Dude, so what?

So what!? Metagaming of this nature is wrong. The mods have said as much numerous times.

there is a difference between meta-gaming, and deciding to attack someone based on grudges aquired in the forum.

likewise, there is nothign wrong chosing an ally based on good experience in the past


call him a metagamer once he actually has two accounts, but pickign enemy and ally depending on likes and dislikes, nothing uncommon

You're reading too much into that Draugnar. He is stirring you, and you took the bait.

You are right Draugnar, that could certainly be seen as metagaming. However, your wish to see him banned for it is unlikely to come true. Metagaming is not _necessarily_ a banning offence, it is very much at the discretion of the mods. And given how abusive, offensive, and downright obnoxious you have been towards Ivo at various times on this forum, I think it's almost unavoidable that he would see your name in his game, and think "oh no, it's that Draugnar guy who hates me", and therefore be less likely to ally with you in any game.

@ Akroma - you are confusing "metagaming" with "multi accounting".

Technically Draugnar is right that this is a kind of metagaming, because Ivo is basing his actions on influences from outside the game.

But Ivo is within his rights, I'd say, given Draug's previous behaviour towards him.

Okay, just to get this out there, again, metagaming is not a banable offense. I think this confusion stems from the fact that the term metagaming covers so much ground.

People are going to have personal feelings about other players, there's not much to be done for it. The best we can do is try to be civil to each other and try not to close doors in games. Ivo says he's not fond of you based on your forum posts, Draugnar. Posts like this are not likely to ingratiate yourself to people of a similar mind.

Personally I don't like to limit my in game options by carrying in feelings from previous games or forum interactions, but not everyone feels that way. And we can't (and won't, last I heard) try to police peoples' feelings.

never mind that he didn't say he's never support you in a game. he said he's not inclined to help you in your current game b/c he already is pleased with his alliance. what further tipped the balance, he says, is your forum encounters, but that's not the main reason he has stated. as for future games, if he wants to write you off, and then when he needs you as an ally and doesn't have you, that will be his problem, but he's a better player than that, so i doubt he actually would.

Just realized I didn't make that clear: it's not that the metagaming that is essentially multi-accounting (two friends in real life repeatedly having unbreakable alliances in games) isn't bannable, but the kind mentioned here is most definitely not.

@Jamiet99uk

everything is part of the game. one can't be THAT naive to be, how you said it "abusive, offensive, and downright obnoxious" against an active member of the forum and then expect him to be all nice and cosy with you in another game, especialy not if there is another player who was a lot nicer.


basing decisions on past experience, isn't that the definition of learning ?

sure, it's not a nice thing to do, and in Draugnars situation I would be pissed as well, but frankly, this situation hardly calls for a topic on the forum to discuss it.

except, it shows clearly why one shouldn't be insulting anyone on the forum

Ivo didn't actually say he would *never* support you in future games rather that you shouldn't *expect* him too... there is a big difference.
I really doubt that Ivo mean's what he says... I am sure if he was ever in a game with you and faced with a situation where gaining your support would help him win he would. His stats are just too good to let his emotions dictate his choices... I could be wrong I guess?

@ Akroma: Yes, sure, I take your point. I was just responding to you saying:

"call him a metagamer once he actually has two accounts"

That offence is called multi-accounting, not metagaming.

I agree with Draugnar, but I've given up trying to convince people.

Just give us anonymous games and I'll be happy.

This, after all those threads and posts about ganging up on people you think are "trolls"? So, it's ok for the mass collective to do that, but an individual who doesn't like you as much as the next isn't allowed to?

We'll work through it in game. Please let this drop off the bottom of the active list and don't post anymore.

Thanks.

To all the babies who cry metagaming at every turn, your version of metagaming is not how Diplomacy should be played. You see Dip as a type of Gunboat where you all rely on strategy but Diplomacy is more than that. I've actually played FtF games and what kind of person who plays FtF games or loves Diplomacy for its diversity and depth would think that utilizing what you know about someone is a form of cheating? It's part of the game! To me, the only applicable form of metagaming is what is commonly said, when you form unbreakable alliances to win. Two people knowing each other in real life are the only ones capable of fully utilizing this and it isn't fair to an online community of people around the world. To strip the aspect of gaining intel or verbal rapports isn't Diplomacy, it is a variant.

Sayjo, you turn me on when you write like that.

@ Sayjo

This isn't FtF. If you don't understand the differences, I don't have time to explain them to you.

The margin is too small to contain rlumley's proof.

@ rlumley
If you do get the time, I'd like to hear. I agree with optional anonymous games, but given it's not anonymous how can you not learn from your previous experiences? And even if you can, why would you want to? I don't think the differences of f2f vs online are very relevant.

I always try to enter with an open mind, but there is no way I'm going to ignore "xxx stabbed me every time we played so far", "yyy was a loyal ally", or "zzz was foolishly too loyal".

Ha, this went public :)

I think we sorted it out in the game. It sounds more complicated than it is actually - Draugnar took over a CD, in a relatively weak position, and I'm in a good position. It makes no sense for me to ally with him and change course when I'm about to win the game.

Plus, admittedly, the added benefit of taking him out does not hurt :)

@rlumley I never said this was FtF you stupid fucking sack of shit. Even if Ivo didn't mean it I mean this. I will never play a game with you and irl I'd show you how to deal with your type ^_^

lololol I love you, Sayjo

I'm reminded of a Winston Churchill quote: "It's good if you have enemies - it means you stood up for something in your life."

That is a good quote

Also: @ Sayjo: Yes you will, cause you're in the masters.

Good thing for you I don't meta game like Ivo does. :-)

Churchill was a notorious metagamer.

@Acosmist - I love you ^_^

lol @ acosmist

Draugnar: We can't tell him to change his alliance now, can we?

I just want this stupid thread to drop off the active list... We done sorted this here game out in them there global and private chat tabs. (said with the best KY accent I can muster, considering I'm a transplant)

and this is why, before you send angry letters, you sleep at least one night before it.

because once it's in the box, you might regret it.

Wow can you be a pussy some times Draug queen. Forget the rules about metagaming; try the rule about 'You reap what you sew'. You are frequently a dick in the forum, you overreact, you are quick to cry, you use a mallet when a chisel will do. Case in point, I believe you overreacted and repeatedly questioned Ivo's parentage in a brutally vile weigh. Now learn to live with it you wuss.

way not weigh

Its important to remember that people can say what they like in game.

Am I missing something here? LOL, if you have a sworn enemy or major issues with a certain player then just DON'T PLAY TOGETHER! Seems simple as pie to me. There, I solved all your problems. Thread adjourned.