I'd say the team definitely should have the required minimum amount of submissions in order to even be eligible for bonus points.

Also, non-submissions could count as 'on deadline' games in regards to submission time (they effectively submitted a non-submission at the last possible moment), zero points (non-submission) if a team has less than the required three games.
That would allow some of the calculations (team score, team submission time) be done even for those teams without granting any advantages.

Official Round 9 results:

Team A - 12
Team B - 11
Team C - 11
Team D - 13
Team E - 11

Congratulations to Team D!   

As for this discussion about non-submittals, a bit of League history may be instructive. There was no protestation by any other teams back in Round 5, when Team E received the first place submission bonus, despite non-submittals by two team members (Itzok & Velkyn Kyil). I believe that the members of Team E should show the same good-sportsmanship exhibited by the other teams in this regard.

I'm sure there are other examples of similar situations from other rounds that I can detail, although I have not looked yet.

Sentient species taste better...

I disagree with both of these proposals for the reasons I mention above.


Absolutely. This is the point. These things tend to balance out. Nothing is perfect. If we introduce something then next month there will be complaints about whatever it is we introduce, because whatever it is we introduce will have it's own set of possible inequities.

ok seens the rounds are over who won and who is going to been in charge of the next rounds.

ok



well i am intrested but am new so its up to the people

Actually, its required that the Commissioner not be a Captain, and that the VC and Commissioner are not on the same team.

Glad you decided to throw your name in KP.

May I suggest that you all find out soon if DA is willing to also run for the job and get your elections going within the next week here or so, so that you can get ready to move on to Round 10. Currently, you have Freeman43, Lord_Arkham, and KzintiPatriarch that have been nominated.

Obv scorekeeper would need to be replaced at some point, but i doubt its as "pressing" esp since im sure both you (KP) and Mumble would keep track of scores and submissions in any case.

Good. That's better than having to draft someone. However I do wonder how much DA would have really protested if we'd dragged him kicking and screaming to the job.

Regarding an election we now have both Lord Arkham and now Freeman that have expressed interest. We certainly have nothing in the rules that excludes either but the point about lack of time in the league is something that should probably be considered.

Again I want to preface that I have nothing against either Lord Arkham or Freeman but I just would feel uneasy about their lack of experience in the league. Add a few months of experience under their belts and I would have no issue with either. If I'm not mistaken this round was the first for both. While I certainly can't speak for the entire league I do know that a number of veteran members share this opinion.

The thing is, do we want to go down this garden path and discuss this to death and then have to vote on whether to have a minimum membership length for commissioner and how long it should be? I don't think we need this at the moment because we have enough other things to worry about besides the commissioner. As KP mentions if he becomes commissioner we would need a new scorekeeper. Even if he doesn't become commissioner we still need a new vice commissioner. I'd be happy with Lord Arkham or Freeman in either of those positions.

My own personal preference is to have an election between two credible candidates each of which are willing to accept the job. By credible candidates I mean someone that has experience in the League and also has what I would call "forum" presence as well.

Certainly KP satisfies both of those criteria but to have an election we still need another credible candidate. I nominated KP and I stand by that nomination but I've also expressed interest in DA as commissioner and I stand by that as well. Either of these would make an excellent commissioner, have been in the league since it's inception and are both well known and well liked throughout these forums.

I would also like to nominate DA as a candidate for commissioner. Previously I was suggesting that he be drafted to the position whether he wanted it or not. Given that KP has reconsidered and accepted the nomination then DA wouldn't need to feel pressured into accepting but as I initially said perhaps he could be talked into the job anyway.

In any case failing DA willing to accept a nomination I still feel we would need a 2nd credible candidate before we could have an election.

In conclusion I don't want to be perceived as ramming some kind of unpopular decision down anyones throat. Everyone is encouraged to speak their own mind and express their own opinion but we were basically doing nothing and I felt the need to take the bull by the horns and try to press towards a solution.

[edit]

Technically I don't think Freeman43 or Lord_Arkham have been actually nominated. They have each expressed interest in the position but were not specifically nominated by another MVL member. Again this is a technicality and I'm sure we could scrounge up a nomination for both of them if that's what we want to do but again I do think we need to consider the experience level.

[/edit]

thank you mimble well if you fell this way then probaly everybody else dose. but i just whant to ponit out that i thought i give it a try am acttive in the forums and new to the game i am not, i even have a empire that is in 16 in rank so i am not a vet nor am i a newbie am some where between. if KP will take me as his VC then i will join him in the race but if not i will give it a try.

Where is the breakdown of this round please?



I too recall this and as i understood it it was an accepted fact that to be eligible for team BP's that a team would need the minimum 4 base games. Has this (bonuses without the 4 base games) occurred this round, i assume so since it has been brought up (again where is the scoring info) and has it occurred previously? If it is not in the rules perhaps leaving as it is would be best as suggested as we may break any precedent set in the past.



This comment is incorrect and frankly, kinda makes Team E out to be a bunch of whiners. Iztok did indeed submit in this round and it was rather late too, are you thinking of another round KP?

As for the comments about Team E showing fairness, i don't believe that any 1 member of my team has done anything but. Comments both DA and i have made show frustration at the loss of what we believed a win using a specific strategy that has blown up in our faces, but, we both accepted the result with no arguing or bickering.

I still feel the submission bonus rules need to be reworked in that it allows for deliberate non submitals to be able to receive BP's. This has to be addressed.

Now i am in no way stating that i believe this has occurred here, but there should be no room for the that to be exploited in the first place.

If something similar to this has occurred before in the league, then it is a shame that it went by unnoticed and if team E was the beneficiary in that event i would have thought it just as unfair that it occurred as i do now.

I think KP would make a fine commish so i withdraw my offer to take over as commish.

I think that the rules are imperfect because perfect rules are not possible. There is possibly even more room for bonus point manipulation by having a team's two strongest players play two games each with the same focus (score or speed). Submit the best game by each player, have all remaining team-mates not play a qualifying game that round and not announce, then if I understand the rules correctly the two remaining games by the 2 strongest players would be selected to replace them (as long as these were the only two extra qualifying games played by team members). This would basically lock a 12 point round (8 base +2 team speed or score + 2 bonus points).

I also think that the above scenario is irrelevant because no one would choose to pursue such a scorched earth approach to the MVL. For the same reason, I don't think intentional non-submission as a tactical measure is likely to ever be a real issue. Perhaps we could just add a rather generic rule that "intentional non-submission, announced or un-announced, with the intent to manipulate the round's scoring, is not allowed. This rule will be enforced by the honor code." I would guess no one would have a problem with such a rule? If not, would that be enough to satisfy the concerns MVL members have raised regarding the submission bonus?

Well, Since this is going to continue I will lay it out the way I see it.

A team has the base four games completed quite quickly. Then within a few days of the end of the round it is realized that having the final player(s) submit would jeopardize the early submission bonus while not helping the team in any other way if said player can't get one of the other bonuses. Your still going to have your basescore of 8 while now gaining a bonus that you wouldn't of had if that player submitted so late in the round. I also thought it a little strange that the announcement wasn't made by the player and done with only two days left in the round. There should be some safeguard against that. Say if your announcement of not being able to submit comes in the last two weeks of the round then the announcement's time should be set as a submit time would. Also think the announcement should be made by the player to keep others from saving face for their team for a no call/no show.

I was going to let it go and just play, but insinuating that I'm whining or being bad sport while referencing inaccurate data is not sitting well with me. Iztok did submit in the round 5 btw. Reply #253 Here . I was not on Team E at the time and have never actually tried for a sub time bonus before now, so any history involving Team E and this did not involve me. I see the here and now and it looked a little "staged" to me.

If this comes off as whining or accusatory, then so be it.

Oh yea, and what happened to posting the breakdown of how the scores were accumulated. I know I can go see Mumble's breakdown at the ToE forums, but not everyone knows or has the gumption to look there.

I'd kinda like to see the breakdown.

I hope I'm not mis-reading this, but DA, is your concern that the current rules do not seem to exclude score manipulation by deliberate non-submittal, and that in the context of that ambiguity situations like that which occurred this round create the appearance of unfairness? I don't think you were accusing team D of conspiring to have GeneralEtrius and Homstar to deliberately not submit this round to get the submission bonus, rather saying it simply looked bad (even though this wasn't cheating) and that a rule change to address the possibility could be a good idea. Is that right? Would you be satisfied with a rule formulated something like "Deliberate non-submission of an MVL game with the intent of manipulating the round scoring is forbidden"?