Diplomacy

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Mark the Merciful:
The problem with Dominions, Diplomacy or playing sports for fun is that on the one hand extremely competitive people can be unplaasant to interact with, while on the other deliberately uncompetitive behaviour tends to subvert the whole purpose of the game. Both tend to increase the frustration and reduce the fun for the rest of us.

Playing with uncompetitive people can sometimes be annoying for an entirely different reason: Some of them have the unpleasant habit of whining obnoxiously when they lose.

[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by Pirateiam:
I find Zapmiester's position on diplomacy quite amuzing. I will not go into details since it will ruin a game we are playing but he seems quite adept at diplomacy. I think he does not even know he is doing it which is really amuzing.
Even if your end strategy is to be the Last man standing (as it should) Helping attack other nations, border agreements, and trying to entice nations to attack other nations IS diplomacy at the highest level!

I think you've misunderstood my position. I'm all for diplomacy, and I agree that the things you've listed constitute diplomacy. The axe that I'm grinding here is that I see the concept of joint victory as the root of much evil.

[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by Nagot Gick Fel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
People that know me from Dom1 will know I can get quite hysterical on this topic.

Damn! Could it be that Zapmeister is actually Steve A.?

[Edit: Seems so. ]

---

Hi Jacques

[Kel]

I think people should just play how they want to play and deal with the consequences

If you get a bad rep and no-one trusts you, the counter side to that is that your being cutthroat probably gave you a lot of advantage over someone who was more long-sighted about his alliances.

There is an advantage and a disadvantage to being cutthroat. I think that works out just fine, instead of trying to make everyone play the same way.

- Kel

[Gandalf Parker]

Hmmm I think most of the Paladin players always knew that it wasnt what the game was all about so they never seemed to gipe about the bad position they know it puts them in. And most of the assassin players seem to accept the consequences of their actions. The only ones I remember having a problem were the ones who wanted to go back and forth. They wanted the slate to be wiped clean between games. Hey Im real sorry about that but if Wikd allies with me and then majorly uses it to trash me, its alittle hard for me play the next game with Wikd and enter into an alliance on a clean slate. Even if I did think it was a good idea for things to be that way, it just isnt something thats likely to happen.

[Norfleet]

Me, I start out with an implicit state of leery distrust. It can be downgraded by a backstabbing attempt into a state of open distrust, or upgraded through a history of reliability to reserved suspicion. I don't really think that trust really has a place in a game played to the death, though.

[SelfishGene]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
.... The only ones I remember having a problem were the ones who wanted to go back and forth. They wanted the slate to be wiped clean between games. Hey Im real sorry about that but if Wikd allies with me and then majorly uses it to trash me, its alittle hard for me play the next game with Wikd and enter into an alliance on a clean slate. ...

This is actually where role playing can come in handy. If you still act as the same player as you did before there would certainly be a great deal of wariness and mistrust. But, if you change your persona through the tone and kind of your Messages, it helps ameliorate the sense of anxiety and lets you have a clean slate. This is actually one reason why i started role-playing pretty heavily in most of the games im in right now.

I've also found role playing is a giant help in forming relationships in game with ppl you don't know. Sort of an ice-breaker.