Good point that needs to be added as a feature as well - I think it's sensible that 1 vs n can always surrender without waiting for agreement.

tom wrote:

I think it's sensible that 1 vs n can always surrender without waiting for agreement.

I still supremely disagree with this statement if a FFA game.  Auto-surrenders (with current functionality) could drastically change a game.  If a player is nearly eliminated but then just Surrenders, then anyone that has worked at eliminating him for the bonus would potentially be hurt.  Personally I think this would be a bad move.   

(That said, if the territories were kept or an auto-bot (Rollout! ) and the elimination bonus was still up for grabs then potentially that would make auto-surrenders more bearable...although I still think there are some cons and people would use them incorrectly, but at least it wouldn't change the swing of the game as much.)

Yertle wrote:

tom wrote:

I think it's sensible that 1 vs n can always surrender without waiting for agreement.

I still supremely disagree with this statement if a FFA game.  Auto-surrenders (with current functionality) could drastically change a game.  If a player is nearly eliminated but then just Surrenders, then anyone that has worked at eliminating him for the bonus would potentially be hurt.  Personally I think this would be a bad move.   

(That said, if the territories were kept or an auto-bot (Rollout! ) and the elimination bonus was still up for grabs then potentially that would make auto-surrenders more bearable...although I still think there are some cons and people would use them incorrectly, but at least it wouldn't change the swing of the game as much.)

I think tom was referring to 1 vs n team game surrenders only.

Yertle wrote:

I still supremely disagree with this statement if a FFA game.  Auto-surrenders (with current functionality) could drastically change a game.  If a player is nearly eliminated but then just Surrenders, then anyone that has worked at eliminating him for the bonus would potentially be hurt.  Personally I think this would be a bad move.   

(That said, if the territories were kept or an auto-bot (Rollout! ) and the elimination bonus was still up for grabs then potentially that would make auto-surrenders more bearable...although I still think there are some cons and people would use them incorrectly, but at least it wouldn't change the swing of the game as much.)

I'm 100% with Yertle on this, and I see the bot as the premier solution.

Bots can potentially weigh in on a number of other issues.  For instance if a player misses their turn, a bot could take it for them.  Premium members could turn on and off an auto-bot if they think they might be booted, maybe with x - number of bot turns allowed before their ability to come back into the game is disallowed.

I hesitate to suggest this because I don't want to discourage the idea of a Real-time engine, but bots could play in RT games to create the illusion of their being more players.  Bots play fast!

Alpha wrote:

Yertle wrote:

tom wrote:

I think it's sensible that 1 vs n can always surrender without waiting for agreement.

I still supremely disagree with this statement if a FFA game.  Auto-surrenders (with current functionality) could drastically change a game.  If a player is nearly eliminated but then just Surrenders, then anyone that has worked at eliminating him for the bonus would potentially be hurt.  Personally I think this would be a bad move.   

(That said, if the territories were kept or an auto-bot (Rollout! ) and the elimination bonus was still up for grabs then potentially that would make auto-surrenders more bearable...although I still think there are some cons and people would use them incorrectly, but at least it wouldn't change the swing of the game as much.)

I think tom was referring to 1 vs n team game surrenders only.

Sorry yes I meant 1 player v 1 player or 1 player v1 team should be allowed.

Cool, I thought it may be just for Team games, but wanted to make sure :)

- Fixed bug where surrenders when 2 players were remaining could result in the wrong player receiving the 'Your surrender has been accepted' notification.

- Allowed one player to surrender against a single remaining team

- Added a link to all WarGear emails offering the option to 'Unsubscribe' to future emails with a single click on a link

Changed factories to be a per-territory (not global) setting:

• Standard means the player has to own the factory territory to receive bonus units
• AutoCapture means the factory territory is automatically assigned to the player if the player owns the continent
• Universal does not autocapture but adds units to the target territory irrespective of who occupies the territory

- Also fixed bug where adding / removing territories in a continent resulted in the factory setting being cleared

Great stuff!  Thanks again Tom!

Oh my lord, The new factories are up and running!?  Oh Joy.

Enhancements

- Added game mod to game lists below board name (refresh to get updated style sheet)

- Added game scraper to return ranking points gained by cheaters back to players who lost to the cheater.

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

Bug Fixes

- Fixed bug where it was possible to start non-teamplay games on games where teamplay only is allowed

- Fixed bugs in dates showing on Charts page and added 'Quarter' button

From now on any threads reporting cheating will be deleted - if you suspect a player is cheating then please use the link at the bottom of each game page to report your suspicions to an administrator.

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

weathertop wrote:

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

I added it to the bottom of the game player page as well.

tom wrote:

weathertop wrote:

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

I added it to the bottom of the game player page as well.

So I think I might have accidentally reported myself as a cheater :)

Was curious about how the link worked, so I clicked it.  It brought up a screen with my name and my opponent's name.  The text said, "Name the player you suspect of cheating...etc" so I clicked on my name.  It took me to my profile page and the "report cheater" form had disappeared.

Did that action sent a notification to you, tom?

AttilaTheHun wrote:

tom wrote:

weathertop wrote:

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

I added it to the bottom of the game player page as well.

So I think I might have accidentally reported myself as a cheater :)

Was curious about how the link worked, so I clicked it.  It brought up a screen with my name and my opponent's name.  The text said, "Name the player you suspect of cheating...etc" so I clicked on my name.  It took me to my profile page and the "report cheater" form had disappeared.

Did that action sent a notification to you, tom?

This is awesome...  Let's keep the self incrimination button!

AttilaTheHun wrote:

tom wrote:

weathertop wrote:

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

I added it to the bottom of the game player page as well.

So I think I might have accidentally reported myself as a cheater :)

Was curious about how the link worked, so I clicked it.  It brought up a screen with my name and my opponent's name.  The text said, "Name the player you suspect of cheating...etc" so I clicked on my name.  It took me to my profile page and the "report cheater" form had disappeared.

Did that action sent a notification to you, tom?

I'm fairly certain that wouldn't actually send a notification, that just links to the Player's Profile page.  You would actually have to click Submit in order for it to be submitted.  Although it would probably be nice if there was a checkbox for which player you are choosing (probably without the ability to enter yourself) and then you could enter the freetext info.  With Submit not available until actually select a player (and perhaps enter text).

Yertle wrote:

..with Submit not available until actually select a player (and perhaps enter text).

Some text should be required.  This will not only prevent accidental submissions, but it will also help with the evaluation of the accusation.

Yertle wrote:

AttilaTheHun wrote:

tom wrote:

weathertop wrote:

tom wrote:

- Added link to report cheating (at the bottom of every game page)

just to clarify:  on the game info page not the launched player page.

I added it to the bottom of the game player page as well.

So I think I might have accidentally reported myself as a cheater :)

Was curious about how the link worked, so I clicked it.  It brought up a screen with my name and my opponent's name.  The text said, "Name the player you suspect of cheating...etc" so I clicked on my name.  It took me to my profile page and the "report cheater" form had disappeared.

Did that action sent a notification to you, tom?

... Although it would probably be nice if there was a checkbox for which player you are choosing (probably without the ability to enter yourself) ...

+1 here.  Prevents typos from being a problem.

And, yes, we should keep the self-incrimination button.  But only if insanity pleas are admissible in the defense. :)

P.S. M, I'm being facetious again!

If no text is typed then no submission is made. ATH it only send a complaint if you hit the submit button.