Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server
From: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 23:47:35 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7378 >

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Turn 23
> A: vote bla
> Turn 24
> B: vote yes
> Turn 25 -> execute the vote.
>
> That is bad forvotes on timeout, cut or aitoggle.

Yes, obviously. However - if you have timeout, then cut and aitoggle will
eventually be resolved.  I guess one option is to start timeout if there
is none when a vote is called.

> Yes special cases are a bad idea. But i think votes should be executed
> the following way:
>
> more than 50% of the players vote for (no veto)
> after the 2 turn rule 1 or 2 players vote for it (no veto)

So if the 50% players are faster to vote than the 1 best player who wants
to veto his /cut, he gets booted out of the game? That is not fair either.
Players need to get time to vote both ways.

  - Per




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]