[Pax]

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
Yikes! I guess I may be insulted... but rather I think it is a case of our understanding of what is backstabbing and the points we both were trying to make.

First let me say clearly that my policy is to enter every game with a clean slate, to win, and to have fun. I also strive to play with a great deal of character.

Um. That's not what you said; not even close. You said:

When a player does "backstab," you better believe it is remembered, and even carried over into other games.

Your "clean slate" reference is in direct contradiction of the quote above.

But- Ah-ha! I've think got you to prove my point, Pax! My entire point is that as objective as you try to be, you are still human. Deny it if you please, but you will remember that player who has "backstabbed" you, and on a subconscious or conscious level, you will be cautioned about leaving yourself vulnerable to them again.

No, actually, you're not right. I make a conscious decision NOT to act on any suspicions I may have about a *player*, period. My actions within a game are based solely on history within THAT game. Nothing extraneous intrudes.

My general strategies develop and grow from game to game, but that's an entirely different level, and isn't what we're discussing here.

You don't seem to be able to separate your emotions from this message board. You refusing to play me is based on a general impression...

My statement was in direct response to your declaration:

When a player does "backstab," you better believe it is remembered, and even carried over into other games. That player will get a reputation for being "dirty" or maybe "ruthless." You will think twice before exposing yourself to them again. That is human nature, no matter how hard we try to be objective.

That clearly indicates you're the sort of player I *don't* want to play against. It's just a game. As long as the other player didn't CHEAT, then past games are a seperate issue, and shouldn't color my in-game actions and reactions at all.

were you as close to being objective as you claim, that should not matter. They player list assigned to a game should be of no consequence.

I never said I was objective. I said, I don't let the actions a player's race takes in Game A, affect my responses to the same player's race in Game B.

Players have a right to see who is assigned to a game, and decide to play in the game based on things like:
1. experience level of the players
2. how long it takes them it to upload turns (slow or fast)
3. whether that player is a risk to bail out suddenly
4. whether that player has cheated or perhaps is suspect
5. whether that player is obviously carrying a vendetta against you (do you just turn the other cheek and ignore someone who is always gunning for you because you are "roleplaying"?)

None of those preclude what I said. If someone is carrying a vendetta against me form other games -- they aren't the sort of people I care to play with. I'm not IN the game and making in-game responses based on other games, THEY are -- and I consider that a form of (mild) cheating.

Prior knowledge is part of learning... Scouting out oponents can be crucial (at least in KOTH).

You will note, KotH isn't my style of game(s), so I'm not playing in it.

For instance, Played a game against a good Talisman player, and waited for him to unload his strategy and kick butt. You lost... but next time you are going to do something about it... that is certainly carrying over into the next game, isn't it? It has nothing to do with roleplaying and race details. If you don't adjust, this game will be quite boring, as that player's tactics will incinerate you time after time.)

What I would learn is, to always be prepared for the Talisman from ANY religious race; to look and see which races, if any, are religious.

But that looking-and-preparing would be based on information within the game ... not on the player, and his or her past games on PBW.

It's the religious race that matters, not the player himself.

I've been in KOTH and PBW games since inception, an I love nothing more that my opponent doing their VERY BEST against me; playing to win... to take me out. It it obvious by my Posts that I love nothing more than to share tactics and strategy to make players better. Becuase when the challenge is stepped up, the game is more fun. Plain and simple.

Obviously, you love the destination more than the journey.

I am the opposite; I can ENJOY losing a game, as long as getting there was an interesting and entertaining process.

When you play checkers, do you play to win, or just move the pieces around in random directions?

Checkers has no persona element. There's no room to RP.

4X games have PLENTY of such room. In them, I RP ... and I play them largely to RP the race-as-a-whole.