Re: Diplomacy ethics
The big issue is how you handle it.
Having played Diplomacy PBEM for a while, Diplomacy is a huge thing. The catch is, you should never lie, unless it is a game changing issue. If there are four nations left, you are #4 allied to #1, and realize tha if you gang up against #2 and #3 you are going to lose, you go ahead and make the stab. The only possible way you win is if you all gang up against #1. The problem is, do the other players trust you when the dust settles?
That is the fundamental problem "care bears" have. They do not know how to play the diplomatic game well. You should constantly be going back and forth regarding the game. Talk about some discussions you are having with other players, forment wars in other parts of the map by discussing what other players are going to do to them, etc.
I played in a game a few years back where one I tried to switch from being allied to the #3 player, to the #1 player (#3 was in a better late game situation). #1 kept on "messing up orders". So when push came to shove and I had to go a way, I went with he #3 player. #1, completely blindsided by this, made it his sole purpose in the game to keep me from winning. Some players might get upset by it, but in a game with diplomacy, even the nuclear option is on the table (I'll do what ever it takes to keep you from winning). The heck of it is, and the player never saw this, is that it really was in my best interest to side with him, but he never saw what he did as impacting relations. How can I side with someone if they "keep messing up orders"?
All that said, Diplomacy is a huge factor in games and should be that way. Keeping you word should carry some weight, but players should understand when a player does not keep his word when it is in his best interest to break an agreement unannounced.
|