is feeding acceptable or not
 

When a player chooses to go AI, is it acceptable for them to give all their stuff to another player?

My take:

Most honorable is to never go AI, fight to the last scrap. Your fighting for godhood after all, to lose is likely to be banished for another eternity to some very undesirable place.

Going AI is acceptable when the end is neigh, it isn't much fun to play that out. However giving all your stuff away is unacceptable on both the thematic and gaming axes. Thematically unacceptable for the same reason it is best to never go AI. Gamewise unacceptable because it gives players disruptive and unwarranted boosts of power.

I read about this happening, and I also read grumbling about it. I personally feel it is wrong, yet some act as if it is natural and OK. Natural maybe, humans are conniving, but I don't think it is OK at all.

That's my stance, how do others feel?

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I voted acceptable. People are allowed to make crazy alliances that can span more than half the players in the game to take out players one by one. Surely you cannot fault players for giving some gems and gold to other players on their way out. The game mechanics allow for it more than they do alliances, NAPs etc.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

The only time I ran afoul of this was when Sensori in a game I was playing in just randomly spewed gems to people completely unrelated to his current state of affairs. While it didn't matter much in the end, he gave like 40 gems to my opponent who had maintained zero diplomatic relations before him.

That irritated the piss out of me. Besides random distribution I see no problem with pumping you allies.

Jazzepi

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I think it's very thematic.

Consider the case of the king who, under mortal assault from a rival nation, sends his only son, the child prince, into hiding with a trusted servant. With him he took three magic items from the treasury...

I mean, you can't argue with that.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

the pretender fighting for godhood sends his... son?... into hiding with three items that he could have used in his fight for godhood?

and who are we talking about here? i mean is ry'leh going to send any of the lesser beings their stuff? and I can't picture the mind-flayer child prince.

you forget that we are not feudal lards, but are in fact pretenders who want nothing more than to see every other one dead. The cost for not doing so is high. Alliances are in fact only temporary mutually beneficial agreements that we kill other people before we kill each other. there is never any real loyalty.

EDIT:
this is making me laugh now:

"Dear beloved 'ally'. It seems the enemy have overrun my empire and with it my hopes of becoming god. please accept my only child. I'm sending a diaper bag full of death gems and a handful of magic items with him"

P.s. you can throw away the kid if you want to, he was only a tissue thin rationalization anyway. just keep the goodies.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Nobody is saying there is loyalty. What there is, however, is a desire to spite your enemies, even from beyond the grave. How on earth is that unthematic?

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

if you are the true pretender (which in playing the game you say you are) then why not 'spite' them yourself? If you give up and give stuff away to someone else, your only admitting you were a cop out from the start. Never good enough to be god, someone else had to do it for you. What real pretender is going to say that?

additionally, any dominion not your dominion is enemy dominion. you can only possibly give stuff to an enemy. no matter who you give stuff to, it is helping to spread a faith not your own. what true pretender would stand for that? You are here to spread your faith and to become god! not whimper out and roll your stuff over to someone else.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

If you truly want to spite them you'll both go down fighting and give all your assets away as you die. At a certain point in a losing war assets will be rendered obsolete or pretty much useless, like earth gems when you can't get any more earth mages. Alchemetizing them away into gold or something else dilutes their potency and depending on the nature of the war being fought might do very little to harm your opponent, whereas they might possibly help someone else immensely.

I view it as perfectly thematic to try and do maximum damage to the person killing you, through whatever legal game mechanics are available. Why not reward the neighbor that kept his word in the process?

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Remember that you aren't actually a god, you are just a bored Lich with nothing better left to do than try and take over the world.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

"what are we going to do tonight, Brain?"

"the same thing we do every night, Pinky."
*turns around, intense look in eyes*
"try and take over the world!!!"

"egads Brain! NARF!!!"

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"

"I think so Brain, but where are we going to find a Tartarian our size?"

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I voted "yes" simply because I don't like gems going to waste.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

You obviously haven't read enough Lovecraft. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif "Your Majesty, may I present to you Prince Wilbur, Thane of Whateley".

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I think of it as acceptable, just picture this. You are a cop, with no arms, and your gun is next to you. Are you going to kick it over to your "friend" or just let it go to waste? A rough comparison, but fitting nonetheless!

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

A cop would help his fellow cops, of course, but Dominions is everyone against everyone with temporary exceptions. Here's a counter-example:

You're a hunter caught between an angry bear and an enraged lion that has already killed and eaten several humans. Your pistol won't be able to take either one down, but it might slow the one you shoot enough for the other to kill it as well. Are you going to help the bear, who only kills people when they get in their way, or the lion, who actively seeks to kill anyone nearby? You're dead, either way.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Thematically, I don't think Dominions is an everyone vs. everyone game. To me it seems more like an ambitious pantheon. Yes you're trying to become the God of gods, but it gets lonely at the top without other deities to pay homage to you, sleep with, and cause shenanigans in the mortal world.

Think about it this way. The world won't function without a fertility god or goddess. So if you banish all the fertility deities to Tartarus, the world will wither away and die. That might be ok for a select few pretenders, but the rest of them are going to have to force at least 1 fertility deity to submit to his/her divine authority.

As the winner of a game of Dominions, you get to decide which pretenders get banished, which ones get released from a previous imprisonment, etc. I don't think you sit on your divine throne all by yourself destroying anyone who attempts to gather any power, like some kind of immortal Stalin figure. Even the pankrator needs his celestial general and lord of war.

In an ambitious pantheon it makes perfect sense to send your resources to a rival in the hope of helping him defeat your sworn enemy. If your sworn enemy wins, he's definitely going to chain you up against a rock where an immortal vulture eats your liver every day. But if someone else ascends to godhood you may be given a position as lord of all janitors or the god of biscuits.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

or perhaps the god of armless security personnel.


"Billy, your on the beat with O'Reily ta'night."

"O'Reily! Not that guy again."

"Ok look. I know he ain't got no arms, but he's a good cop with a lot of heart, an' if y'all get in a sticky situation, he can kick his gun over to ya; then maybe run up and bite the guy or something."

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Hm. In one game I received bucketloads of gems and items from total of 5 nations when they were about to go the way of dodo during the game. Each time, the gift was accompanied by a message:

"Avenge me."

And so I did, to best of my ability. So no, I wouldn't consider throwing away stuff after it's clear one's dead unthematic.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

this poll is a bit silly. If you play much mp, you know revenge is a powerful motivator. Defeated players typically give away gems/gold and even allow units to be charmed to either help a friend or to hurt an enemy.

Trading items/gems is a part of diplomacy. And the mechanism exists to do do trades. Giving away stuff when all
hope is lost is part of diplomacy as well. If you are dead set against diplomacy, you can play 1 v 1 mp games, or try to start a no diplomacy mp game.

But the reason mp games are more fun than sp, apart from the higher challenge of facing humans over ai, is diplomacy.
Diplomacy is a great equalizer. A player not as good in strategy, even with a weaker nation, can defeat a better opponent with a stronger nation with help. And that may be his only hope.

Not giving away your items/gems in defeat is a bad tactical error. Giving away your stuff builds goodwill toward the player you give the stuff to, and you may get some reciprocation down the road in another game.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I think this is very bad tact if you're attempting to influence later games with a current one.

Jazzepi

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

For me, it is a fun part of the MP game. Avenging is something I don't get to do much in the real world.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Building goodwill may certainly help you in a future game, but I agree it should not be quid pro quo. You can never promise to give stuff in return in a future game because you may be in contention yourself.

But human nature is what it is. If a player helps you win a game by giving you items/gems when he is defeated, most players will remember that kindness. And if I am faced with defeat in a future game, and all other things are equal, I am likely to return the favor then give my stuff to someone who has never helped me.

Of course if I have a close ally in the present game, the help in the present game may outweigh the gift of stuff in a past game, but I still think going down in defeat and taking your gold/gems with you is a mistake.

A quote from the Alpaca Game Thread, my 1st large mp game on this forum:

"Out of curiosity, if I were looking for someone to whom I would give all my gems and items - who feels they are in a good position to fight a successful war with Marignon and Pangaea? Right now I'm inclined to give all my treasures to Man, but whoever is on Marignon's southern border (or across the southern sea) is also a prospect."

This from the wily veteran Dr. P.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I think it depends on circumstances. If i have been in a long war with a loyal ally he will absolutely get my stash when i go down, but if i just get punked by a straight rush in the early game i'm taking it with me to the afterlife. If someone double crosses me or if i get dog piled i usually will try to find my enemy's most powerful enemy and help him out.

My notions of honor and sometimes a bit of roleplaying figure into it- i've been known to give small gift to my conquerer in acknowledgment of a well played game, and in one case i even flushed the gems i was given by a player who threw a hissy fit and left the game. But really, for me it's about deterrence. I have tried to build a reputation as a tough opponent so people will sign NAPs and look elsewhere for easy pickin's, and sending off the treasure fleet to an appropriate person is often the last step in this procedure.In my case this is more often lab gear than gems 'cause i try to use those fighting.

One of the many cool things about Dominions is that the community is really shockingly honorable and well behaved. I think the fact that it takes months to play a game and (unless you are Micah) you are pretty much certain to lose drives the lower orders of net gaming scum back to easier games. So this is really pretty much a non-issue as far as i'm concerned.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Thematically I have no problem with it--you're not going to make it but you would prefer to live under an ally than under an enemy.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

absolutely yes, the gems/gold/items should go to the player(s) who have the potential to avenge your defeat. It is, in fact, an important part of the game, and part of your strategy. That is to say, if I can't win, I will certainly not let you win either.

Therefore it is a critical factor that one should always take into consideration before he makes the final kill to his enemy.

However I have seen a case where the player A gave his hundreds of gems to the player B who defeated him, simply because he believes the game is over and no one would be able to defeat play B...a rather cynical move, I'd say.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Reading Tyrant's post reminded me, I have actually given my gems to an enemy. In that case, I knew our war had led to both of our stagnations. When I knew I would die, I sent him my stash and so in that case, I think it actually may have helped balance the game.

But I think it is fine whatever your motive. You earned it, you can spend it how you like.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

No diplomacy games make sense to me. If you don't want to go that far, make a 'no giving items, gems or gold' game.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I havn't a problem with trading items, that makes sense. It is just that giving items away because your losing and decide to go AI doesn't make much sense to me. It doesn't seem right somehow.

I can ONLY see it justified thematically if you fight to the LAST province, and before going under, send off your stuff. But if you actually fight to the last province, you won't really have any stuff to send. I suppose if you do that though, it is OK. But I think rarely that actually happens. Typically people have a respectable amount of stuff left, but know their fighting a losing battle. So they send their stuff to someone who might be able to win out over their aggressors and go AI. There are many ways to argue that this is NOT thematic, not the LEAST of which is the AI nation you leave behind; kind of difficult to explain their continued fighting when they just sent all their stuff to a neighbor, who they likely invade in the next turn or two.

I don't think diplomacy is bad. I enjoy all that stuff, all manner of diplomacy: trading to tribute to bribing, it is all plausible and understandable. I think giving away respectable sums of stuff requires some fangling and shallow rationalizing to pass it off as thematic though. In fact, if read through them carefully, most peoples responses even imply if not outright admit that it is more personally oriented. We could debate whether that is OK, though I think most would actually readily agree it is personal, not thematic, and that this is OK.

Lastly, we could examine this from a purely gaming perspective. However, I think that is unwise with Dom3, as many of the wild card factors that competitive gaming tries to minimize (in order to accurately judge skill rather than luck) are the very things that make Dom3 so much fun. However it is worthy to mention from this perspective that feeding is a HUGE wild card, perhaps to much for anything more than casual Dom3. You can build a strategy around diplomacy, but you can't build a strategy around being the benefactor of feeding. Yet the bestowal of this kind of gifting is very game shaping.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Your whole premise is flawed: feeding isn't a wild card. It's usually very predictable who will give their stuff to whom. If someone's going out, they will give their stuff to their allies and/or the person who took them out's enemies. That's just human nature, and a lot of pretenders are, in fact, human.

When you keep saying that it's unthematic, yet the overwhelming majority disagree, you must at least entertain the notion that it is you who do not understand the theme.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Whether or not this practice is "OK" by some thematic measure is a moot point. Practically every player does it, so you just have to accept it and continue. Personally, I have no problem with sending all your remaining resources to a loyal ally or even to the enemy of your enemy, for revenge.

That said, I do think it would be neat if there was a chance somehow when you destroy the last province of a nation that you could get a % amount of thier remaining gems / gold and perhaps even items in the lab as loot.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

if everyone was jumping off a cliff, would you do it too?

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Revenge is for me thematic, and I see no problem to justify it in a roleplayer perspective.

If my pretender is losing and must renounce to his hopes to become a god, he don't want to offer this power to his ennemies. Prefering to help the ascension of a friend (or even any other pretender than the one destroying him) is logical. If he can't be god himself, he wants to be the god-maker, it's the last expression from his ambition.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

You could also bribe the next pretender so he doesn't kill you outright when he ascends. I certainly understand that someone would rather serve than die.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I don't think it's fair to demand that people play the way you want them to either. I know that it can be annoying when someone goes AI but in the end this is a game and if they aren't enjoying it they should stop. It would be better if they found a sub or were more polite about it, but you have to understand that most people don't care about what is perceived as 'honourable' by a few.

I wouldn't give my stuff away when dying unless part of an alliance that had been declared to everyone (not some secret NAP 3 or something). In that case you should expect resources to be shared.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

My experience with other multiplayer games makes me leery of any rules that don't have an in-game enforcement mechanism. Otherwise, you just get endless arguments between the people who voluntarily follow them and the ones who ignore them.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

Well the mechanism would be kicking people out who don't follow the rules. There's no automatic rules for non-computer games and not all of them need dedicated referees.

I think explicitly stating NO DIPLOMACY would probably work. If some people choose to 'cheat' well it wouldn't keep me up at night or anything, I'd just think they were lame.

Re: is feeding acceptable or not
 

I think it's fine.

If your kingdom is so knackered you can't get much out of it, you may as well just quit, and why not hand everything you can to your enemies' enemies? The going to AI could be roleplay rationalised as the God having given up and gone off in a sulk, leaving a semi-competent mortal to oversee the collapse of the nation.