My personal view is that this is wrong, however I also feel it is down to each and every player to do as they feel

If Germany is his ally why should he not help him get more points.

if the two players had agreed on a draw between them, it is a sign of trustworthyness and teamwork.
and sportsmanship does not simply amount to "grab 18 as fast as possible and ignore everyone else"

allowing those that have helped you to get to 17 get some more points out of the game is a very nice way to show them you acknowledge their help, instead of just using it.

so don't be sore about defeated by a team that decided on drawing.
it is a fair way to end a game. You lost, because your diplomacy was unable to talk the one who had 17 into simply winning, and because you were unable to make the weaker friend switch sides and help you out against the one with 17 centers.
that's all there is to it.
calling them bad sportsmen because of that is a sign of a sore loser

I've done, and am doing, the same thing as your opponent. I see nothing wrong with rewarding someone who has been a good ally.

I've also done this, though we let the person survive. I think he had two SC's left when I claimed the victory.

I've also had it done to me, and to be hoenst I think it was entirely my fault. Though I would've loved to survive, or even draw with the other two, the reality was that I failed in the mid-game to notice the emerging powers. I got caught up in claiming my own Sc's and had vision that was short-sighted. The good players in this game see down the road quite a few years to see that perhaps they need to ally with an overwelmingly strong alliance.

Well I wasnt calling it bad sportsmanship. I was asking...thus the question mark. And germany never helped france out...In fact germany was on the verge of being obliterated by Austria and France and never helped france at all. Most of the game germany stayed put by support holding everything. It wasnt until France was on all three sides of him with me in the south did France start giving SC's to germany and taking some from me. Im not saying its poor sportsmanship (i just didnt know what else to call it or write as a thread heading) but it makes me suspicious as to why he would support someone who was about to die, who never helped him, and never made any original effort to win, against me.

Well if it's WTA then what difference does it make? If it's PPSC then clearly Germany has done something that you've failed to do. =/

You could try playing more WTA's to avoid that sort of thing.

i didnt think WTA's were avaible to anyone under 100 pts. I guess im just bad with words.

"allowing those that have helped you to get to 17 get some more points out of the game is a very nice way to show them you acknowledge their help, instead of just using it."

No, this indicates metagaming. He's doing it either in exchange for help (or being allowed to do this) in another game, or, less offensively but still wrong, for no other reason than to get this player to trust him more in a future game.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong and it's neither.

Well i think ive found his intentions. Hes going to let germany get to 17 SC's (through wiping me out completely as in 0 SC's and then hes simply going to take holland when germany takes somewhere else so that France - 18 and Germany - 17. Kinda harsh to be wiped out because someone decides to postpone the game just because he wants someone who is, as aoe3rules (im guessing that means age of empires 3 rules?) puts it, metagaming in multiple games to get some points. I worked hard for those...im gonna say atleast 25 plus winnings....oooo...im gonna say a total of 50 points in winnings and i find it rude someone is enjoying seeing me die after ive worked just as hard as him. I never really cared for metagaming but when your on the recieving end...metagamings a biatch

War sucks doesn't it?

Yup...

You lost, and if they decide to be cruel and obliderate you for their own pleasure that is up to them, and crying about it wont get you anywhere, whether or not it is a socially acceptable move doesnt matter, because it happens, and there is no rule that says people have to win at the first possible opportunity, this game is all about building alliances, and helping other people out is a good way to get those.

I'm going to disagree with most of you and say that it's the height of bad taste. I would say the 2nd member of that alliance deserves less points, not more, for enabling someone else to win. I know that PPSC bastardizes game strategy but just because I've seen it a hundred times doesn't mean I'm any happier about it.

It would be one thing if the allies grew at approximately the same rate and then on the last turn did what they could to get the extra SD for the assisting team member, but dragging the game out like that is displaying poor sportsmanship. It's no different than running up the score in a [insert favorite sport] game.

@Rammstein - In this case the game has already been decided. Are you saying it's ok to help the person out so that they will remember it and be nice to you in a future game?

thank you dangermouse. Thats what i was trying to get across but certian people (vamosrammstein) believe im crying about it...Im not...I just find it rude in of its own sense that someone would do that to someone who was doing just as well with an ally who...well.....sucked

I think what most likely happen in the game you were describing is that you were rather rude to the person playing France while the person playing Germany was not. Germany may have made some Promises to France and kept them, whereas you probably made promises and broke them. France probably saw no reason to take any SCs from Germany, who had been a decent ally and never insulted him like you may have. Germany almost certainly did not taunt the French player for refusing to break an alliance and insist that no matter what France did, he would get points from the game any way. It seems to me that you probably engaged in some pretty poor diplomacy in this game if you have France so mad at you. Of course, France probably was not going to completely eliminate you, he just simply had never been in a position to take another SC from you yet, although he has probably been moving into position to do that. Since you feel the need to keeping complaining about it, making accusations and insults, and implying that people are cheating, however, I wouldn't be surprised if France does eliminate you from the game now.

This, of course, is all just speculation.

haha im just coping off people :)

I'm not saying that giving someone points in a game so they help you in a future one is ok, im saying that if you piss people off and they destroy you that you shouldnt be complaining about it. I am not saying that drawing the game out just to eliminate someone that pissed you off is ok, I'm saying that if you made them angry you shouldnt be complaining about the fact that you may get eliminated, regardless of how immature it is to draw out a game just to destroy someone

Also, to clarify things a a bit... I don't actually intend to completely eliminate SgtSilver from the game, although it would seem almost fitting at this point.

I got to 17 SCs a couple turns ago, but have not been in position to take an 18th from Silver yet. True, I COULD take one from the German player, but see no reason to. I do not believe it is poor sportsmanship to not turn on an ally in order to end the game a few turns sooner. I have been steadily moving into position to take my 18th SC from SgtSilver.

As for "metagaming," I don't know the German player and don't know whether I have ever played any other games iwth him or ever will.

I am, perhaps, guilty od metagaming in the sense that I hope the way I responded (in game) to SgtSIlver affects the way he plays future games (ie that he will improve his diplomacy and not expect concessions and help from someone to whom he has already broken promises and then insult them when they refuse)

lol... you got pwned dude. It doesn't really matter. Although it really is rather whack that they would do it, they are entitled to do whatever they want.

True. But I respond in action likewise. If you break a promise of sorts then i break promises to. Germany never had the chance to break a promise cause guess what he did, Nothing. And for the second time...I didnt know what else to put so i wrote poor sportsmanship. I didnt actaully mean it. I dont want this to turn into an insult battle so im done here

IMO it is perfectly fair. there have been games where about midway in I've just said to my ally, "I'm gonna let you win, just let me finish with more then 14 SC's". I think it's perfectly legal and fair. in this case it seems strange because according to you germany was never really his ally. so, I am inclined to believe MJT's speculation that you were taunting/rude to france.

I'm sorry srgt, I didn't see your last post. honestly, you are perfectly within your rights to post a thread asking this question, some people will just be jerks though.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=8098 for anyone who is curious. If anybody can find where I should have taken an 18th SC without turning on Germany (or for that matter, when Silver had anywhere close to 13 SCs) I would be interested in hearing it.

I never actually tuanted him. I just looked at the chats. He said some rude things to me about....gosh i dont even remeber....but all i was doing was telling him to take holland. Unless thats "pestering" and "taunting" then i dont see how i coulduve been anymore nicer. "Hey france why dont you take holland" is now going to be my number one insult.

Ok, if all MJ is doing is trying to take his 18th SD from Silver rather than his ally that's a very different scenario.

Also, I'm pretty sure that SrgtSilver / LiesAllLies has just outed him or herself as a multi-accounter. Would you care to defend yourself?

Yes...ive been accused of multi-accounting before and got banned and im not inclined on doing it agian...

I know. Why don't you and/or Lies email me and explain what, if any, connection there is between you.