Deception

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Cainehill:


First, I'm not an apologist for his behavior or his style of gameplay

Strange. It seems to me that that's exactly what you have been doing so far in all your Posts on this matter.

Originally posted by Cainehill:

If something couldn't be done in game, isn't it darn close to cheating? Messages sent in the game don't get received until the next turn. This is in keeping with the game's background and mechanics. Sending instant updates during a turn isn't.

Cainehill, your arguments doesn't make much sense to me. If you thought that using email and isntant Messages on for diplomacy, intelligence sharing between turns, trading, etc. is against the spirit of the game, much less "cheating" as you put it in yor post, why didn't you say so when we begin to play???

For what else do you think we meet on the ICR channle if not to have opprtunity to communcicate between the turns? You did it yourslef many times sending privite Messages to me, in both IRC and email.

As for my part, I've send on turn 1 (!) message to everyone, telling than that to speed up comunication and to conduct dimplomacy efficiently I suggest we use email, like we always do in all Dom2 MP games that I've played. I even went so far as to send everybody my email address. You you had any issue with that you should say so back than. Instead you never said a word about it before, but now you are puting the show of shock and distaste. Sorry, but I can't buy it.

As for alliances - I already expaliend to you. If you think that alliance between weaker nations against opponent who much stronger than each of them separetly and is clearly going to dominate the map very soon (as Caelum did) is dishonorable , you will never going to win any serious MP Dom2 games.

In response to those people, I'll quote Stormbinder's eloquence : STFU.

Heh, Cain makes me feel like an raw, coarse oldtimer who taught the baby how to swear.

I used "STFU" suggestion only during one final converstaion on IRC the day our Fire and Ice game was amandoned. It was made to Norfleet, when he kept interupting our discussion what to do with our game, that was wreaked because of him/Pakhar. As you can imagine I was really pissed at him by that time because of his actions, so I snaped.

You on the other hand seem to be enjoying using this "STFU" again and again with obvious pleasure, while noting that it was copyrighted by me. You really are almost making me ashamed thinking that perhaps I've tought it to you or something.

[ May 25, 2004, 03:30: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

[Vynd]

I have to agree with Stormbinder, the answers available in this poll are lame. I think what Norfleet was doing was wrong. But reprehensible is a strong word. It's not like he's been killing and eating little babies... has he?

The thing about this whole affair that bugs me the most are the folks who try and blame the other players for being stupid enough to talk to Norfleet about their strategies. Maybe it was stupid (me, I'd call it friendly, or trusting). But is deceiving and taking advantage of stupid people somehow OK then? Might as well say that its OK to lie and cheat, except when you get caught.

[ May 25, 2004, 03:31: Message edited by: Vynd ]

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Vynd:
It's not like he's been killing and eating little babies... has he?

Mmmm. Babies. Crunchy. They were already dead when I found them, though! I swear!

[ May 25, 2004, 07:42: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

[Yossar]

Maybe I'm naive and maybe I'm the only one, but I actually believe Norfleet that he wasn't trying to get information to give himself some kind of advantage. Just doesn't seem like something he'd do.

[Esben Mose Hansen]

Mmmm. Babies. Crunchy. They were already dead when I found them, though! I swear!

How do you get the babies crunchy? Do you deep fry them?

[Chazar]

Umh, I dont really want to get involved in this business about particular persons I've never met, but generally speaking, as we are in this thread (?):

I usually only play strategy games like Dom2 with people I personally know and meet in non-virtual life, because I love to chat about the game, discussing strategies, trying to obtain information and telling my own (maybe false) plans in return. This kind of diplomacy is what makes strategy games truly interesting for me!

However, I would consider it quite ruthless if someone would deliberatley give false information on the game mechanics and rules, and/or cheats by messing around with the game files. This is simply out of question for me.

So in response to what Vynd contributed: I'd say trying to obtain the enemy's plans by means of polite conversation and deliberate deception is a part of the game for me. When it comes to the game, the game is always on, regardless of the situation I am in when talking about it.

I accept that my "enemy" might not always tell the truth about his intentions, as do I. You have to reveal something true in order to regain something true, but just how much is the parlous question. I guess I consider it as fantasy roleplaying, thus I usually sign my diplomatic Messages if sent via email with my pretender's name.

Using fake identities on the net might be of another magintude, sure, but I dont want to judge that. I dont like it personally and would not create another identity myself. My avatar-picture clearly reveals me to all who have visited me, but I do not expect my fellow players to reveal themselves, should they visit this forum. Therefore I am cautious, so that I have nothing to regret afterwards, which I would regard as my own fault. I consider strolling alone through a park in the dark to be something I would do at my own risk...

[ May 25, 2004, 14:20: Message edited by: Chazar ]

Just a little reminder. If this topic strays too far from the anonymous or accusational then it will be locked.