Opinions on ethics of this PBW move

DavidG · #1 May 20th, 2002, 02:48 PM

Hello I was just wondering what you guys think of this move my opponent in a PBW game just did. He is in 1st place and his partner in 2nd place is an open slot. So he surrenders to his partner and then next turn gets approved to take over his partners empire. Frankly I think this is basically cheating or at the very least extremly unethical.

geoschmo · #2 May 20th, 2002, 02:58 PM

Yeech.

PBW makes no official policy on this sort of thing, as long as it happens in the clear and open. The only behavior will step into and stop is actual cheating where a player is manipulating data files, or playing two empires simultaneously unknown to the other players.

It is the game owners responsibility and say as to whether this sort of thing is allowed. There may be some sort of logical game reason for it. For exapmple if it's a team game.

However, personally I wouldn't like it either if the game owner allowed something like this without making it perfectly clear to the other players what the deal was beforehand. My suggestion is you take it up with him. If you don't get an answer you like you are free to vote with your feet and find a game with an owner mroe receptive to player input. There are plenty of games to chose from on PBW.

Geoschmo
PBW Admin Team

Saxon · #3 May 20th, 2002, 03:33 PM

Yep, the surrender thing is pretty yucky. I can see it if discussed ahead of time and the two empires had been allies for a long time anyway, but otherwise, it is dubious. Geo has a good point. This is for fun, so do not stay if they are doing dodgy things in the game.

dumbluck · #4 May 20th, 2002, 03:42 PM

Surely there is some background info that explains this. Otherwise this is not a good decision by the game owner at all. Unless, of coarse, he's "on the take"...

DavidG · #5 May 20th, 2002, 07:05 PM

Well yea there is some background. After discussing with the game owner and player it seems there was no ill intent so case closed. I'm curious however what everyone thinks of players losing ground in a war and then surrendering to an ally? They friends I play with (not the PBW games) always do this and seem to think it's OK. It bugs the H$%# out of me though especialy if I'm also allied with the player he surrenders to. I think a player should either just quit and let the AI take over or surrender to the player who defeated them. It just seems so unrealistic to me. It would be like the Nazis surrendering to Canada in 1944. All of sudden the Brits, Americans and Russians have to ceasefire or declare war on Canada.

Quote:

Originally posted by dumbluck:
Surely there is some background info that explains this. Otherwise this is not a good decision by the game owner at all. Unless, of coarse, he's "on the take"...

Growltigga · #6 May 20th, 2002, 07:13 PM

Well, I think that if you have a problem with this, you need to set up either a house rule or withdraw when it happens with one of your games.

If you think about it, it is too unrealistic for a race/nation being beaten badly in a war to 'surrender' (read cry for protection) to a much stronger race - if you then have to fight both combined, isn't this galactic machtpolitick at work?