Scorched earth

[Salamander8]

I've only done scorched earth once in an MP game, and that was just burning down 2 labs in Sophistry when the massively blessed giants were stomping my Arco butt hard, and even then I am not overly pleased I even did that much. If I ever am in the same situation I'd not do that again (although I did set myself to AI early in Evermore between frustration vs the blessing EA Oceania had and my grandfather's illness cutting my freetime down). I never have cranked my taxes up or destroyed any other buildings just to make my land worth less to an opponent though.

If I feel I am doomed, I do tell anyone I have had positive relationships with that I free them from NAPs and other agreements and that they should consider my territory up or grabs if they so wish. I also give allies/NAP partners my gems and magic items before going out, but not to anyone else. I would rather see an ally get my stuff than my conquerer if at all possible, but I don't involve anyone beyond friendly powers to do so.

[thejeff]

I can see doing it if you were betrayed or were trying to do what damage you could to help a loyal ally. Otherwise... I don't get it.

The only time it happened to me, though I haven't played a lot of MP, was very early in the game. He and I invaded the same indy province, I won. I offered NAP and borders, but got war instead. By the time I'd found it, he'd burned his castle, lab and temple. It still cost me to take it and since I got little out of the early war and took less indies because of it, left me behind and I never really caught up.
The war seemed to be for RP reasons, but I never figured out the preemptive self-destruction.

[quantum_mechani]

Personally, I am much happier if people fight dirty to the bitter end than the flip side of going AI as soon as things start looking bad. In my experience, it is that latter that throws games much more than the former.

[Gregstrom]

I'll fight on even from an obviously lost point in the game, trying to cause my opponent maximum discomfort with spells while they besiege my capital, but I don't see the point in scorched earth.

[K]

I'll do it when my opponent has broken a NAP, bargained in bad faith, or been spamming me with messages. In short, jerk behavior as payment for jerk behavior.

Otherwise, I'll do it to prevent a key asset from being in enemy control. For example, a site producing Wizards will have its lab burned and provinces overtaxed so that an enemy taking it won't get much use out of it before I can retake it.

[Edi]

I wouldn't go so far as pillaging my own provinces, but razing castles could be on the table, as well as burning down labs so the player defeating me is not going to get any benefit from my infrastructure. I will also very likely take a look at who his current worst enemy is or who he will be fighting next and that one is likely going to start getting all sorts of intel as well as choice items, gems and gold that I'm not able to use anymore.

Last time I played MP was Faerun Pirates in Dom2 and whoever it was who played Ulm stomped me badly (I was playing Helheim, which started in the Moonshaes). So Cainehill's Pangaea suddenly found itself in possession of somewhere around 30 skull mentors, a dozen skull staffs and a number of air items I had made, spread out over several turns. He also got a total of several hundred gems of various types since I could not use them for anything. I had a ridiculous gem income compared to the size of my territory and he was also happy to take a couple of provinces with big site concentrations, one of which had a Banefire Forge for the Construction bonus. I have no idea how that game turned out, but that sort of tipping of the scales is bound to have an effect.

[IndyPendant]

I too will use scorched earth tactics in only three very specific situations:

1) My opponent has negotiated treaties and/or deals and not held to them (i.e. is a scum-sucking liar ; ).

2) I have an exceptional ally (and not just a NAP-let's-jump-on-that-guy type of agreement) who would benefit from me putting up as much of a fight as I can.

3) The war is still undecided, and I might yet win with the extra coin produced from 200-taxing my provinces into oblivion. Or I don't want him to benefit from the castle he's going to take from me, when I might be able to turn the war around later. And so on, on that theme. (I'll worry about recovering from the unrest/loss of buildings/whatever afterwards.)

Other than that, I tend not to destroy my own provinces/buildings in the face of the enemy. However, I also (so far, anyway) will not go A.I. even if I know I can't win. (As the old saying goes, you learn much more from losing than from winning.) I wonder if everyone draws the same line between "fighting to the bitter end" and "scorched earth"? I'm betting...no. ; )

[Hadrian_II]

I usually give my gems and gold to some other player, and i invite others to invade me when i am beaten, but i dont burn down my own infrastructure and i dont pillage my own provinces.

[K]

On the flipside, I've had some very nice players send me gems and gold after I tromped them soundly, but I hope thats because I always blatantly declare wars and fight my wars alone. Pretty nice, actually.

[DigitalSin]

I want to see them implement something so that if you started scorching everything, your people rebelled and did the exact opposite. Of course, you would have to implement this in secret so all the scorchers would get a nasty little shock