Thread: Hall of Shame
View Single Post
  #29  
Old March 24th, 2008, 06:56 PM

IndyPendant IndyPendant is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 483
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
IndyPendant is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Hall of Shame

The fact is that there is no treaty enforcement in this game. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is debatable (I'm solidly in the "bad-thing" camp, myself) but I have to agree with the consensus: the concept of a Hall of Shame is a terrible idea. In part because it's easily abusable (don't like someone? Post on the thread that he broke his word!) in part because it's possible there's a misunderstanding involved (I try to give people benefits of doubts whenever possible) and so on.

However, this is a very small community, and people do tend to gain a reputation. Those that break treaties and/or think it's okay to do so at a whim (or at least, who may be that type of person) are often easily found simply by checking their post history in the forums.

After some emotional reactions to being betrayed that way myself a number of times, I have decided to try a new long-term strategy of using this small-community, easy-rep situation to my advantage. If a player betrays an agreement with me, or doesn't follow through on a promise, I will do *anything and everything* I can to ruin that player's game. Period, no-holds-barred. Scorched Earth tactics? You bet! Ignoring another opponent to focus solely on the one that broke his agreement? Of course! Cripple myself, if it means ensuring the other player can't win? Check. (All of course, assuming I can't just defeat the scum normally. If I can do that, none of those extreme tactics are necessary.)

The way I figure it is, if the scum-sucking lying bastards need a reason to keep to an agreement, other than that they made it...I'll give them one: screw me over, and I'll do my best to screw you over twice as bad, in each and every game we encounter each other in. *shrug* It's what I want to do anyways. ; )

If they violate an agreement with me in one game, and I can't get revenge on them there, I am perfectly willing to wait until I play them again (if I ever do) and go for their throats in that game. I'm quite willing to sacrifice myself in another game to take out someone that has proven (to me, note!) that they are scum-sucking honourless liars, if that's the only option available to me. Don't like that idea? *shrug* Either don't play against me, or honour your agreements with me when you do, and you won't have to deal with it.

And it is very important to note that I am only talking about players that violate stated agreements or promises. If someone gives me a 3-turn warning on our NAP to gang up on me in a war, hey that's fine! You kept your agreement and gave me the promised notice. If I ask for help against a stronger foe, and you refuse to give it...that's fine, we never had an agreement in the first place. We're already at war, and you hand me my butt on a silver platter...hey, good game, excuse me while I go off to lick my wounded ego for a while. And so on, and so forth. No hard feelings.

This attitude of course requires that *I* keep all agreements I make, and I do. If giving three turns' warning before starting a war means I lose the game, then *shrug* I guess I lose. Not giving the warning doesn't necessarily mean I'll win...and becoming the type of scumsucking honourless liar I loathe isn't worth a mere chance of winning a single silly game.

Eventually, if an opponent is tempted to violate the terms of an agreement he signs with me for a short-term goal...then hopefully he'll reconsider doing so, because he knows that I *will* do everything in my power to get revenge for his betrayal. ; )
__________________
MP Guide to MA Ermor
Reply With Quote