WAKA WAKAAA

Yeah, in general I don't overly object to players throwing, or partially throwing, the game as an act of revenge. This puts weight behind threats of vengeance, which if they were never followed through upon would be of negligible use as a diplomatic tactic.

If I end up with a Survive because a rival player threw the game, that tells me that I either needed to have stabbed them more thoroughly in the first place, or that I needed to step up my diplomacy.

And, on the other end, it can rather satisfying to see those that screwed you over go down in flames. Next time, maybe they'll think twice before messing with you!

Finally, bitter feuds make solo attempts far more interesting! There is nothing quite like, as the leading player, welcoming with open arms the player that the others have outcast. Similarly, as the head of an anti-leader-alliance, it is an interesting challenge trying to get your unlikely allies to work together.

im seeing alot about going for solos in this thread.....ive only done it twice but is there like a thread i havent seen with when you are a dick and when you arent for soloing? not that i care but id like a rather neutral public opinion on this site, helps keep allies/enemies objective

Could you re-phrase that Bitemenow10, I don't quite understand what you are asking.

Not Dickish, but just as anoying, top 100 gr players who just arent capable of holding a stalemate line. By by points :(

when someone who doesn't even put any orders in for his units purposely keep the unit that threatens three of his enemy's supply centers, instead of the keeping the one blocking his only supply center, which would've made it harder for him to get it


And i couldn't just ignore because he was sitll entering in all holds and if i moved out he would've taken one of them. Really dickish

I think it's a legitimate tactic when attacked by say in the case of Austria all 3 neighbours, to throw the demise of your country whichever way you like, favouring on attacer over the other two

If I have Austria and Italy warns me of a Russian-Turkish "juggernaut"
( fleet Ankara to Con, then to Aegan in Autumn 01 etc )
& instead I get hit with army Warsaw to Galicia & army Venice to Tyrolia
( tha alternative "juggernaut" )
then I will invariably, ( but you always have to make your desisions based on whats going on in the particular game, so I can vary )
throw the sc's to Turkey & do my best to create the Turkish "monster" to bedevil the other two, especially Italy

It's a simple message to Italy, attack Austria & I'll drag you down as best I can.
and refer him to my previous games for proof

Intentionally holding back on pressing ready just to prolong the game in hopes that more people will CD so you can solo

gameID=12239

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cryMVK1PwuQ

"All in the game."

I can't prevent another player from Scarfacing out. But it happens, and when it happens, you've got to deal with it.

Stuff I WON'T do:

1. Not vote for a Pause if someone requests it. That's some outside-the-game shit.
2. Not vote to unpause afterwards. Ditto.
3. Throw the game, for ANY reason. If I'm put in a position where someone else will solo if I get steamrolled and the other players won't help me, that's a failure of my own diplomacy (and everyone else's except the soloer, but I'm not responsible for what anyone else does beyond failing to convince them to do what I want). I'll fight for my corner until I'm dead, and when I'm dead, I'll take my loss.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFkWPNJAy14

4. Call the mods, for ANY reason.
5. CD. Did it once, never again.

Stuff I WILL do:

1. Not ready up if I'm still negotiating with someone. It may look like I'm trying to delay the game, but I'm more likely waiting on a response (which will likely be negative anyway, but I'm not readying until I hear "no").
2. Lie, lie, and lie some more.

@AverageWhiteBoy, regarding point 4. So if you are in a game and you are sure you are playing with multis you won't tell the mods? Why not? You would be doing us all a favour.

^ i agree with that. So if there is OBIVOUS cheating/multi'ing going on, you shouldn't contact the mods, and save your points

How would I know someone else is multi-ing? I've been falsely accused of it before, and I can't think of any way that someone who isn't a mod themselves would be able to figure it out.

because there are things that make it almost 100 % certian that the people are multi'ing

And if there is there is a chance someone in multiing (as long as it is somewhat likely) then they SHOULD contact the mods. If there isn't multing, the game gets paused for a little bit. If there is, then you got saved points

"because there are things that make it almost 100 % certian that the people are multi'ing"

Such as?

in an Ancient Med gunboat Greece and Rome both took an equal amount of supply centers in the north and then completely DMZ'ed the border. Someone emailed the mods and they turned out to be multi's. If it had countiued, we all would've lost points unfairly

@AverageWhiteBoy I have reported many people to the mods because I suspected them of being multis. The thing is, I do it over the email so no one knows they are being accused and I have been correct in more then one case. In the cases I was wrong it was a few extra minutes of work for the moderators. Which I do feel bad about but that it is what they volunteer to do.

i think what AverageWhiteBoy is complaining about is that it interupts the game for a few minutes.

1) When people play gunboats, someone CDs and so one of the other players asks his mate to joing to help him, and then once he has helped his mate by setting him up for a solo he then CDs the game also.
2) People who don't ready up because they're losing
3) People who vote DRAW but then attacks all the other players who have also voted DRAW allowing a cheap solo.

• When someone leaves territory to another in order to throw a game (I'm guilty of it too)
• Losing to multiplayers
• This is the big one.. splitting a 17/17 draw with a player who later gets banned. Can't stand that ;)

@AWB, if nobody reports anything to the mods, the mods are not going to look for it. So your way means nobody would get banned (because they wont be found).

of do you think the mods are checking 200 account per day at random for the oportunity to catch a cheater?

I'm more confused by #3 myself. If I am pretty sure I'm going to lose the game, I'm going to have a say in how I lose. I totally agree with AWB that it's my own fault I'm losing. I shouldn't cry about it. I should play better next time. I'm a big believer that if you're getting attacked its usually your own fault for not negotiating better.

BUT, I still get to choose who benefits the most from my death. If you piss me off enough, I'm going to try to throw my dots to someone else. If that means they solo, that's your problem. I'm dead either way. I'm not going to protect someone else's draw as I'm going down.

It can work out well, too.

gameID=85090

In 1906, France and Germany rightfully decided they were sick of my crap. As England, I'd been playing them against each other and picking up a SC here or there. So I approached Austria and said, hey, I'm dead either way, I'll help you solo. As I went down this path, it became apparent to France and Germany that they could not hold the stalemate line if I was helping Austria and that continued pursuit of me would lead to defeat. Through skillful diploming including a concerted effort to help Austria solo, I managed the four way draw in a situation that I guess I should have curled up in a ball and cried about instead?

You go for every advantage you have, and being able to frame someone else in the context of "likely solo" is a huge advantage.

I feel that it's my duty to play every game for the best result possible, but sometimes, at least to me, that result can include throwing a solo. My preference is to start to throw a solo in such a manner that I end up being part of the draw, because I can't be removed from it without giving up the solo. I will always choose being part of a draw over giving up a solo. But, if I am left with a position where one power might solo, and the power trying to stop him are unwilling to give me a place in the draw in return for stopping it, then I'm dead no matter what, and if I'm dead no matter what, I'm going to choose whatever manner of dying is most satisfying to me given how the game has developed to that point.

However, if the powers trying to stop the solo make me a credible offer to be part of the draw in return for joining them, I will always accept that offer. If they're unwilling to make a credible offer and they have done enough to make me upset that I prefer the solo without me to the draw without me, then I consider it partially their responsibility. One of the best lessons you can learn as a bigger country: 圍師必闕.

Just had an Italy feign being in CD (didn't submit moves, but kept the country) for five years, and then stab everyone in the back at once. Nearly punched through my screen. It's utterly fucking absurd -- if at any time, all of your units hold for 2 consecutive turns, you should be out. Plain and simple. And not be allowed back in. He stuck around hoping he could get the draw points (since two other people CDed, and everyone -excepting a greedy, selfish Russia - was agreed that the game should have been forfeit), and then decided to jump back in long after he should have been thrown out. Fucking absurd.

"I threw that game to Turkey because you wouldn't put in a draw."
Don't you just love the sentiment in those words, spoken like a real man.
Maybe if he wasn't such a twat he could have tried fighting Turkey......

I don't think that is wrong at all. Doing nothing is a valid tactic IMO.

A dick move: winning because countries CDed.

In the game in question the person tried attacking Turkey and failed miserably, and then told me they threw the game as opposed to they got beat, there is a difference.