[Rules] Don't Award Points to Deadbeat / Kicked Partners

[earthen]

well i used to program a bit and i don't think it would be hard at all actually,I just think that they (the programers) over looked that point that's all it's hard to think of everything.

[earthen]

Well I just finished another game where my partner actully got kicked for being a milti and still he was awarded points after i won the game!

forgot game number here it is "5124984"

[legionbuck]

[Delete Me]
PLACE THE NAME OF THE SUGGESTION IN THE SUBJECT LINE!

Things to remember when posting a new suggestion are that the dice are random, and that lots of analysis has been done on them both internally and public by community members. Also, please take time to search for previous similar suggestions and, if possible, to check current and archived threads before posting something "new". Delete the xxxxxxx, and substitute your text.

Any questions, contact one of the Suggestions Moderators.
[/Delete Me]


Concise description:

• Dead beater / multi gets kicked out of team game and his partner gets a windfall of troops & turf, puttin other teams at a huge disadvantage. Dead beater / violator shouldn't benefit from partner winning the game, he still gets points.
  
  Specifics/Details:
  • Team games that have a deadbeater / violator kicked out should see the offender lose points to all players, and game ends right then.
    
    How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
    • Players that lose games because of windfall bennies to one team due to unfair advantage should not be put under impossible to recover odds from the windfall of another team. The violator currently gets points even when he's been kicked out of the game...that certainly is not fair at all. To discourage deadbeating / multis from profiting , the game should terminate upon violator being kicked out, all other players get points from the violator. No other player has to lose a game because of a poor team member, or the other teams be penalized by giving points to a violator that caused the game to go south because his partner gets the extra turf / troops !

[Mr_Adams]

they've either got to be in the points or out. you can't only take them out in the case of a win.

[legionbuck]

they've either got to be in the points or out. you can't only take them out in the case of a win.

That makes absolutely no sense...care to amplify ?

[blakebowling]

they've either got to be in the points or out. you can't only take them out in the case of a win.

That makes absolutely no sense...care to amplify ?

He means that either: Deadbeaters get points in the case of a win, and loose points in the case of a loss (The way it is now)
OR
Deadbeaters neither gain points or loose points, regardless of the outcome of the game.

Having them only loose points isn't fair.

[legionbuck]

they've either got to be in the points or out. you can't only take them out in the case of a win.

That makes absolutely no sense...care to amplify ?

He means that either: Deadbeaters get points in the case of a win, and loose points in the case of a loss (The way it is now)
OR
Deadbeaters neither gain points or loose points, regardless of the outcome of the game.

Having them only loose points isn't fair.

If they are violators ( multis ) then them loosing points is VERY fair ! Think of the damage that would be done to you if your partner dead beated or was a violator and you lost ! Make sense now ? If not , let me double up with you, dead beat, you win so I can get points!

[Woodruff]

they've either got to be in the points or out. you can't only take them out in the case of a win.

That makes absolutely no sense...care to amplify ?

He means that either: Deadbeaters get points in the case of a win, and loose points in the case of a loss (The way it is now)
OR
Deadbeaters neither gain points or loose points, regardless of the outcome of the game.

Having them only loose points isn't fair.

If they are violators ( multis ) then them loosing points is VERY fair ! Think of the damage that would be done to you if your partner dead beated or was a violator and you lost ! Make sense now ? If not , let me double up with you, dead beat, you win so I can get points!

You seem to be confused about the difference between a violator and a deadbeat. You keep bouncing back and forth between the two, and it eliminates any argument you are trying to make.

[Mr_Adams]

Violators will be shot. No wait, that's trespassers.

[PLAYER57832]

I can see extra penalties for multis, other violators. Among other issues, often teammates of multis ARE multis... or know they are teaming with a multis. Whent that is not the case, it falls under the heading of "tough break... but it is just a game".

The current policy is sufficient for basic deadbeats.

[legionbuck]

I can see extra penalties for multis, other violators. Among other issues, often teammates of multis ARE multis... or know they are teaming with a multis. Whent that is not the case, it falls under the heading of "tough break... but it is just a game".

The current policy is sufficient for basic deadbeats.

Nope...it's not a "tough break" , it stacks the deck for one player against the rest for troops / spots, and if you knowingly team up with a multi, you should suffer !

[Mr_Adams]

Survivors will be shot again.

[legionbuck]

Survivors will be shot again.

That means you weren't a good enough shot the first time.....

[TheForgivenOne]

I can see extra penalties for multis, other violators. Among other issues, often teammates of multis ARE multis... or know they are teaming with a multis. Whent that is not the case, it falls under the heading of "tough break... but it is just a game".

The current policy is sufficient for basic deadbeats.

Nope...it's not a "tough break" , it stacks the deck for one player against the rest for troops / spots, and if you knowingly team up with a multi, you should suffer !

And how would you know if a person knowingly teamed up with a multi? How would you determine that? And having your partner kicked isn't always a bonus. You lose your chance at an extra card, which can be very big. If it's deep in a game, or on a small board, sometimes it doesn't matter. If I was to inherit 8 1's, when I owned 3 territories, I really doubt it would help me all that much.

And a deadbeat has enough downside. A) You lose 3 possible cards. B) You lose up to a minimum of 9 troops. C) You lose 3 turns of attacks that could be used to break/defend bonuses

[jefjef]

Why include deadbeats in this sug? These are 2 entirely different circumstances.

This suggestion can lead to new types of abuses/manipulations/cheats. Part of the reason CC does it the way they do is to help protect the integrity of the point system (but it really doesn't).

Multi account kicked from games should make it a no points game like it did not exist.

[sure]

My partner in a doubles game deadbeated after the first round, got kicked out in the 4th round and received half the point i won us in the 19th round. The Deadbeat partner should get zero points won in a game.

[Dibbun]

I agree with this. For those who will inevitably say that a deadbeat is sometimes tactical, that is an EXPLOIT and should not be rewarded in any way.

[Woodruff]

This makes sense to me. I believe "tactical deadbeat" should be considered "not in the spirit of the game", and I would think this could go significantly toward eliminating (or seriously reducing) the practice. After all, if you're not getting any points out of the action, it has to make you think about it more sternly, I would hope.

[trinicardinal]

Certainly from the point of view of a tactical deadbeat it should discourage it to some extent.... I like the sound of it overall although I can see some potential abuses coming out of this one but in a different way.

[patrickaa317]

I agree with this but if you each get 20 for the win, the non-dead beater shouldn't get 40. Just clarifying since you said he got half the points.

The calculation could be average of non-deadbeaters from winning team in comparison to all players from losing team.

[sure]

I agree with this but if you each get 20 for the win, the non-dead beater shouldn't get 40. Just clarifying since you said he got half the points.

The calculation could be average of non-deadbeaters from winning team in comparison to all players from losing team.

no, i mean the non dead beat would get all the points, from your example all 40. i just played an 8 player game, my partner deadbeated on the 2nd round and was kicked out on the 4th. i won it in the 19th round. i'm freak'n amazing, conquering the 6 other players who were still in as 3 teams. i should get 100% of the victor's points.

the deadbeat gets 0 and the surviving partner gets 100% of the victor's points for doing all the work.

~sure

[chapcrap]

I agree with this but if you each get 20 for the win, the non-dead beater shouldn't get 40. Just clarifying since you said he got half the points.

The calculation could be average of non-deadbeaters from winning team in comparison to all players from losing team.

no, i mean the non dead beat would get all the points, from your example all 40. i just played an 8 player game, my partner deadbeated on the 2nd round and was kicked out on the 4th. i won it in the 19th round. i'm freak'n amazing, conquering the 6 other players who were still in as 3 teams. i should get 100% of the victor's points.

the deadbeat gets 0 and the surviving partner gets 100% of the victor's points for doing all the work.

~sure

Eh... That's not that hard in 8 player doubles.

I don't think the points can work out here, but I like the sentiment.

[MegaProphet]

I agree with this but if you each get 20 for the win, the non-dead beater shouldn't get 40. Just clarifying since you said he got half the points.

The calculation could be average of non-deadbeaters from winning team in comparison to all players from losing team.

no, i mean the non dead beat would get all the points, from your example all 40. i just played an 8 player game, my partner deadbeated on the 2nd round and was kicked out on the 4th. i won it in the 19th round. i'm freak'n amazing, conquering the 6 other players who were still in as 3 teams. i should get 100% of the victor's points.

the deadbeat gets 0 and the surviving partner gets 100% of the victor's points for doing all the work.

~sure

But it wouldn't do much to prevent the 'tactical' deadbeating discussed above. In fact it could lead to a more experienced player tricking less experienced partners into deadbeating for tactical reasons and steal all their points for himself.

[Woodruff]

I agree with this but if you each get 20 for the win, the non-dead beater shouldn't get 40. Just clarifying since you said he got half the points.

The calculation could be average of non-deadbeaters from winning team in comparison to all players from losing team.

no, i mean the non dead beat would get all the points, from your example all 40. i just played an 8 player game, my partner deadbeated on the 2nd round and was kicked out on the 4th. i won it in the 19th round. i'm freak'n amazing, conquering the 6 other players who were still in as 3 teams. i should get 100% of the victor's points.

the deadbeat gets 0 and the surviving partner gets 100% of the victor's points for doing all the work.

~sure

But it wouldn't do much to prevent the 'tactical' deadbeating discussed above. In fact it could lead to a more experienced player tricking less experienced partners into deadbeating for tactical reasons and steal all their points for himself.

Agreed. It would definitely have to NOT give the survivor all of the points. As chapcrap said, the points may not work out...and yet, I don't personally find that to be critical. I don't think that should be a relevant reason for rejecting this suggestion.

[Kaskavel]

My partner in a doubles game deadbeated after the first round, got kicked out in the 4th round and received half the point i won us in the 19th round. The Deadbeat partner should get zero points won in a game.

And your opponents should apparently lose all their points...

And by the way, to become more serious, I support the suggestion.