Not all players would want this as the likelihood of more NMR's and CD's occurring as players wait for the game to continue increases as the wait drags on.

I myself am on the fence. On the one hand I'd like to play an uncontaminated game at some point where people don't leave, on the other hand, sometimes I'd just like to play the game as it comes and be able to deal with NMR's and CD's and still come out a victor.

So what about making it an option at game creation to always halt or extend to replace players who NMR/CD?

That way people who don't want to deal with the wait can still have games as they are now, but on occasion some of us can choose alternatively to have a game from time to time where all nations are present all game and NMR's (and thus CD's) don't occur (though the wait may be painful).

Interesting ideas again, but I think it's just not a problem with the site or the game. It's people who don't care enough, mostly bastards or idiots (or a combination).
Is it really the best to ask for another serverside solution? It will add more delay as Leif rightly pointed out. And it's more work for Oli obviously. Maybe I'm nostalgic, but what happened to playing passworded games with players you trust?

Not to say it would be a bad option to have at game creation. If you're into playing against anonymous and unknown players it would be a great. You will still have to accept that some of those players will add delay and that is still annoying.

Having an option to automatically wait for replacement when a player is idle raises some more questions. Do you wait after that phase has been processed? That still means no orders were entered and the game is screwed, which is what we're trying to avoid in the first place.
So you wait to find a replacement before the phase is processed. In that case the new player can still enter orders. Does he/she get time to do press too? That would lead to doing the whole phase again, because the replacement might cause everyone to change orders and send new press, right?

The option "replace idle players" would mean to not process the game in case of an idle player. Pause it to find a replacement and then restart the phase when a player is found.
An extra option to "pause no longer than X days" is useful here, it turns the pause into an extend and limits the delay.

Personally I would still prefer setting up a game with players I've talked to or whose profiles I've checked to waiting for replacements.

@sqrg,

Good insight. And yes, I think the password option is still the best for non-anon or semi-anon games.

However, I think that an option to replace idle players prior to NMR (redo-phase with full press and new orders is the only option that makes sense given the intended purpose) could be valuable. But the real question is, will it get used enough and is it worth the trouble for Oli to create yet another server side option to solve this issue for a small subset of players who would actually use it?

Another thing that I think might be useful. We recently had a high profile CD in the Biggest Pot Ever game that ruined the end game dynamics. We have no idea who it was though because he was replaced. I think that names of these high profile CD's (or really all players who participated in a game) should be known at the end of the game (though this is probably a rather extensive code modification). That way names of the culprits of these high profile CD's could end up on a public wall of shame thread (rather than simply be lumped in with 1 SC CD's in the unbalanced CD's stat or easily erased with takeovers).

There are enough options for pausing/extending/handing games to other players, etc. that this shouldn't happen in high profile situations like this.

Cypeg, it is a smart idea but Leif's concerns are right, IMO. I hate CDs as well as you do, but I wouldn't like to be in a game that is not proceeding until a replacement is found. I could wait forever. So, even if it was an option, I would never choose it and I'd never join a game where this option is on.
Months ago, when "first turn's CD & repeat phase" feature was implemented, Oli opened a thread asking to the community:
1) How many phases long this feature must work: only the first one, first 2, first 3...
2) How many times the phase in question must be repeated.
And the majority said what it is now:
1) Only the first diplomacy phase (or build, if game starts with it)
2) Repeat only one time
Personally, I'd make it "one time, only all the first year's phases" that are those in which a NMR is catastrophic for a country. But it's very dabatable, all opinions may be good because there's not a right answer.

There's not a right answer because this solution is not a real solution. As well as the other solutions proposed here are not real solutions. Please let me explain.

First of all: they're not useless. They actually give some advantage, "relieving the pain" when a NMR occurs. You may also think about some further implementation, like sqrg's smart idea, to make them more effective and with less bad side-effects.

But this doesn't change the matter and the matter is that all these features are intended to alleviate a problem without addressing the underlying cause.
They tend to tend to be palliative rather than curative.
Is it right? If your vermiform appendix hurts, morphine can help you relieving the pain, but it doesn't cure the cause of pain.

So, before we propose a cure, we should find the cause of the problem.
And to find the cause we need to pinpoint the problem.

What's the problem? Well obviousely, if there were no NMRs and CDs, nobody would complain.
Oli's working hard on this problem. In the last months he released several features (RR, Extend, GameMaster giving notice as a Pause/Extend poll has started, Game Switch, Forecast on game duration as you join it... ) curing different causes and I'm sure that he won't stop.
But "how to cure" CDs doesn't look to be the point of this thread (although this doesn't mean that new ideas are not welcome).
Since we're all aware that NMRs and CDs can be reduced but they'll never be totally eliminated, the Problem here is:

- - - Why can't we get an immediate replacement for each CD? - - -

Because:
If each CDed Country was taken over within 10 minutes since it CDed, nobody would complain.

So: Which are the causes of this problem? Why people don't usually take over CDed Countries?

The first cause that comes to my mind is that taking over a CD is very rarely a bargain, a good buy.

Can you find some more? When we've found all the causes we'll be able to discuss about curative solutions.

So please everybody, think for a minute and answer:
Why don't you usually take over CDed Countries? Why almost nobody does it? Why, even when they do it, the thing is almost never immediate?

I'm not sure taking over CD's is the heart issue cypeg was driving at. I know it wasn't really related to where I was going, though I agree, taking over CD's is rarely a good buy (two cases in the Biggest Pot Ever game excpeted, catholica and US), that is a separate issue and I think one that is being addressed and for which there are possibly better solutions still out there.

The point I think cypeg was driving at (and the one I was driving at) is how can we arrange a game (particularly truly anonymous games) for which NMR's and CD's are prevented and the players replaced before damage to the game's integrity is done.

While I would like to see an option for potentially every turn extensions to get replacements and replay phases, I'm sure the number of people who would put up with such a game is few and far between.

I think one of the root causes for CD's is the anonymity often associated with high profile CD's hence the reason I'd want to add such players to a public "wall of shame" list.

hmm not sure how I would feel about a wall of shame, I mean on occasion there are RL concerns or problems that could lead to a NMR (something as bad as an unexpected family crisis, could ask for a pause, wouldn't expect it depending on the situation or something as minor as a temporary loss of internet)


as for people not taking over CDs two (or I guess three things)
1. Like Guaroz and Leif said, the buy in is usually very high, with probable slim chances of reward
2. Quite frankly many of the countries on the open list are either screwed or perceived to be in an untenable position, nobody wants to take over something that will soon be dead.
3. Sometimes people don't deal as well with the new guy or won't call off their attacks if they were taking over the undefended centers (this is really part of my second point)

Now don't get my wrong not all CD countries are up the river, but many players probably assume that, be they right or wrong;

WHAT DOES NMR MEAN! I SEE IT ALL THE TIME BUT HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS!

no moves returned or something like that.. missed a turn basically

Anyways, the wall of shame wouldn't be for people who have RL reasons for bowing out of a game. Those things happen but if you explain people will often understand. Its for the people who just plain disappear with no explanation for a while then come back and try again in another game that tick me off.

I think the buy in price for take over is the biggest issue. But here are a few other possible suggestions:

Before webdip was available, I played on judges. This is how the judges (that I played on) handled NMR's and CD's.

1. Players were not permitted to conduct any diplomacy until orders were saved.

2. If someone NMRed, the orders were not processed, and one phase extension was automatically added.

3. If the NMR did not enter orders after the extension, the country went CD, but the orders were still not processed.

4. The game was on hold until a replacement could be found.

5. The cost to buy in as a replacement was zero. (This made taking over hopeless situations worthwhile, even fun.)

6. Players had the ability to place orders for future phases if you could predict your position at that phase. (I don't know if this reduced NMR's, but was fun to play with)

An example regarding #5, I once took over England with 1 SC, and ended up with a 3 way draw. It cost me nothing, and gave me more satisfaction than any other game I played.

Ok guys, I like all your posts.
About the heart issue, yes it is preventing NMRs & CDs obviousely. But, as I said, Mods are already working on the main causes, although new ideas are welcome, especially if we discover a new cause nobody's working on.
What I'd like to do, if everyone agrees, it's discover causes on why people don't take over CD quickly. This is useful, because I believe that CDs will never be completely eliminated. Someone should work on it, why don't we?
So let's find the causes, first. Solutions like the ones Leif & Devo proposed might be very useful later, when we'll have clear enough the causes of the issue we're working on.
Also working on it, might lead us to find something useful for the different problems, same way Schönbein discovered guncotton while working on a minor issue. Who knows.

Well, now I try a first recap (correct me if you don't like it):

1. taking over a CD is very rarely a good buy (most of positions suck for several reasons).
1.1 high profile CD's are too expensive
1.2 if buy in is too high, chances of reward are often slim
1.3 many of the countries on the open list are either screwed or perceived to be in an untenable position

2. Even if you take over a good-looking position, you might find yourself in a bad diplomatic situation (if I fully understood Shep's good point: "Sometimes people don't deal as well with the new guy or won't call off their attacks if they were taking over the undefended centers"). We could call this 2nd section: "Even good-looking positions are risky because of unknown diplomacy situation"

Ok, this looks a good start.
BTW, Nobody said anything about the timing of TOs.

Once, in a game I was playing, a player NMRed. Lucky him, I thought, nobody seriousely attacked him. But he NMRed again and CDed. Again, only some usupported attack that didn't dislodge anything, while other players were even going in the opposite direction. It was a 36h/phase gunboat on a large map. You could read that position like:
- many neighbours going far away from me ("allies" or easy to attack)
- rest of neighbours just keeping me under control (like NAPs or at least I'm not the main enemy for them)
- average position or slighly better than average
- it was the 3rd or 4th year, so most of the game yet to play
- low buy in for playing with 10-11 units (something like 8 or 9 )
So I thought "that's a wonderful position! It will be Taken Over in 10 minutes!"
But nobody did it. (Well, nobody did it immediately. It was taken over 2 years later, the position was already screwed, the player who did it CDed as well: he joined the site, joined a couple of open games and then disappeared forever)

Any idea on why, in a site where several hundreds of active players are, nobody took over that wonderful gunboat position? Neither in the first 10 minutes (as expected) nor in the first 2 hours nor in the following 34 hrs? Items 1 and 2 can't explain this so even if we remove causes 1 & 2 we'll still have a problem.

____________________________________________
Why don't you usually take over CDed Countries? Why almost nobody does it? Why, even when they do it, the thing is almost never immediate?

I've been proposing solutions, so in the spirit of Guaroz's request that we look at causes, let me give the reason I don't take over CD's (which has essentially already been stated, but I felt the wording of this rather blunt observation once I thought about it was worth sharing).

I find the idea of paying to take on someone else's mistakes rather distasteful. As such, I don't think I've really ever considered picking up a game in progress that has an opening. I admit, this attitude has made me part of the problem.

As far as CD's being picked up immediately, there is little incentive to pick up games (or for players in the game, to ensure games get picked up) sooner rather than later.

On the one hand, a hold or reset of the phase would force the players in the game to go out and advertise that a CD needs to be picked up to get the game back on track sooner.

On the other hand, once I have a nice pile of games running, I don't check the new games tab (and by extension the open games tab though the reasons given above for not checking this tab trounce this reason) because I don't have any need to take on additional games. I'm full up with what I think I can handle. Thus I'd not be checking often enough to be cognizant of CD's that need to be filled, were I willing to take on open games.

Just a few thoughts from my perspective as to why CD's don't get picked up.

I don't pick up CD's because they are not a good deal. They cost more to buy in and the position is generally worse. There is almost no incentive to buy in. Even the RR is not an incentive for me since I have never missed a turn.

I wouldn't mind the poor position if the buy in reflected the poor potential.

As a result, I don't even bother to look at take over positions. So, if a rare, good opportunity did arise, I don't ever see it.

I also think the PPSC mentality has increased CD's and has made take-overs even more risky.

@guaroz, I did mention the timing of take overs. I think the game should stop or at least pause, without processing, to give the opportunity to find a replacement. It was also mentioned in the original post by cypeg.

Yay! Last 2 posts are very interesting... I've started thinking how to recap them (I was considering to not make more than a recap a day).

Oops yes Devo, you did mention the timing, I totally forgot it, sorry. Perhaps because it was in a solution-format. But this could help us find the cause underlying it. So what's the disease that game-stopping is intended to cure the cause / relieve the pain? What's his cause? Where's the problem?

Devo, can you please explain deeply the PPSC thing? I would have said the opposite! In a WTA game, there's no point in TOing a small country if someone else's missing a few SCs to win: you'll have a "defeat" and your bet totally lost... while in a PPSC you could have a "survive" and the chance to gain something or get your bet back....you'd have, averagely, more often something to fight for...

Leif, we're all part of the problem! Yeah we could add this to next Recap. :)
So, I'll follow yours and Devo's examples and I'm going to admit my faults. Some of the things you two already said go for me as well. I just add this:

I... forget to do it. Yeah I look for some good TO once a month, maybe twice. So I TO a game maybe once in... say... 4-5 months.
I know it's not enough, I know I could help someone to have a better game, I know I could be missing some good deal and I know it takes less than 5 of the hundred minutes a day I spend here. But I usually just forget to do it.
And I wonder why should recall to do it all players that spend here less time than I do.

Ok... someone else?

____________________________________________
Why don't you usually take over CDed Countries? Why almost nobody does it? Why, even when they do it, the thing is almost never immediate?

First my reasoning, and then my.opinion:

I don't take over CDs (usually) because of the mentality ofnmost players on this site. Unfortunately, once most players get into a mindset, they don't change it. How many times have we all been in a game where you.can't convince someone to change their coursenof action even though its hurting them? Similarly, most.players simply.won't give the new guy a chance, especially if their position is weak to start.

For this same reason, I don't know if resetting a phase will even matter. Assuming 6 (on classic) or more people have conducted a day or more building relationships and plans, would that many people really throw everything away and reset just because the turn restarted? Or would.most just say "OK, same plan right?"? After all, most people don't make plans as if someone is going to CD, its simply a benefit to their plans. They plan as if they'll have opposition, and the CD is a bonus.

Now, my opinion: CD games don't get picked up, and definitely don't get picked up quickly, because most people simply aren't that dedicated. While we may have a couple hundred active users, how many are active on the forums? A couple dozen? These are the people who are online enough and dedicated enough to even NOTICE that people have gone CD. Is it fair to ask a few dozen people to pick up every CD game? Would they even want to? Unlikely considering that many of the CDs are in games with lower calibre players that people would not view as worth their time.

Anyways, I could probably go.more in-depth, but I hate writing on my phone.

hmm..I rarely sub because I do not want to fight a lost battle or try iin vein to ally with people or the stake is too high with no prospect. and when I do I get drug into stuff.
So perhaps the person who substitutes should not buys in and should not get a survival/defeat status. So then I can do it for fun and the thrill. Or maybe subs can win a bonus at the end of the game?

PPSC has its benefits but as it happens a solo there does not give a respectable amount of points (when I reflect the effort put in), plus players are happy to try and stalemate the leader and share the amount of points.

i did not pickup cdd games cause i didnt want to wreck my stats :D

I have a solution, everyone with 150+ points could suck it up and take over 100 worth of CD's for the good of the site XD

I, personally, would like some more bonuses for taking over for CD's, as some of my favorite games have come from that.

My post does not pretend to be the solution for the website but it’s a good answer to reliable users. Indeed I see only reliable users in this thread.
I prefer to move in the “prevent” direction, not in the “fixing” direction:
I invite you, especially you “diplomats” and “masterminds”, to make a wide use of RR filters. Oli has done a lot of work to let us have this tool and it’s wonderful. At the moment I can see only about 1/5 of the new games set with some kind of RR filter on and the requests of those filters are really poor in most cases. RR filters are still basically unused.
I am aware that the more you raise up the requests of your filter the more you reduce the chance to get a game started; but I remind you that a single “unreliable” user you allow to join your open-to-all game is likely to screw the entire game.

Summarizing, my advice is: if you’re fed up with CDs, spend more time in the game creation/ game joining phase. Don’t create or join open-to-all games, probably you won’t have fun due to CD occurrence and you’ll repent. Use RR filters to reduce the occurrence of your problem.

@RoxArt - if you go through them carefully, you can do wonders. I already won a game where I picked up a CD early on, and plenty of people go on to draws in games where there are CD's

@Guaroz,

"So what's the disease that game-stopping is intended to cure the cause / relieve the pain? What's his cause? Where's the problem?"

- CD's and NMR's are the "disease/problem". Stopping a game until a replacement is found is the only way to completely eliminate CD's and NMR's 100% of the time. It was proposed before you asked for causes, so it is purely a solution based approach. (I will agree that it may have it's own drawbacks though)


"Devo, can you please explain deeply the PPSC thing? I would have said the opposite! In a WTA game, there's no point in TOing a small country if someone else's missing a few SCs to win: you'll have a "defeat" and your bet totally lost... while in a PPSC you could have a "survive" and the chance to gain something or get your bet back....you'd have, averagely, more often something to fight for..."

- Let me give an example: Suppose there is a 3 SC CD in a classic game, where one player has 16 SC's, another has 15 SC's, and the 3rd player that CDed is along the stalemate line... In a PPSC game, the two major powers have very little to lose by eliminating the 3 SC player and will likely discuss the possibility of a 2 way draw. If someone stabs and takes the win, they get almost the same as a 2 way draw anyway. No one in their right mind would take this game over. But in a WTA game, the 3rd player has an excellent chance of participating in a draw. All he has to do is threaten both players with throwing the game to the other player unless they draw. He will lose anyway, so he has nothing to lose. The other players will be afraid of losing the whole pot, and will likely draw.

This is just one example, but it affects all aspects of the game. It was one of the hardest things for me to get used to when I started playing on Webdip/Vdip. People played for points. They played for 2 way draws and acted like gentlemen, and actually got 2 way draws. There was little tension as games neared the end and no need for a 3rd country to prevent a last minute stab. This gives the smaller player a distinct disadvantage and makes taking over CD's much less attractive.

@goldfinger0303 look my game history.... does it seem i like draws? :p

ah and btw about the RR thing: i just didnt play long time now, i think when this RR thing came i wasnt playing anymore... i have 270 phases now but i think before those got counted i had many more..... so i couldnt join now? lulz ;)
btw one of the reasons i stopped playing was cds...... ;)

@RoxArt - Yeah, it does look like you draw, almost one in 5 times :p

And Devonian I couldn't agree with you more. I hate people who play for draws. And not to contradict my earlier statement, for taking over a small power that has CD'd in the mid to late game, a draw is a very good outcome, but if you're playing the game full through, I only draw when absolutely necessary

Dont get me wrong. I will play for a draw. Especially a 2 way in PPSC. (I have adapted to the PPSC culture here.) But my favorite games are when there is mutual distrust of my allies and a draw is forced. Its the gentileman alliances I don't like.

Technically it would be easy to make the phase-extension a game-setting.
As we have this already in the code it's only a little change to move the option from the global config-file to the game-database.

@Devonian.
1) Yes, of course I agree with all you just said about game-stopping, expecially about drawbacks. But, although we're not talking about solutions yet, I'd say that "game-stop" doesn't remove even one of the causes of CDs: CDs would happen anyway. Game-stop doesn't answer the question "Why people CD?", it just may relieve the pain as a CD appears (so we'll keep it in mind when we'll talk about solutions). This is what's about the "CD disease".
You and I were talking about "timing" issue, right? Well, about the "Why people don't TO open games?" issue we're discussing, perhaps game-stop helps because it gives more time to find a replacement? So maybe the underlying cause is that users don't have enough time to notice that a CD happened? I'll add it to next recap, please correct if you don't like it.
2) Thank you for the example, what you meant is much more clear now. And yes it is a valid example but it involves preferences of the people. As well as my example is valid for poeple who like to play for D-points. So I believe that we should not include in our list causes related to the settings of the game because nobody can do anything about it. IE: I may not TO a good position because I hate that Map. It would be the cause of my refusal to TO for that particular game, not in general. As well as Pot-Type and Map, people may not like the Phase Lenght or the Victory Condition or the Press Rule etc...right? Thoughts?
I'll add a reminder.

@Leif, drano019, cypeg/Rox: I've included the causes you've mentioned, please check if they're correct (I may have rephrased your thoughts to put them into a cause-form)

@Shep: Where are you? btw, I need a check on item 2.1

Second Recap:

1 - CDed position are not worth the buy-in.
1.1 High profile CD's are too expensive
1.2 If buy in is too high, chances of reward are often slim
1.3 Many of the countries on the open list are either screwed or perceived to be in an untenable position
1.4 The idea of paying to take on someone else's mistakes is rather distasteful.
1.5 The stake is too high with no prospect.
1.6 Too probable to get a survival/defeat status. It wrecks personal stats.

2 - Even good-looking positions are risky because of diplomatic situation you may find.
2.1 Sometimes people don't deal as well with the new guy or won't call off their attacks if they were taking over the undefended centers
2.2 people have conducted a day or more building relationships and plans, would that many people really throw everything away since I took over the CD?

3 - VDip community is not involved.
3.1 Everyone is part of the problem
3.2 People don't even bother to look at take over positions
3.3 Most people simply aren't that dedicated.

4- Psicological side / Lack of incentives
4.1 There is little incentive to pick up games (or for players in the game, to ensure games get picked up) sooner rather than later.
4.2 RR is not an incentive for those who have never missed a turn.
4.3 People forget to look for TO and do it less frequently than they would like.
4.4 There's not enough time for users to realize a CD happened and one more game is Open.

5 - Various impediments
5.1 Players "full up", already playing what they can handle
5.2 A player may hate some of the game settings (Map, Pot-Type, Press Rule etc...)

Did I forget anything?

Any more causes?
C'mon a little effort everybody! Why people don't join open games?
Anything more about timing?

____________________________________________
Why don't you usually take over CDed Countries? Why almost nobody does it? Why, even when they do it, the thing is almost never immediate?