Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Wow. I never even considered this as a possibility.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Um, yes?

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Yeah, I'd say that's verboten. Whether you're trying to influence another player (the understood message being "be nice, and maybe you'll get more free stuff!"), or are facing elimination and just want to spite your conqueror.

And if it's the later case, seeing as how this is an anonymous, every man/woman/child for him/herself game, what would be the point, except mere vindictiveness (which in a regular MP game, I'd totally be for :D )?

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Yes. That would be considered diplomacy.

A attacks B. B sens A gems. Maybe A would cease his attack?- worth a try at the price of few gems.

A & B are neighbors. B sends A gems. Maybe A would think- wow, B is cool, of course I won't attack him. Oh wait a sec. Didn't C just attack B. Well I'll show this C not to mess with generous B.

etc.

As I see it. ND in RAND == Complete radio silence. No meta gaming, no msgs, no gold nor gems nor any transferable goods or favors.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

I don't play YARG2, but we are just about to start another NO DIPLO one, so i'll join discussion.
No meta-gaming? It's interesting. I don't think it's possible to avoid metagaming completely. When you attack enemy province you not always want war. And you can show it just by stopping crusade and withdrawing armies instead of taking another province. Is some situations it will be a very clear sign. And such "non-verbal language" is extremely hard to avoid and prevent. But is it really game-ruining? And with a good imagination you can find ways to deliver a message in some cases,mostly when enemy has all reasons to look for such signs (both nations have good armies, and aggressor had more need for that province(it neighbors his capital), or just the province is valuable for both but aggressor just is obviously stronger in all charts, so when he attacks and withdraws it's am obvious message "i just need this province because it's 20k+ and I like that damn adepts of silver order I can hire here .").

To make RAND completely RAND you should have a rule - if you took enemy province you should fight him till death. I'm not sure it's good idea though.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

militarist, that's a good observation. I was referring to out-of-band meta gaming. Meaning using communication channels outside of this game to influence it by meta gaming (like, expose your identity, threaten to retaliate in a different game, whatever).

I think that in game "signs" are not meta gaming and are ok. So if someone attacks you and just takes a few provinces and you don't want to attack back - fine. It's your risk that the aggressor would come back for more. Do with it as you will but it will always stay at the realm of guesswork and would never be comparable to a NAP.

I personally find it way more acceptable in no-diplo game than giving gems or gold. When someone gives you gold you don't have to guess much. Obviously he wants to carry favor. That's even "stronger" diplo than a "hello there neighbor" message.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Of course giving nice gifts would be dis-allowed. But I would think spam-sending crap to fill up his slots would just be a war tactic.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Quote from the OP:
I think we just need to forget there is 'send messages' button in this game.

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

Lol, when I first read this I was looking for the joke or twisty punch-line. But then read the later thread posts and noticed people were debating it! So realised it must have been intended as a proper question :shock:

I'd say there's absolutely no way anything can be sent in a RAND game. Be it a message, gold, items, anything. As all of these are at least against the spirit of the rules (or just flat out against the rules IMO)

But sending gold could be turned into a basic-code way to communicate. How about sending the following gold amounts to your neighbour on the same turn in separate instalments :)

16
5
1
3
5

or maybe

14
1
16


I do regularly use the send items option in RAND games though. (actually during all game types). As sending items, and then cancelling them, is the only sure way to re-arrange un-removable items in your lab. I'm mainly pointing this out for the benefit of those who didn't know about this work-around for organising your lab screen :)

Re: YARG2 , 24 players EA RAND game [23/24 players left]
 

@Calahan:
4
5
1
12

But seriously, it was a proper question. I also thought no, but I wanted to check if everyone else thinks the same way. And most specifically what admins think. Sending peace offers and crypted messages is not the only use of sending gems/gold/items. I had some different things in mind, but I am not going to give you ideas. So, to conclude - sending anything is strictly forbidden, for whatever reason it may be (except overfilling enemy's lab, of course, that's a valid tactic).