politics from GM with forsaken position
Hello everybody,
I would like to clarify the attitude from GM with forsaken position, then all GM could apply the same rule for this type of situation.
For my opinion, i think that usually a forsaken position is the result of an ended war where the player loose it and find nothing interresting to continue on this game. I think it is the just result for the player who win this war by taking easely the rest of the lands from the looser (heroes and hexes), to compensate the loose time during this war.
So, i would like to apply this rule if all agree that “on normal game only” forsaken position never will be replace by a new player. On big game, it could be replace by a new player only after 2 turns off.
Tell me your opinion about this resolution ?
Regards,
Bonzo, the french GM.
Bidz.com
March 5th, 2010 at 7:01 am
I believe that a dropped position should be taken by another player only when the player who leaves gives a good reason. The fact that it’s a game played on a small or on a large map shouldn’t interfer. If a player leaves only because he has lost a war and all his heroes, loosing all interest in the game, i believe he’s not fair. On ak games you can’t be always victorious !
Besides of this, many players prooved that a lost war isn’t the end of a game and that you always have something to do.
So definitely in my eyes, a dropped position shouldn’t be replaced by another player except if the player who leaves find himself a replacer, unless he gives the good reason that makes a GM try to find a substitute.