http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=40311

Did i read rules wrong, or is it illegal to have preformed alliances going INTO a game?

Predefined alliances are against the rules.

Let a mod know at [email protected] They can investigate and may have to make a decision base don past history or what not. If it is a new player, they may chastise and warn him, but if it is a clear case of knowingly metagaming, they may have to be more harsh.

thanks i will do.

There is nothing nothing wrong to have alliances from previous games if the reason for alliance is knowing that this person is reliable and you can trust him.

It is wrong to ally someone from a previous game because "he owes you" or "you owe him".

@Bask - "and carrying it over to a new game" implies a predefined alliance. You know well that I would ally with you any day if the game conditions warrant it. Bit I would never ally with you before the game was set. I coudl just as easily start a game with you as your enemy. And that is the way it is supposed to be.

Bask - Like Draug said, this reeks of a predetermined alliance. There's nothing wrong with repeatedly allying with someone IF game conditions warrant it. It's when you get 2 people who say "let's just be allies in all our games" that there becomes a problem.

thats the point. first off, i've never played with either of the people i'm alligned with in that game before. never. in our game, it made sense. in other games, i ALWAYS come into the game with a clean slate. there was nothing "predetermined" for this game.

Did anybody notice that Bjmacson replied as if he were either dannyboi or Russia? An analysis of dannyboi's games shows Bjmacson playing as Austria, who wasn't accused of anything, in only one game with dannyboi...

Things that make you go hmmmmm...

Your kidding Bask.You see nothing wrong with having preformed alliances.If that was the case shut the site down since there would be no need to play any more since we could all pick an ally to enter every game with and dominate.
I'm good with tactics so I would need a smooth talking partner to commincate are thoughts to other teams.would any one of the smoother talkers on the site like to be my permanent partner in crime.

i replied cause dannyboi posted this on the general tab in my game, and i am allied with russia and england. he said that some of my moves have been weird and questioned my playing integrity...

I would like to say that I was completely unaware of a rule prohibiting me from working with someone who I've learned I can trust from previous games. Russia and England forming an alliance is not an unheard of strategy, it works pretty damn well actually. Also, this is my first game with this Austria, but he's also in an ideal place to help against Germany and Turkey. There is nothing preventing either of them from betraying me. You can also take notice to the fact that I am currently involved in about six games, and neither England nor Austria appear in more than maybe two of them. I can't help the fact that I enjoy 12 hour phases and so do they so we end up in the same games.

Also, if I were "cheating" wouldn't I have more then 35 credits by now?

@hauser - as long as you didn't go into the game with a preset alliance, the fact that you allied with someone who was an ally in the past is fine. There is a fine line and you must be careful not to cross it.

So there is no rule prohibiting working with someone just because you have worked well together in the past (see Bask and myself, for instance). But there is one (and the mods have made it clear it exists) that prohibits you from entering the game with the alliance already decided upon. If I coem in as Turkey and Bask is Russia, I'm likely to attack him because a juggernaut is the first thing everyone looks towards. But if I come in as Austria and Bask as Italy, you damn well better believe I'm ging to be trying to set up an alliance.

And I should note, I always try to get Italy as an ally when I'm austria.

@Draugnar - I appreciate your comments, and I do understand dannyboi's concern. If it made no sense to work with either of my current allies in the said game, I would not be working with them, and if it makes everyone happy, I can try to avoid joining games with either person. But as I said before, I strongly prefer 12 hour phases, and it seems like they do too. I would have to find a new site to play if I were never allowed to play with either of them.

Hard to prove what is predetermined or arose out of in game events.The fact that players would say this in game raises some doubts which could never be proven as they could deny it or take the fifth and refuse to answer on the grounds it may incriminate themselfs.

hauser, just to rebut your "35 point" argument, a cheater or rule-breaker does not necessarily have to be good at it. The level of success that they have at breaking the rules does not determine how much of a penalty they should have for breaking the rules. A bank robber who gets away with $10 should be penalized as much as one who got away with $10k.

I would say any bank robber who gets away with 10 bucks should be shot on sight, for his own sake and the future of humanity :)

@hauser
1. Don't quit over this and don't take it too seriously. By the looks of it you haven't really done anything that bad, definitely not intentionally. I don't think you'd be banned or anything.

2. The basic rule, as with any community, is don't do to others what you don't want done to yourself. So, the question here is "would you join a game if you know in advance there are 2+ other players who have a strong tendency to ally with each other?" Probably not...

Noone is saying you should not play with the same people again - we all bump into each-other all the time - but you should play in a way that noone else can come and say "hey, these two guys always work together".

If you're having problems fighting someone because they are nice, you know them, it always works well, etc. maybe you should really stop playing with them for a while. Play with some other people and you'll gain more such good allies - and then make a game with only these guys - and I promise you won't like all of them so much after :)

Draugnar, drano019 - if somebody approaches another player and says "hey, join game such and such, so we can ally", then this is cheating. If somebody joined a game and says "hey, we worked together in previous games, how about an alliance?", then it is legit. I think we agree on it (unless there is some weird Astro-Turkish alliance there, then it stinks of cheating).

@podium - preformed alliance are illegal. It does not mean that an alliance that is based on previous performance is preformed.

"...unless there is some weird Astro-Turkish alliance there, then it stinks of cheating"

Agreed. If Turkey has roped in aliens, he is probably cheating!

What I find INCREDIBLY ironic and ***extremely hypocritical*** is how many people used to tell me (when I first got involved in forums and was *extremely obnoxious*) that they would A: never ally with me, B: Kill me on sight in any game. This includes, I believe, Draugnar. So, it seems Pre-Determined ENEMIES is perfectly acceptable!!!!! Damned hypocrites!!!

That being said, please DO NOT tell me that ANY OF YOU will not be pre-disposed to ally with Player A over Player B because A has always been loyal and trustworthy and B has always been a piece of shit.

This notion that all you people are so morally uprighteous and never PRE-judgemental when playing against known players just stinks of LYING! And the ONLY person you are lying to is yourself! You ALL make conclusion going into a game based upon who you are playing, based upon known strategies, etc.

give me break. I GET IT...you can not, in ANY WAY, make a written prior agreement to be allies...but to suggest that natural alliances to no occur just makes you all liars.

At FatherSnitch - regarding weird Turko-Astro alliances...I'm currently in an ANON game in which there was a WEIRD Turko-Astro alliance. I tried to explain that is Austria grows, than Turkey's ONLY growth would be through his "Ally", and thus it was a stupid alliances....but believe it or not, logic *completely* escapes some people. baffling...

@krellin I´m in an ANON game as Turkey where I haven't overtly attacked Austria yet. The reason being that I dedicated my forces to taking out Russia (completed) while Austria was dealing with an Italian attack. I now am building up the forces necessary to take out Austria while he is still distracted by Italy. Situations like that arise occasionally in games, but I could never Imagine a game where Turkey and Austria are allied the entire time. Geography is against it.

@Krellin - predetermined enemies is most certainly ok, that's common sense???

Predetermined alliances give advantage to the involved parties, predetermined enemies gives a disadvantage to the involved. If, for example, you and Draugnar were to play a game together and decided to invite me I'd be more than happy to join. If it's only the three of us and you two hate each-other it will be the easiest win :)

I'll admit to being judgemental though - I prefer to deal with smart people who can get their concepts straight before typing in capital letters - nothing hypocritical about it though :P

Btw, TUR-AUS is a very valid alliance... I'm curious what will your strategy be, with these nations, in case there's a joint attack from RUS-IT :)

Ivo is online and I am in a live game.......where one guy is dominating(sorry guys this is off topic)........Im scared

I'm not in it :) - not playing any live games right now. Good luck.

@Ivo - if it is OK to go into a game with pre-determined enemies, then you are meta-gaming. But, no big surprise that you would express such hypocrisy. You, in fact, are one of those morons I refer to. Going into a game with a predetermined enemy will, as a result, limit your options for allies...thus causing outside influences to affect your ally options. If you seriously can't see that is it the flip side of the same coin, then I suggest Ivo_ivanov is a meta-gamer and a cheat.