[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by wolfkinsov:
To me this game feels a lot like the AH game "Diplomacy". I mean there can only be one winner. There are no points for coming in second. Letting any one country get to big because you stuck to some agreement is the same thing a conseeding defeat. The big boy on the block expects to be takin down. You can honor your agreements with the weak.

This is how it should be, IMHO. Unfortunately, there are some players out there willing to agree to joint victory which is (again, IMHO) contrary to the spirit of one-god ascension and unfair to the opponents that want to stay true to that spirit. People that know me from Dom1 will know I can get quite hysterical on this topic.

I am all for honor and my word, hell I went to USNA. But when you play theses games that is how they are played, double dealing, double crossing, who to trust, when will you be backstabbed.

I think there's a lot more to diplomacy than double-dealing and back-stabbing. You've described the real polit, in which everyone understands that ultimately, everyone else is out to kill them. But it's still possible to be honourable. For example, many people agree to giving one or more turn's notice for the cancellation of alliances and NAPs. If you stick to your promises, you can keep your honour and still win the game.