I bet you hadn't read my response yet. As I said, the mods have said this is OK. Looking over history is fine as it doesn't give Daffy an unfair advantage when everyone can do it.

Stein, I'm not angry. You nutjobs make me alternate between laughing and just shaking my head in disbelief and sadness. I didn't take what you said out of context. If people don't play the way you want them to, you'd like them to go somewhere else. That's pretty clear from your previous posts telling me "...people with your views are not welcome here." So trying to backtrack now just makes you look sillier than before. It's also interesting that you think that trying to look like a good ally is the same as trying to look like a weak player, that being a good ally is being a weak player. That's fine. Keep underestimating me.

I feel a challenge comin on that I want to get in on. But It should be anon and WTA so we can all just play our styles and see who comes out on top. I just need to wait for my elimination in another game (one non-home SC and no units. It sucks!) to get into this one.

Draug wrote: "Looking over history is fine as it doesn't give Daffy an unfair advantage when everyone can do it."

Exactly right. And the same with my prior playing style of not stabbing to build a reputation as a dependable ally. I'm guessing Draug has already heard from a mod that what I was doing wasn't illegal, and that is why he has now backed off. My playing history was available to everyone, and they could use it or not. Some players like Bog and Fortknox (I think) adapted by arranging immediate counter alliances. Others whined and cried, called me a cheater, and tried to get me banned. History has repeated itself, because there are always Little Hitlers who demand that everyone follow their dictates for the sake of purity.

There is one NMR that I welcome, when the chap that's attacking you fails to build his
new units

I am being "Devils advocate" again, so it's hypothetical and we can stay calm.

so information from other games about players that is available to all players
but is which is still "external" to a new game is allowed to influence alliance choices /
strategies, you can look into chit chat Histories can't you ?

Daffy looks up the chit chat histories, finds out Bluto shafted Daisy Duck 8 games
earlier and changes from blindlty trusting Bluto and goes on the attack ?
thats' a "bit too close to the edge" for me perhaps, without guidance

Nope, DD, I haven't heard anything from anybody. I just decided it wasn't a serious issue because your reputation could be used against you anyhow.

Okay, and you're right.

@Major - No, you can't see private in-game chat, only public, so your hypothetical doesn't work. You can't see for certain that Bluto fucked Daisy over (mixing our cartoon franchises I see). But to study that game and see that Bluto stabbed 3 years into an apparent alliance so you decide to stab first is legit by the mods, although I just approach it as "I won't open myself up to Bluto's stab" and I make certain my armies and fleets arer well stocked with spinach . :-)

Bluto is Popeye (King Features/Paramount)
Daffy is Bugs Bunny (Warner Brothers)
Daisy Duck is Micky Mouse (Donald's GF - Disney)

I vote CD's get automatically advertised on the forum and that replacement players can join for free, but if they subsequently CD as well they have to pay the initial joining fee.
This should do 2 things:-
1) Stop a lot of people CD'ing
2) Make it much easier and quicker for players to replace CD countries in games
Let's put it to the vote.......

That may be fine for public games, but not passworded games. I actually think there needs to be a cost to joining a CD nation, but as the discussion has been going on VDip, there should perhaps be some scale based on the relative strength of the position, not to exceed say 75% of the value, but then also make anyone who CDs have to pay the full value to take back over their old spot.

It sounds like people take a lot of preparation time prior to playing games... I cannot think of one time ever looking over someone's history or playing style. I enjoy the dynamics of the individual games. My greatest pleasure is when someone pisses off hellalt and he goes f'ing ballistic.

Admittedly I've had more than one person state they typically find a country and will attempt to ally w/ them over the long haul. Some of those same people don't take getting stabbed very well and have even stated they'll never play w/ me again because that's not their style (i.e. stabbing or getting stabbed). I've had game long alliances on occasion (even 17-17 draw in a WTA) and others where I've stabbed, allied, stabbed again and re-allied again. Very few games are the same (albeit sometimes countries (as opposed to players) do fall into very generic or predictable patterns.

I understand the differing perspectives of both DD and Draug; but I guess I just don't see the big deal because it's still going to depend upon one's ability to adapt or adjust to the situation. I cannot necessarily read DD's mind on why he maintained any particular game long alliance, but even if the collective gives others a mental model that he'll be a steadfast ally throughout and won't stab - it doesn't matter to me. Why?

1 - I don't look at history and wouldn't even be able to connect those dots
2 - If an alliance appears to be created and unbreakable, then I'm going to find other allies and convince them of the combined threat... this doesn't change whether it's DD or someone else
3 - I can't determine if this will help or harm DD.. i.e. he can alter that style whenever he chooses and stab for a victory; but someone could just as easily use it against him
4 - I suppose I've always felt meta-gaming is when someone makes an arrangement pre-game or allows outside influences to dictate their actions... it's not like DD is saying - Draug, let's join a game and then kill all our enemies. In a way, he's just allowing other's preconceived notions to either hurt or help him... Doesn't Babak run the same risk - because he's a cut-throat, stab-happy, bastard doesn't mean he won't be able to ever ally w/ someone.

Keep in mind, I didn't have time to read most of these posts; so I apologize if I was redundant or echoed others' thoughts.

No offense Babak... you know I love ya (platonically of course). =P

LG +1. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.