I can't abide surrenders either. Could there be an option where there is a permanent transfer of power available in a game?
This would help keep the game balanced for the other players, allow replacements if players really feel they can't continue (perhaps they have a real problem with another player and feel they can't play without bias or have real life issues to deal with), allow a fairer distribution of the points if the sub finishes the game, and perhaps would allow the game to be stored in the subs My Finished Games tab.
drillbit
Premium Member
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 23 Apr 2012, 12:16
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1284
All-game rating: 1487
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby Tortellacci » 14 Sep 2019, 12:08

I'd like to add to this: drillbit kindly just subbed for me, and I had to add that game to "My Watched Games" since I could not access the page from "My Active Games" - it said I couldn't because I wasn't a part of the game.
Tortellacci
Premium Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: 04 May 2017, 00:54
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1261
All-game rating: 1404
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Sub questions

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Sep 2019, 19:16

Tortellacci wrote:I'd like to add to this: drillbit kindly just subbed for me, and I had to add that game to "My Watched Games" since I could not access the page from "My Active Games" - it said I couldn't because I wasn't a part of the game.

I'm confused.

The idea is you ask for a sub if you have to be away from the site for a bit. When you come back, you take the game back. Why would you want to watch the game while your sub is playing? Surely if you have the time to watch it, you have the time to play it?

drillbit wrote:1. The games I've subbed in don't go into My Finished Games once they are completed. I realise this is because they weren't actually my games :) . It would be nice to have a record of them somewhere tho. Also, when you're subbing you have access to the messages of that country. It would be nice to be able to access these messages for reference once the game is finished as the sub has played a part in that country's fate. Is this possible in any way?

I'm afraid not. A sub is a temporary thing, and as soon as the original player is switched back in the sub no longer has access. Having said that, there is a record for the sub in the game, so it would be possible I guess to show the games, but it would need a separate tab (My subbed games or something) which seems overkill.

drillbit wrote:2. One of the games I subbed in, the player I subbed for stated he had no intention of returning to the game but he didn't want a surrender on his stats (I've seen this situation advertised more than once). I managed to get this fella a 3-way draw. I see where he is coming from as I can't abide surrenders either. Could there be an option where there is a permanent transfer of power available in a game?
This would help keep the game balanced for the other players, allow replacements if players really feel they can't continue (perhaps they have a real problem with another player and feel they can't play without bias or have real life issues to deal with), allow a fairer distribution of the points if the sub finishes the game, and perhaps would allow the game to be stored in the subs My Finished Games tab.

The way this is done is the player surrenders so that the new player can take over properly. It was very kind of you to take the game over even though the other guy didn't want to play anymore, but normally the leaving player will tell the sub how long he/she is needed for eg a week or whatever. I think better would have been to get the guy to surrrender so you could take the game over properly.

Frankly, I don't like it when someone plays a position out for a lengthy time as a sub because it distorts the scoring system. For example, if you are a low rated player and you get a higher rated player to sub for you, and that player ends up getting a draw or even solo, all the scoring is done on the basis of the original player. So for example another player in the game will be penalized because the result when calcualted based on the subbed player (lower rating) will be more painful for him/her. Do you see what I mean?
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 931
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby drillbit » 14 Sep 2019, 22:18

super_dipsy wrote:The idea is you ask for a sub if you have to be away from the site for a bit. When you come back, you take the game back. Why would you want to watch the game while your sub is playing? Surely if you have the time to watch it, you have the time to play it?


For the game I most recently subbed, Tortellacci had two other ongoing games, one with long deadlines, one a friends game. RL issues meant he didn't have the time to manage all 3 games. The subbed game was at an early stage when you can expect to spend a significant amount of time messaging other players. Having a quick look at how the game is developing would take far less time than being stuck in the mix.

super_dipsy wrote: drillbit wrote:
1. The games I've subbed in don't go into My Finished Games once they are completed. I realise this is because they weren't actually my games :) . It would be nice to have a record of them somewhere tho. Also, when you're subbing you have access to the messages of that country. It would be nice to be able to access these messages for reference once the game is finished as the sub has played a part in that country's fate. Is this possible in any way?


I'm afraid not. A sub is a temporary thing, and as soon as the original player is switched back in the sub no longer has access. Having said that, there is a record for the sub in the game, so it would be possible I guess to show the games, but it would need a separate tab (My subbed games or something) which seems overkill.


I take your point, I can only find 5 requests for a sub since the start of June. It doesn't look to be an option that's used too often.
150678
157843
156564
159996
160074

super_dipsy wrote: drillbit wrote:
2. One of the games I subbed in, the player I subbed for stated he had no intention of returning to the game but he didn't want a surrender on his stats (I've seen this situation advertised more than once). I managed to get this fella a 3-way draw. I see where he is coming from as I can't abide surrenders either. Could there be an option where there is a permanent transfer of power available in a game?
This would help keep the game balanced for the other players, allow replacements if players really feel they can't continue (perhaps they have a real problem with another player and feel they can't play without bias or have real life issues to deal with), allow a fairer distribution of the points if the sub finishes the game, and perhaps would allow the game to be stored in the subs My Finished Games tab.


The way this is done is the player surrenders so that the new player can take over properly. It was very kind of you to take the game over even though the other guy didn't want to play anymore, but normally the leaving player will tell the sub how long he/she is needed for eg a week or whatever. I think better would have been to get the guy to surrrender so you could take the game over properly.

Frankly, I don't like it when someone plays a position out for a lengthy time as a sub because it distorts the scoring system. For example, if you are a low rated player and you get a higher rated player to sub for you, and that player ends up getting a draw or even solo, all the scoring is done on the basis of the original player. So for example another player in the game will be penalized because the result when calcualted based on the subbed player (lower rating) will be more painful for him/her. Do you see what I mean?


From the 5 games I've found since June, 3 have been for permanent replacements and from the wording of the messages I'm fairly sure game 159996 is a permanent request too though this would have to be confirmed. So potentially 4/5 are permanent requests.
From these 5, 3 subs were found. 1 player continued without a sub. 1 player surrendered.

I get what you mean about a lengthy sub. I get that surrendering is currently the only intended option for a permanent replacement.
Consider the permanent sub though:-
This would allow a player to withdraw from a game, and allow a smooth transition where the country wouldn't suffer from a change of player as is so often the case.
It would also keep the game balanced for other players, surrenders often unbalance the game through no fault of the remaining players and can really ruin it for them.
It wouldn't distort the scoring system as something similar to the surrender scoring method could be used.
Having a player continue to play when they don't want to be there can often poison a game and make it less fun for everyone. Allowing a withdrawal like this might help keep the enjoyement factor for all players and perhaps be a positive addition to the site?
drillbit
Premium Member
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 23 Apr 2012, 12:16
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1284
All-game rating: 1487
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby super_dipsy » 15 Sep 2019, 07:59

drillbit wrote:Consider the permanent sub though:-
This would allow a player to withdraw from a game, and allow a smooth transition where the country wouldn't suffer from a change of player as is so often the case.
It would also keep the game balanced for other players, surrenders often unbalance the game through no fault of the remaining players and can really ruin it for them.
It wouldn't distort the scoring system as something similar to the surrender scoring method could be used.
Having a player continue to play when they don't want to be there can often poison a game and make it less fun for everyone. Allowing a withdrawal like this might help keep the enjoyement factor for all players and perhaps be a positive addition to the site?

Fair point. But this needs thinking through a bit more I feel.

I think what you are suggesting is that there should be an option to ask for the replacement to be permanent, in which case the departing player will get a points hit equivalent to a surrender and the new player will now be scored as normal for a surrendered country, ie the rating used will be a pro rata average of the two players and any benefit / impact will be scaled depending on turns played by the incoming player. In other words, it becomes a way to surrender without having a surrender on your record.

I am rather worried about how such a facility would be used. Basically, it seems to me it rather damages the concept of surrenders and player classes. An Ambassador is a player who plays the game out for the sake of all the other players, whether he/she is winning or losing. In addition, a player who walks out on a lot of games may not be a player you want to play against; some players do not join games where there are a lot of players with high surrender records. The point is if a player is walking out of a game, they are demonstrating that they walk out of games. I get the real life thing, which may mean even the most reliable player may have to duck out of a game. But it should be very rare. Players in my view should realize that if they join a game they are making a commitment.

The way we can identify people walking away today is to mark it as a surrender. If we provide a way to walk away without it being a surrender, how else can someone determine that a player is going to be reliable? In order to do this, it seems we would have to create another stat (eg 'walkaway') which is for games where a player left the game but did not surrender but instead used the 'replace me' facility. Now people can see players who walakaway a lot as well as players that surrender a lot...but surely the two things have now become identical (since my assumption is using the walkaway facility would affect your Ambassadorshiop just like a surrender?).

I guess I am a bit in two minds. On the one hand, if someone has decided to leave a game I would prefer that they did so by finding a replacement, in which case we need to incentivize that, but on the other hand I fear that such a facility would be misued.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 931
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby drillbit » 15 Sep 2019, 14:45

I totally agree.

It definitely needs more consideration. The ideal would be players stick with a game full stop.
Perhaps permanent subs shouldn't be encouraged, but have less of a penalty applied to them compared to all out surrender. Maybe still being hit with a points loss but not suffering Ambassadorially? or some other middle ground, as the player has made the effort for a smooth transition for the sake of the other players in the game.
I guess it could be open to abuse if not pitched right, but the country would still have to have decent opportunities in the game for any subs to want to come in, and it's probably less likely that newbies will join in this way, so maybe any potential for abuse might be limited.

There's also the question of players asking for a temp sub but then leaving that player to finish the game. Perhaps if the sub finishes the game they would be entitled to be treated as a permanent sub when the points are dished out, or even subs in general be attributed a percentage of the points for any victory they have been a part of? Don't know how complicated these would be to implement.

Might be interesting to see how the playdip community would feel about this as an option? or raise any concerns about potential abuse of it?
drillbit
Premium Member
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 23 Apr 2012, 12:16
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1284
All-game rating: 1487
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby Tortellacci » 15 Sep 2019, 16:13

super_dipsy wrote:
drillbit wrote:Consider the permanent sub though:-
This would allow a player to withdraw from a game, and allow a smooth transition where the country wouldn't suffer from a change of player as is so often the case.
It would also keep the game balanced for other players, surrenders often unbalance the game through no fault of the remaining players and can really ruin it for them.
It wouldn't distort the scoring system as something similar to the surrender scoring method could be used.
Having a player continue to play when they don't want to be there can often poison a game and make it less fun for everyone. Allowing a withdrawal like this might help keep the enjoyement factor for all players and perhaps be a positive addition to the site?

Fair point. But this needs thinking through a bit more I feel.

I think what you are suggesting is that there should be an option to ask for the replacement to be permanent, in which case the departing player will get a points hit equivalent to a surrender and the new player will now be scored as normal for a surrendered country, ie the rating used will be a pro rata average of the two players and any benefit / impact will be scaled depending on turns played by the incoming player. In other words, it becomes a way to surrender without having a surrender on your record.

I am rather worried about how such a facility would be used. Basically, it seems to me it rather damages the concept of surrenders and player classes. An Ambassador is a player who plays the game out for the sake of all the other players, whether he/she is winning or losing. In addition, a player who walks out on a lot of games may not be a player you want to play against; some players do not join games where there are a lot of players with high surrender records. The point is if a player is walking out of a game, they are demonstrating that they walk out of games. I get the real life thing, which may mean even the most reliable player may have to duck out of a game. But it should be very rare. Players in my view should realize that if they join a game they are making a commitment.

The way we can identify people walking away today is to mark it as a surrender. If we provide a way to walk away without it being a surrender, how else can someone determine that a player is going to be reliable? In order to do this, it seems we would have to create another stat (eg 'walkaway') which is for games where a player left the game but did not surrender but instead used the 'replace me' facility. Now people can see players who walakaway a lot as well as players that surrender a lot...but surely the two things have now become identical (since my assumption is using the walkaway facility would affect your Ambassadorshiop just like a surrender?).

I guess I am a bit in two minds. On the one hand, if someone has decided to leave a game I would prefer that they did so by finding a replacement, in which case we need to incentivize that, but on the other hand I fear that such a facility would be misued.


I think a permanent sub system would be fantastic on the condition that it still counts as a surrender in every way. Like a "name your replacement" feature. I have been in a situation before, and I'm sure others have, where I surrender for the good of the game because I can't put enough effort into it and my hope is that someone else can. In my case it was an April Fools Shift game, but you get my point. ;)

To give players an incentive to nominate their replacement instead of surrendering in any case, here's an idea: what if by nominating a replacement, you take a -10% points hit or something. Marginal enough to not make too much of a impact, but large enough to where people actually go through the effort. Of course this idea could only apply to ranked matches. I don't think you should retain your Ambassador status if you would otherwise lose it though. That kind of degrades the entire point of being an Ambassador.

In a perfect world people would nominate a replacement they know would and could carry on their legacy (or reverse it! I'm looking at you, two-center France!), but the obvious potential abuse of this system would be players just nominating a friend that won't ever touch the game, but the original player walks out with their nice -10% points hit. A way around this could be taking up a position this way would always count as if your ratings shield is off, that way the player has to "sell the game" to their replacement, so to speak. You almost definitely won't walk out with a -10% points hit if you played horribly, only if you're in a decent or better position and you want the game to transition seamlessly between players.
Tortellacci
Premium Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: 04 May 2017, 00:54
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1261
All-game rating: 1404
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Sub questions

Postby hedge trimmer » 16 Sep 2019, 11:17

drillbit wrote:2. One of the games I subbed in, the player I subbed for stated he had no intention of returning to the game but he didn't want a surrender on his stats (I've seen this situation advertised more than once).

Please, whoever might read this, don't ever do this. It's so disruptive to the game, much more so than a regular surrender. I know you want to keep your Ambassador/Classicist status or you don't want to lose points, but this is not the way to do it.

A permanent substitution system that makes it CLEAR to the other players that the first player isn't coming back could be okay though. Having to guess if the player you're dealing with is someone who's there for a move or two or if they're there for the remainder of the game is pretty high in my list of things that I don't want to deal with again.

The sub system is a nice idea, but I'd like if it worked more like the pause system where the system announces that a substitute for player X is there for the next X days/weeks. I guess without an upper limit you'd see things like "Russia is now being substituted until the heat death of the universe" though :lol:
Silent and deadly Loud and annoying
User avatar
hedge trimmer
 
Posts: 124
Joined: 27 Jul 2017, 21:36
Location: Finland
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1374
All-game rating: 1394
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: Sub questions

Postby ColonelApricot » 16 Sep 2019, 12:19

hedge trimmer wrote:The sub system is a nice idea, but I'd like if it worked more like the pause system where the system announces that a substitute for player X is there for the next X days/weeks. I guess without an upper limit you'd see things like "Russia is now being substituted until the heat death of the universe" though :lol:

This suggestion has merit especially if there is a reasonable maximum duration. If the substituted player does not return within the allotted time then a surrender is recorded against their record etc.
Dog of War in ToS
GRU of the Despicables in TTT
User avatar
ColonelApricot
Premium Member
 
Posts: 382
Joined: 06 Oct 2013, 11:48
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1010
All-game rating: 1400
Timezone: GMT

Re: Sub questions

Postby Phlegmatic » 16 Sep 2019, 20:56

Surely a permasub is just a replacement?

And if the game needs a replacement then there are mechanisms to advertise for one after a surrender. As far as I can tell they work well and if a replacement is needed someone usually steps up. Or am I wrong on that point?

Does the “NMR protect” feature also add time if a player surrenders? (I make very few games myself so can’t remember)

If so, then the remaining 6 have plenty of opportunity to fill the gap and get the game back on track, if they want to. If they can’t be bothered advertising then they have no right to moan about a “ruined game” I reckon.

If the “surrender protect” timer extension doesn’t exist, then that’d be a good feature.

Phlegmatic
Phlegmatic
Premium Member
 
Posts: 99
Joined: 18 Jul 2018, 16:50
Location: Cheshire, UK
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1215
All-game rating: 1262
Timezone: GMT


Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests