Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the rights of the one

[Maplefish]

Charlie's scorecard looks legit to me.  HAHA

 Whatever you think, you 3 never had a prayer of winning with his strat. When he shut you guys out on food, you were done.  It was even more clear after he ironically recieved the food package event the next round, which would almost certainly not be offered again.  However bad is skills may have been and however far behind he was he was still going to develop at least 3X as many plots as each of you.  Never in your wildest dreams would your 3-4 producing plots with nary another plot ever developed, each producing energy and ore, be able to keep up with his production, no matter how shambly put together he made it in the end.  His Crystite alone would have swamped the leader.  You wouldnt have just lost, you 3 wouldve been anhilated.  Maybe by a record total margin of victory vs 3 other scores.  Chalk one up for the Blind Drunken Mule technique.

[Spoonwood]

    I see nothing rude with saying you won't sell food no matter how much anyone offers.  It just saves other players time from running up in the auction.  It doesn't sound like firewalk acted rude in any way.  If he acted rude, I can see booting him.  But, booting him for NOT selling food doesn't have a justification.  It's simply the wrong thing to do.  It comes as your responsibility to make your own food.  Take responsibility for your actions and accept the consequences of your choices.  One can argue that kicking him for not selling food, in fact, consists of a form of cheating.  After all, he couldn't kick you for not producing food.  The AI only sells food in such a situation because it doesn't have any way to know that it shouldn't in such a situation.  So you basically open up "The Game Genie" since you couldn't beat BattleToads the normal way (well... no one could).

    I think I've had 2 games where I've produced food early, a fire happened, and I ended up with all the colony's food for a round or two, and I haven't sold food.  Pretty sure I won those games because of that.  Some other player had a food plot, but it didn't produce anything/some other player got the package and eventually produced food.  I don't feel any remorse that I cheated anyone out of "fun".  I think in one game I also let everyone starve for 3-4 turns, and then finally sold a food unit or two.  It does seem true to me that you can benefit more by selling food after having everyone starve for 3-4 turns for a high price, since if none of your opponents do anything with their plots for 3-4 turns you really have such a good position that if you have an idea of how to play well, you have a very high probability of winning just from having 3-4 more turns of development.  However, if you don't want to sell food, you can ensure your victory by not selling food in such a situation.  It makes for a good strategic play.

    Funny thing, it seems that firewalk got penalized for his announcement that he would play strategically well, and that he did indeed play strategically well.  If this did in fact happen, shame on the host for booting, and if the other players approved of it, shame on those other players. 

[firewalkwithme79]

In my head I have been comparing it to games of Street Fighter 2 we played as a kid where your friend would beat you 17 times a row by picking Ryu and doing nothing but sweeps so you get mad and shut the Super Nintendo off.

[Rogue Cat]

Sorry to say it, but you screwed it well, both for voting to kick the player and for not having your own food reserves. If you fully lack of food, you are screwed. If you are forced to depends on others to get your food, they can screw you at any time. Be it selling at highest price or not selling at all. Just as another player can do by buying all the food before you do, or rising its price so you can't buy it. Same goes for plots.

Certainly he was screwing your playtime and possibly the colony score by doing that, but the game has no official rules about that. If he wants to win at any cost and goes fully throatcutter, he can do that. In that case, we can blame the rest of you for not playing defensively and have your own food supply, or for expecting all players to be cooperative. (So you'll have to wait for the family to come and help you.)

We have to admit that this was a bit interventionist, as you didn't let each player to choose their own path. And what Ryu did was casting fireballs about non-stop.

[firewalkwithme79]

You are right about Ryu. Then who was the character that could win with constant sweeps?

[MuleyMan]

Fire is a new player and expected to do new stuff.  He will not understand all the nuances and factors in a game that are important.  To deny food or anything to others is a choice. Might not be the best choice for himself, others or the game but we all have had noobs hose a normal game and twist it into a weird event where others wish the new player was replaced with a bot.  Live with it, enjoy the weirdness, take advantage of that to win, whatever.
But Hosting is a special privelege here.  Reputation as a host/player is all important.  Just ask Akire1.
It is so important to be a good and rightous host.  Word will get around and pretty soon players will avoid you, women will shun you and banks will repossess your home!   No, wait, just kidding on last part (i hope).
Reputation is all we have here.  It is the responsibility of regular players to inform new players on how important this is.
How many games have you played where a new player messed up the game, or your game, or helped another win thru ignorance?  We live with this and hopefully politely help them to get better so more games don't get hosed.
The question was asked in a response if the host would have acted differently with a seasoned player.
I feel a new player should get MORE consideration in any matter affecting a game.
In this case, Fire had every right to play as he wishes.  If he feels this is his only chance to come back and win, how can a host justify booting for that?  I understand the frustration.  After reading the game chat and talking to all parties involved and reading this forum post I have concluded that Nanner should not have booted Fire, but Nanner realized later that the situation was not clear cut.  Nanner tried to make amends and seemed to understand and learn from the situation.  Kudo's on keeping your eyes open Nanner.
You were willing to listen to the complaints after the boot and seemed to learn a little too.

Too many good and fun players have left us from all the crap that has to be tolerated from a few bad apples.  We, as Mule fanatics must do all we can to keep who we have now, help the new players get up to speed and go recruit some more new players.

[firewalkwithme79]

You guys can't get rid of me that easy. What Muley said is kind of what I was trying to tell them before I was kicked, I am newish and had never seen that situation and wanted to play it out to see if it works. I am sure that situation will either never happen to me again or in the least very very rarely happen. I am still testing stuff out and wanted to see if that is a winning strategy. To be honest I would still try it again to some degree. I do see now that I probably could have sold to them at a crazy price and used to my advantage the next round but I still feel like I had a shot with the method I was using. I looked at the game log or whatever and I think I was starting make a comeback. None of them would have had more than 3 mules out the whole game. I would have had all my plots producing and I had high tite spots. I may have still lost but it was up to me to choose my strategy and tinker with my game to see what happens just for the knowledge. One thing I never pointed out though: the three people in the room kept saying they didn't want to waste another 45 minutes to not do anything in the game but (and not saying this to sound like a jerk) they werent getting any time to place mules so all of the rounds would have been greatly shortened and I figure they would have had to sit through about 10 to 15 minutes to finish from the point I was kicked due to that. It also bothered me a bit that he kept stating that I got the win like that had an effect on the justification of his decision to kick me. To me the win is besides the point and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

All in all there are no hard feelings for anyone involved. I was kind of shocked because I have never experienced anything like that playing an online game but it what it is and this is still just a video game. In all honesty Nanner seem like he is probably a nice dude. I think he got swept up in the other two players asking him to kick me on top of his own frustration with my game choices. They were asking him to for a few rounds and he was bucking the idea at first but finally gave in. If anyone asks me, the one that was the most effected, they should still play with all three of the other players involved. I say let them chalk it up to lesson learned. When I say that I am not talking about game tactics, I am talking about accepting a bad unlucky situation and dealing with the outcome of that situation.

[Rogue Cat]

I guess your strategy would have worked perfectly. If all other 3 players are starving, and your food production+stock is lower than 12 units, the price will rise to the max in 2 turns. Then, you just have to produce massive food and sell it all to the shop/players.

I guess this topic will end just like NULL's one: a bad move or unwise choice began the problem, some time after that the problem gradually vanishes. Just give it some time, no need to keep talking about this "unwise" choice anymore, capisce?

And about SF2, I guess it was Guile who had the longest range for low kicks. Except for Dhalsim, who could keep using his elastic limbs to hit from distance.

[Maplefish]

How many games have you played where a new player messed up the game

It seems to me that this issue, of someone elses bad move ruining your game is alien to me.  Its not my responsibility to play the "generally accepted pattern" that experinced players have come to expect.  Because they expect a certain style of play from experienced players they fail to adapt to an illogical move by a new player, thus "ruining" their game. 

If any player feels this way then I suggest staying out of any room I play in completely.  Because that is exactly what Im going to do, either through stupidity or by design.  And in my opinion thats your fault not mine.  When you get thrown a curve ball, you adapt, or you strike out, its that simple.  Dont blame the pitcher because you refuse to change your swing.

I came into contact with a player tonight who verbally abused me before abandoning the game because I didnt purchase an auction that gave another player a great chain of mountain plots.  He was too busy building his little empire in the corner because he thought the other players would do his dirty work for him.  He felt the game was completely over at this point and no one could win because of MY mistake.  That I had cost him the game and 90 minutes of his time because I failed to keep the other player from attaining a huge advantage in the game.  As if I had this huge responsibilty to the colony to ensure that everyones game was fun and everyone had a winning chance.  I feel that this ideology is complete nonsense and made even more rediculous in that this is a FREE MARKET TRADING GAME.  It does not lend itself to predictability and players who cant adapt to unexpected turn of events. 

In short I may quote "hose" your game because of ignorance.   Be prepared to change your business plan or maybe you should avoid my rooms until Im a more predictable player.

[Chuckie Chuck]

Really, I thought being kicked counted as abandoned.

[Spoonwood]

     I pretty much agree with Maplefish, and feel his perspective excellent here.

[Gmanster64]

Really, I thought being kicked counted as abandoned.

No, for some reason, a kick doesn't count as an abandon; while a disconnect, that wasn't your fault, does.
Peter REALLY needs to fix that...

[Chuckie Chuck]

Hmmm, no, actually, I would consider that to be fixed already, because it used to count and I hated that.

[Mt-Wampus]

   I agree with you Maplefish! Every man for themselves unless your Mary/Mogs or any other of there colluding alliases

How many games have you played where a new player messed up the game

It seems to me that this issue, of someone elses bad move ruining your game is alien to me.  Its not my responsibility to play the "generally accepted pattern" that experinced players have come to expect.  Because they expect a certain style of play from experienced players they fail to adapt to an illogical move by a new player, thus "ruining" their game. 

If any player feels this way then I suggest staying out of any room I play in completely.  Because that is exactly what Im going to do, either through stupidity or by design.  And in my opinion thats your fault not mine.  When you get thrown a curve ball, you adapt, or you strike out, its that simple.  Dont blame the pitcher because you refuse to change your swing.

I came into contact with a player tonight who verbally abused me before abandoning the game because I didnt purchase an auction that gave another player a great chain of mountain plots.  He was too busy building his little empire in the corner because he thought the other players would do his dirty work for him.  He felt the game was completely over at this point and no one could win because of MY mistake.  That I had cost him the game and 90 minutes of his time because I failed to keep the other player from attaining a huge advantage in the game.  As if I had this huge responsibilty to the colony to ensure that everyones game was fun and everyone had a winning chance.  I feel that this ideology is complete nonsense and made even more rediculous in that this is a FREE MARKET TRADING GAME.  It does not lend itself to predictability and players who cant adapt to unexpected turn of events. 

In short I may quote "hose" your game because of ignorance.   Be prepared to change your business plan or maybe you should avoid my rooms until Im a more predictable player.

[leahcim99]

That was YOUR WIN firewalkwithme - I have been messed up on food LOTS and starved for many rounds - I take my lumps as it was MY ERROR - if 3 players did this at the same time and left one with an advantage, which he then used, well so be it. 3 players get to starve - IT IS NOT JUSTIFICATION to kick him.

Maplefish stated it PERFECTLY.

firewalkwithme, join my game anytime - I will not kick you if you gain that advantage in one of my games.

Please remember all....in real life he would have sold and got as much as he could for the food as opposed to letting it rot.

As to the "need" justification - be careful what you wish for - someday someone might "need" something you have and will take it because they "need" it.

fire planted food, bad luck hit the other 3....fire's win