Deception
 

Tell us what you think about the following hypothetical:

Player A creates pseudonym B to join a game. In IRC chat, A solicits from B's opponents their strategies and plans, while never revealing that A, in fact, is B.

[ May 24, 2004, 23:24: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Deception
 

Is this like that other post that got deleted?

Re: Deception
 

This is obviously loaded poll Reverand. Option 1 and 2 deals with person A. Option 3 implicitly deals with person B, not A. You have bundled it together, while they are clearly separate issues.


Let me give you example. Suppose somebody went to the night park alone and without weapon, and got mugged and suffered life-threating insuries as the result.


Should that person know better? Perhaps. Does it mean that his assaulter was right in his actions? Of course not.


It is not exactly the same case here, but I think you see my point. Question of whether it was "(un)effective" or not have nothing to do question is it was "reprehensible" or not, since they can very well be both at the same time. Therefore as it is your test is not very meningfull or objective.

(heh, thanks to your and other people critic of my own polls, I am now much more aware of such matters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )


If you want to make it rigth it you should separate questions related to person A and questions related to person B, not to slap them together. Otherwise it doesn't make much sense.

[ May 25, 2004, 00:58: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

Yeah, and he should have had a choice, "It's not the deception, it's the whining that bothers me." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

And given that the votes add up to more than 100%, I'd say that multiple choices were possible. More whining.

[ May 25, 2004, 00:51: Message edited by: Cainehill ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Cainehill is correct--all choices are possible, you can select that you think the behavior is both reprehensible AND no big deal, and at the same time ineffective.

Re: Deception
 

Double post.

[ May 25, 2004, 00:57: Message edited by: Reverend Zombie ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, the only one who is whining constantly is you Cainehill. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif You keep whining about whining. Not sure why you are so obssesed with it though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif


To Reverand - aye, you are right about possibility of having multiply answers, my mistake. Not sure if it is obious to the pollers though, that's why I would still separate unrealted questions if I would be me. But it's your choice. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 25, 2004, 01:06: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, the only one who is whining constantly is you Cainehill. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif You keep whining about whining. Not sure why you are so obssesed with it though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've just had an interesting thought. This pejorative term (whining) is also a favourite of Norfleet's. And I don't believe I've ever seen anyone else use it in this forum. And Cainehill is a staunch apologist for Norfleet's recent behaviour and style of gameplay.

Anyone else see where I'm going with this... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 25, 2004, 01:18: Message edited by: Zapmeister ]

Re: Deception
 

Of course. As I've mentioned before on the chat I am Cainehill's father. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

CAINEHILL! I AM YOUR FATHER!

[ May 25, 2004, 01:57: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, the only one who is whining constantly is you Cainehill. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif You keep whining about whining. Not sure why you are so obssesed with it though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've just had an interesting thought. This pejorative term (whining) is also a favourite of Norfleet's. And I don't believe I've ever seen anyone else use it in this forum. And Cainehill is a staunch apologist for Norfleet's recent behaviour and style of gameplay.

Anyone else see where I'm going with this... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 25, 2004, 02:04: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Ah. So I'm Norfleet too? Maybe we're all Norfleet? FOAD. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

First, I'm not an apologist for his behavior or his style of gameplay. His strategy, er, "style" isn't unique to him, but it does lead to a plodding, grinding game that I don't necessarily enjoy myself. In fact, I was one of the people who was somewhat looking forward to a game without Norfleet - in fact, that's what Stormwhiner promised when he was recruiting via private Messages on IRC.

However, instead of *****ing about it (see? A word other than 'whine'), and forming panicky little cabals against him, I think it'd be more productive to .... (drumroll) put some thought into finding a way to defeat the strategy.

Regarding his behavior? Him inserting himself into a game he knew he wasn't desired in was childish, but frankly somewhat understandable. People have a tendency to want to crash parties they know they personally have been excluded from.

If he was pumping the town idiots for information about their strategy against "Pakhar"'s Caelum, that's worse.

But what I was seeing on IRC was people approaching Norfleet and asking for his feedback regarding actions they were trying to take against someone using his strategy.

I was also seeing unfair (ie, cheating) cooperation being used against Caelum in the game.

Telling someone via IRC or email that an opponent has leaders in a province that the someone can't see, so that the someone can cast Magic Arrows, strikes me as a cheezy, lice-ridden cheating tactic.

Sending out emails to all but one of the players in a game, trying to organize an alliance and concerted campaign against the lone player - again, cheezy, cowardly, and irritating, once again pretty close to 'cheating' in my book.

If something couldn't be done in game, isn't it darn close to cheating? Messages sent in the game don't get received until the next turn. This is in keeping with the game's background and mechanics. Sending instant updates during a turn isn't.

So - blame Norfleet, blame the feverish conspirers against him, blame me for getting irritated at all parties but keeping my yap shut.

Oh - and you haven't seen the term "whining" or "whiners" used much? Maybe you never spent time in the military (one of the main things Norfleet and I have in common), where "whine" is the most socially acceptable of numerous terms in common use for the same type of irritating behavior.

Or maybe it's an age thing? Norfleet has stated he's in the uppermost Category in the "age" poll / thread; I myself am somewhat older than the average / median. I suspect a slice of the younger generation has been brought up to believe that it's "judgemental" to say someone is whining, because "all" points of view are valid.

In response to those people, I'll quote Stormbinder's eloquence : STFU. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Thank you for your time and consideration. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That would have been the case had somebody bothered to inform me that I was being excluded. Of course, I didn't find out that there even *WAS* an attempt to exclude me from the game until after I had confided my presence to Cainehill! If anything, the conditions of the game seemed more likely to bait me than indicate that I was not to attend: You don't advertise for "intermediate" and "expert" players only, then expect them not to notice the challenge.

By that time I already well *IN* to the game, and I don't pull out of games.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's called standard diplomacy. If you consider that cheating, then I certainly hope you would also consider lying about your identity cheating.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'd have to concur. That does seem to be fairly standard, unless the game has been specifically ruled to be that way, and there wasn't really a rule prohibiting it.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Strange. It seems to me that that's exactly what you have been doing so far in all your Posts on this matter.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Cainehill, your arguments doesn't make much sense to me. If you thought that using email and isntant Messages on for diplomacy, intelligence sharing between turns, trading, etc. is against the spirit of the game, much less "cheating" as you put it in yor post, why didn't you say so when we begin to play???

For what else do you think we meet on the ICR channle if not to have opprtunity to communcicate between the turns? You did it yourslef many times sending privite Messages to me, in both IRC and email.

As for my part, I've send on turn 1 (!) message to everyone, telling than that to speed up comunication and to conduct dimplomacy efficiently I suggest we use email, like we always do in all Dom2 MP games that I've played. I even went so far as to send everybody my email address. You you had any issue with that you should say so back than. Instead you never said a word about it before, but now you are puting the show of shock and distaste. Sorry, but I can't buy it.

As for alliances - I already expaliend to you. If you think that alliance between weaker nations against opponent who much stronger than each of them separetly and is clearly going to dominate the map very soon (as Caelum did) is dishonorable http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif , you will never going to win any serious MP Dom2 games.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, Cain makes me feel like an raw, coarse oldtimer who taught the baby how to swear. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I used "STFU" suggestion only during one final converstaion on IRC the day our Fire and Ice game was amandoned. It was made to Norfleet, when he kept interupting our discussion what to do with our game, that was wreaked because of him/Pakhar. As you can imagine I was really pissed at him by that time because of his actions, so I snaped.

You on the other hand seem to be enjoying using this "STFU" again and again with obvious pleasure, while noting that it was copyrighted by me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif You really are almost making me ashamed thinking that perhaps I've tought it to you or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ May 25, 2004, 03:30: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

I have to agree with Stormbinder, the answers available in this poll are lame. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I think what Norfleet was doing was wrong. But reprehensible is a strong word. It's not like he's been killing and eating little babies... has he?

The thing about this whole affair that bugs me the most are the folks who try and blame the other players for being stupid enough to talk to Norfleet about their strategies. Maybe it was stupid (me, I'd call it friendly, or trusting). But is deceiving and taking advantage of stupid people somehow OK then? Might as well say that its OK to lie and cheat, except when you get caught.

[ May 25, 2004, 03:31: Message edited by: Vynd ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Mmmm. Babies. Crunchy. They were already dead when I found them, though! I swear!

[ May 25, 2004, 07:42: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: Deception
 

Maybe I'm naive and maybe I'm the only one, but I actually believe Norfleet that he wasn't trying to get information to give himself some kind of advantage. Just doesn't seem like something he'd do.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">How do you get the babies crunchy? Do you deep fry them?

Re: Deception
 

Umh, I dont really want to get involved in this business about particular persons I've never met, but generally speaking, as we are in this thread (?):

I usually only play strategy games like Dom2 with people I personally know and meet in non-virtual life, because I love to chat about the game, discussing strategies, trying to obtain information and telling my own (maybe false) plans in return. This kind of diplomacy is what makes strategy games truly interesting for me!

However, I would consider it quite ruthless if someone would deliberatley give false information on the game mechanics and rules, and/or cheats by messing around with the game files. This is simply out of question for me.

So in response to what Vynd contributed: I'd say trying to obtain the enemy's plans by means of polite conversation and deliberate deception is a part of the game for me. When it comes to the game, the game is always on, regardless of the situation I am in when talking about it.

I accept that my "enemy" might not always tell the truth about his intentions, as do I. You have to reveal something true in order to regain something true, but just how much is the parlous question. I guess I consider it as fantasy roleplaying, thus I usually sign my diplomatic Messages if sent via email with my pretender's name.

Using fake identities on the net might be of another magintude, sure, but I dont want to judge that. I dont like it personally and would not create another identity myself. My avatar-picture clearly reveals me to all who have visited me, but I do not expect my fellow players to reveal themselves, should they visit this forum. Therefore I am cautious, so that I have nothing to regret afterwards, which I would regard as my own fault. I consider strolling alone through a park in the dark to be something I would do at my own risk...

[ May 25, 2004, 14:20: Message edited by: Chazar ]

Re: Deception
 

Just a little reminder. If this topic strays too far from the anonymous or accusational then it will be locked.

Re: Deception
 

i wouldn't put it past anyone having faking his/her/its persona to do it once again.

Re: Deception
 

I have a hard time taking all this seriously.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Indeed.

Re: Deception
 

The game has limited diplomacy. But the players have worked around that by bringing the diplomacy into the virtual world outside the game (email, irc, instant messaging).

The game has limited spying ability. Someone brought that out into the virtual world by creating a kindof embassy spy persona. In my abilities as a system administrator there are some things I could do to fight that but it doesnt seem like that big a deal. I dont LIKE it, but I would say that it is now part of the game that people will have to beware of.

However, I will use the full force of my abilitys if anyone brings assassins out into the virtual world. You might laugh but as a white-hat security hacker I can very well see the capabilitys to remove a player from the game using the types of methods we use against black-hats, trolls, and spammers.

So for bringing game-actions into the rest of VR its diplomates=kewl, prophets=fine, spys=not kewl, assassins=will be hunted down and destroyed, and of course only Shrapnel and Illwinter get to be pretenders outside the game. Maedads are optional http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 25, 2004, 16:35: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't think hacking or actually killing the other player is a very constructive exercise for the game at all, since if you disable a player entirely, you can't exactly host the game if he can't send in his turn.

Re: Deception
 

I know this is slightly off the topic but has anyone noted that the poll results give equal 115%?

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why not? So he's stalling, which shouldn't be an issue if you have a regular hosting schedule or are playing it the pbem way.

What is an issue, however, is that you deprive yourself from the ultimate goal of playing games at all: The deep, personal satisfaction of being able to openly gloat at your opponent's defeat (or worse, to congratulate him on being a good sport and claiming "It's all a game and of no consequence" - so you beat him and it didn't even matter to you...).

While you can gloat openly about having been able to remove your opponent from the game (assuming a non-terminal solution), it is often unwise to do so due to the likely illegal nature of the removing...


Oh, and the poll allows multiple choices by each person, Talisien. That means there's more selected choices going around than people having voted.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">*nod*

Exactly.

[ May 25, 2004, 18:56: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, that's because Reverend allowed more than one answer to be submitted. Although I suspect most pollers do not reilize this fact since it sounds somewhat countintuitive with his current 3 options.

Re: Deception
 

i think its more amusing than anyone else. Yeah its kind of underhanded, but that fact that its created this giant hoopla of daytime television soap opera is hilarious. Its done nothing but maybe add another dimension to the trickery of this game, and i guarantee it wont be as successful next time.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">When players sit down for a game of poker... if someone gives themself an edge by leaning backwards and looking into another players hand...... thats bending the rules. As a result when caught the other players will always look at you with distrust. What you did had the same effect.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you were hiding your identity and asking questions about other players actions towards your player in the game.... the knowledge gained will obviously provide you with an advantage. This advantage may determine who wins or loses the game.

[ May 25, 2004, 23:18: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Exactly. When I've asked questions or advice for a game in progress, I generally try to put in enough misleading, erroneous information to not give away the actual game and situation I'm looking for feedback on, which has usually been a question about a magic item, spell, or game mechanic I hadn't used before.

Talking about plans, in the open, on IRC, where there's half a dozen other entities idling on channel, is practically begging to have information used against you.

When playing poker - proper players don't try to sneak looks at each other's cards. But if someone is setting their cards down face up on the table, it's a fool who doesn't look. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Except here the person who looked denied being a fellow player in the poker game.

Re: Deception
 

It's my understanding that Norfleet did not just sit around waiting for people to mention what people were going to do in thise Fire and Ice game. Although I'm sure some of that went on. But unless Stormbinder is lying--and I'm sure Norfleet would have called him on it by now if he was--then Norfleet actively sought to engage people in conversation about the game, and specifically asked them questions about what they were going to do to his nation.

Could, or should, the other players have refused to talk to him about this? Well obvioulsy in this case, yes. And in a general sense, it probably isn't wise to give away information about what you're doing in a MP game. But even if Stormbinder and the rest acted somewhat foolishly, that doesn't change the fact that what Norfleet did was dishonest.

Norfleet conned these guys. If some con man were to convince your brother to buy the Brooklyn Bridge from him, I'm sure you'd chew your brother out for being an idiot. But I think you'd also be pretty angry at the guy who ripped him off.

[ May 26, 2004, 03:06: Message edited by: Vynd ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Quite. It's the dishonesty, outside the context of diplomacy, that I think is the cause of most of the ill-feeling we're seeing here. And it's dishonesty that continued after the game, when Norfleet was defending his actions here.

In the "Play the World" thread, he said:
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">What were these questions to which he knew the answers before they were given? According to Stormbinder (in the same thread) they were:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">'Nuff said? Norfleet apparently thought so too, because he didn't respond when I presented him with this. Instead, he started a new thread with this comment:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For me, this is all about dishonest behaviour in public, and almost nothing to do with Dominions. So I'll leave it there.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">What were these questions to which he knew the answers before they were given? According to Stormbinder (in the same thread) they were:

Quote:

See, as a Norfleet he was constantly soliciting information from each of Pkahar Njar's (his alias in our game) neigbors with questions such as "So what are you going to do about Caelum?" (Caelum was Pakhar's nation). "How is your war against Caelum going?" , "How are you going to attack Caelum now?". (all these are exact quotes)

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">'Nuff said? Norfleet apparently thought so too, because he didn't respond when I presented him with this. Instead, he started a new thread with this comment:

Quote:

Due to the rampant hijacking and derailing of the other thread, I'm not going to deign to respond to it and am going to let it die and sink back into the abyss where it came from.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For me, this is all about dishonest behaviour in public, and almost nothing to do with Dominions. So I'll leave it there. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I started a new thread because the contents were no longer relevant to the actual GAME: Bringing up matters from another deceased game to the a new game is not helpful or relevant. As the thread had been sufficiently derailed, I opted to jettison it.

As for the accusations in question, I have made my statement, intend to stand by it, and have deliberately chosen not to comment on the matter further.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've called Stormbinder on lying and misrepresenting the facts. Still haven't gotten him to reply to the question I asked, the issues I brought up.

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I have no problem with that.

Perhaps you could provide a reference to your statement that addresses the accusations in question (that you claim to have known your opponent's plans before asking about them).

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've called Stormbinder on lying and misrepresenting the facts. Still haven't gotten him to reply to the question I asked, the issues I brought up. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hmmm? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif I have no idea what you are talking about. All I have noticed so far in all your Posts is that you constantly defending Norfleet everywhere that you can, without any real regard to the facts or trying to listen to arguments of your opponents. And also claiming that you are not Norfleet's defender or appologist. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I don't know what strange psyhological bond you have with Norfleet, and I am not really interested in it. What really surprised me though, is that you told me here (for the first time) that you have known about Norfleet all along but choose not to tell anybody else, instead prefering to blame me for spoiling the game by "admiting norfleet's ringer" in our game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif I still have your strange email in which you did so and I can post it here if you are going to dispute it. No matter what is the reason for your pecular behaivour I'll leave it on your conscience.


As for myself - I didn't lie in anything I told on this board about the facts of the game, so please stop saying obscure nonsense without any proof. I have also posted a lot of quotes and logs here and elsewhere, and our "Fire and Ice" thread is very clear and open for anybody to see. Even Norfleet himself could not dispute these facts, instead all he can do and what he have been doing here all along was trying to "explain" his dishonest and cheating behaviour - by pure "spining", admiting the facts but denying his motives, in extremely clumsy and unconvincing way.


And finally keep in mind that Zen asked everybody to drop this topic, and even send me email asking to do it. If you choose to continue this discussion I suggest do it elsewhere, on GoneGold Boards, emails, IRC, or whatever. I don't know about you, but I am not interested in geting Banned because of you trying to resurect dead and smelly horse Cainehill.

[ May 26, 2004, 07:18: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: Deception
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hmmm? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif
I have no idea what you are talking about. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Just one example : You wrote that the house rules were explicitly designed to prevent Norfleet's "abusive" style of play.

I quoted the actual house rules, showing that _NONE_ of them had anything to do with Norfleet's style of play, and asked you to explain just which ones you were making that claim about.

The reply: Silence.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Again, a distortion. I have stated that I found out that it was Norfleet sometime shortly after the 20 turn mark. According to several of you people's standards, the game was already "ruined", so telling y'all would have done nothing to fix the game, but would have been a violation of confidence and honor.

And again - you let Norfleet in, did you not? After promising several of us on IRC that all the players were going to be hand selected, personally vouched for, and individually invited. Then you let a complete stranger in who turned out to be Norfleet. The responsibility for an unpleasant game rests on your shoulders.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">First, you still haven't replied to the misrepresentation of the facts that I have again written of in this post. Deliberately avoiding the unpleasantness of explaining your misrepresentation is ... lying.

Second: You are aware that capturing IRC logs without the other people's awareness / consent is, has long been, regarded on somewhat unethical? Not that I say anything on IRC I don't want quoted, but....

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Who is resurrecting the dead horse? You just can't stop posting about it. You ... just ... can't ... stop, can you?

Re: Deception
 

I believe this is a discussion that should be continued via PM's or on another chat/board feature.

As I stated before, it is inappropriate to continue this line of off topic discussion. For either Norfleet or Stormbinder.

I am locking this thread and expect this discussion to not bleed into other topics or new threads unless it is taken to Shrapnel General.

Thank you for your cooperation.