Do we need this feature? It is always a subject to concerns. Why when we have a tie, this just won't start a new referendum, necessarily with the tied characters?
well, if the referendum is to replace a ruler who was assassinated, that would mean that it would take twice as long to elect the new ruler--8 days, rather than 4 (I think it's 4). That would cause major problems.
How about this:
In the event of a tie, a new referendum begins with the countdown of 1 day. This new referendum is only between those nobles that were tied, and all nobles that voted for the two that tied originally automatically begin the referendum with their votes cast in favor of that candidate. Anyone can change their vote during the course of the referendum. This repeats until a tie is broken. (Purposefully possible for it to continue for a long time, because if a real stalemate occurs, the amount of character interaction will increase dramatically as the two candidates try and break the stalemate in their favor. Meanwhile, the realm falls into anarchy because no ruler is chosen, and so they can say that the other is hurting the realm interests by not withdrawing their candidacy)
Why complicate things? How many serious complaints do we have about actual ties?
How about tie-breakers where you just compare some values? In case of tie, compare prestige, if still tied, compare honor, if still tied, let the clerk flip the damn coin.
It's fine as it is, but I like a comparison on Prestige, Honour, perhaps even Days in the Realm if those two are tied before flipping a coin. That should probably take care of most cases anyway.
Random is perfectly fair.
Literally, because you have exactly as much chance of winning the tie as the other guy.
I don't know what "concerns" the feature might be "always subject" to—I've never heard a complaint, and I've seen it happen many times.
Unless I hear of some actual honest-to-goodness problem with the feature, I see exactly 0 reason to change it.
Quote from: Anaris on February 16, 2012, 01:58:41 PM
Unless I hear of some actual honest-to-goodness problem with the feature, I see exactly 0 reason to change it.
/signed
I don't know why people complain about tied refer.
you obviously need to work harder to get more votes if you don't want to be tied with someone. send personal letters to fetch more votes. that always works.
Quote from: Tom on February 16, 2012, 09:52:05 AM
Why complicate things? How many serious complaints do we have about actual ties?
It kinda sucked when I lost a tie to a character that had less days in realm, less honor, less prestige, and a lower station than my own char...
Quote from: Chénier on February 17, 2012, 04:21:09 AM
It kinda sucked when I lost a tie to a character that had less days in realm, less honor, less prestige, and a lower station than my own char...
And he managed to tie you in votes? He must be doing something right.
Quote from: vonGenf on February 17, 2012, 09:07:42 AM
And he managed to tie you in votes? He must be doing something right.
Right, by not doing anything in a realm that liked peace and calm. Clearly the kind of thing we want to encourage, right?
Quote from: Zakilevo on February 16, 2012, 08:20:18 PM
I don't know why people complain about tied refer.
you obviously need to work harder to get more votes if you don't want to be tied with someone. send personal letters to fetch more votes. that always works.
What's telling you that the person wasn't? And that neither was his opponent? Even if you campaign and your opponent doesn't, if you are fighting against the status quo odds are generally against you.
I just find this argument to be very bad. "Work harder" is a lousy reply.
I can think of arguments that would favor newbies over more established characters, and that's fine, but randomness? I really doubt people would chose such things randomly in real life. It doesn't serve a specific gameplay purpose (such as favoring newbies for rollover), and doesn't make any IC sense.
Quote from: Chénier on February 17, 2012, 02:08:52 PMRight, by not doing anything in a realm that liked peace and calm. Clearly the kind of thing we want to encourage, right?
If that's what the realm wants...
QuoteI can think of arguments that would favor newbies over more established characters, and that's fine, but randomness? I really doubt people would chose such things randomly in real life. It doesn't serve a specific gameplay purpose (such as favoring newbies for rollover), and doesn't make any IC sense.
It's a game. Go with it. Accuse him of stuffing the ballot box. Have fun. Stop complaining.
Quote from: Indirik on February 17, 2012, 02:28:57 PM
It's a game. Go with it. Accuse him of stuffing the ballot box. Have fun. Stop complaining.
We really should add "roll with the punches" into the social contract or something. I really tire of this constant complaining. The dev team is working its ass off to provide people with an entirely free game, in a time where "monetiziation" is
the buzz-word in the entire games industry, and all we get is a constant deluge of whining.
Quote from: Tom on February 17, 2012, 02:32:16 PM
We really should add "roll with the punches" into the social contract or something. I really tire of this constant complaining. The dev team is working its ass off to provide people with an entirely free game, in a time where "monetiziation" is the buzz-word in the entire games industry, and all we get is a constant deluge of whining.
Roll with the IC punches, at least. Or stabbings. Or torturings. Whatever takes your fancy!
Quote from: Anaris on February 16, 2012, 01:58:41 PM
Random is perfectly fair.
Perfectly fair != fun
We could also have battles decided by dice roll, and it would be perfectly fair. It would also be completely arbitrary.
Quote from: Slapsticks on February 24, 2012, 04:16:09 AM
Perfectly fair != fun
We could also have battles decided by dice roll, and it would be perfectly fair. It would also be completely arbitrary.
There is a fair bit of randomness in the combat code, it two sides are pretty closely matched then it pretty much could be said to be decided by some dice rolls.
Quote from: Slapsticks on February 24, 2012, 04:16:09 AMPerfectly fair != fun
Strongly biased against you != fun.
Any system you implement is guaranteed to piss off some element of the player base. Make it based on:
- Prestige, or time in realm: you'll be accused of setting up a good-old-boy network designed to lock out the newer players, and solidify existing power blocs.
- A one-day run-off: You'll piss off people who weren't able to log in on that day. Or people who don't like having to log in on a specific schedule. Or can't make it early in the turn change, so can't get their campaign speech out fast enough to sway votes their way. (And you'll probably be accused of violating the IRs against activity, too.)
- Honor (and prestige, too, but not as much): You'll piss off the people who enjoy playing priests, courtiers, traders, and other non-combat roles.
And just to let you know: we've seen all these complaints before, over the course of several years. We're not just pulling crap out of our asses.
Random selection may not be the preferred choice of everyone. But it has one major, undeniable advantage: It's a simple, transparent mechanism that everyone can understand, and
most people can see the logic behind.