AWIY's blacklist of dishonest peoples

[Methel]

Im behind the llama on this.

I find this thread offencive.

[Edi]

I also find this thread offensive. However, I'm not going to lock it for the time being. The thing to remember here is that a particular game is distinct from a particular player, someone who was your staunch ally in one game may stab you in the back in the next one. Besides that, as long as there is not a set of commonly agreed-upon rules about notification of attack being mandatory in a given game, this sort of thread will come across as whining about nothing.

Further, this sort of thread is a prime breeding ground for vendettas, which are something that will absolutely not be tolerated. If you have a problem with somebody's in-game conduct, keep it to PM, email or the particular thread dedicated to that game. If you start making lists where you add up everyone who ever got the better of you in a game, even if it was through backstabbing, fine, but keep them to yourself. The moment you start airing vendetta lists on the public forum, YOU get on the moderators' watch list. If it spirals out of control, the proverbial ton of bricks is liable to fall mostly on the person seen as the instigator of any trouble.

Try to keep that in mind.

With the limited Dominions MP experience that I have (just 2 games of Dom2 long ago), I remember being backstabbed and doing some backstabbing myself and we all had a good laugh about it afterward.

[jimkehn]

I agree with Edi, Llamabeast and Methel. This is a game!!! We are dealing with diplomacy, war, and intrigue. Guess what?? That happens in real life?? Remember the Russo-German Pact in 1939??? And how it was broken in 1941???? Someone above mentioned that in one game a player may be roleplaying a nation as a disingenuous thug, and the next as a knight-hearted benevolent. I never carry a grudge from one game to another (although I can think of at least one person who may think I do...8^).....) I think threads like this tend to take away the intent of the game.......to have fun; and to encourage unintentional results......take the game too seriously.

[Gandalf Parker]

We have removed people from the forums for carrying vendettas too far into other threads. Im afraid that it will be up to each person to read about NAP complaints. A blacklist definetly does not fit the desired feel for Shrapnels forums.

On the OTHER hand...
people should realize that reputations DO follow you. I understand saying "how I play my god in THIS game is not how I play my god in the next game" but Im afraid that it just doesnt tend to hold true. The RPGers would like full creativity for each new god but the Strategists tend to keep score across games (and lists).

We have sometimes discussed ways to have completely anonymous games. So far we can achieve about a 90% anon if someone wants to set up such a game.

[Yucky]

Gandalf Parker said:
people should realize that reputations DO follow you. I understand saying "how I play my god in THIS game is not how I play my god in the next game" but Im afraid that it just doesnt tend to hold true.

I agree. Someone would be a fool to let another player betray them twice.

[Sleet]

I do not think this a good idea. Even if NAPS were a holy right and a sin to break, having a thread to start the flame-wars and vendettas for them is a recipe for disaster.

I will not be checking or posting in this thread at all again.

Salute.

[DrPraetorious]

I think that the game has the reverse problem - people keep their agreements even when it's crazy, from an in-game standpoint, to do so.

They do so in order to avoid being regarded as treaty breakers, for the classic game theory reasons, as well as personal ethics. This has the effect of making everyone (including, I must say, myself) too honorable.

The other problem is that the game has no long-term message memory. If you have longterm diplomatic arrangements of some kind with someone, and they offer an NAP, and you ignore that but continue to coordinate strategically, they *invariably* think that you agreed to the NAP. But you can't call up the messages in question and demonstrate that you didn't actually agree to the NAP.

[Ubercat]

Evernight, a web based fantasy wargame that I used to play (evernightgame.com) has a good system for diplomacy. Everything I know about NAP's I learned from them.

They have a good message log, which would be very helpful in DOM3 MP for many reasons beyond keeping people honest. There's also a setup where you can rate other players on a scale for various things like honor, communication, skill, etc. and type up a blurb about your experiences with them for other players to read.

Could be useful here if it were implementable.

-Ubercat

[Morkilus]

The only use for this thread is to compile a list of whiners. I hope we don't see this sort of thing very often. Individual game threads are for reputation-bashing, and it should all be in-character.

Color me disgusted.

[WraithLord]

DrPraetorious said:
I think that the game has the reverse problem - people keep their agreements even when it's crazy, from an in-game standpoint, to do so.

They do so in order to avoid being regarded as treaty breakers, for the classic game theory reasons, as well as personal ethics. This has the effect of making everyone (including, I must say, myself) too honorable.

The other problem is that the game has no long-term message memory. If you have longterm diplomatic arrangements of some kind with someone, and they offer an NAP, and you ignore that but continue to coordinate strategically, they *invariably* think that you agreed to the NAP. But you can't call up the messages in question and demonstrate that you didn't actually agree to the NAP.

I agree with DrP. that's why I really like the "no diplomacy" games. Somehow they end up as the most exciting one.

I also agree that its part of the fun in the game to break treaties and since this is only a game it doesn't say anything about the player's morals in real life. In a way its kind of childish to keep track of "treaty" breakers. I'm not for that.