is feeding acceptable or not

[DonCorazon]

For me, it is a fun part of the MP game. Avenging is something I don't get to do much in the real world.

[Xietor]

Building goodwill may certainly help you in a future game, but I agree it should not be quid pro quo. You can never promise to give stuff in return in a future game because you may be in contention yourself.

But human nature is what it is. If a player helps you win a game by giving you items/gems when he is defeated, most players will remember that kindness. And if I am faced with defeat in a future game, and all other things are equal, I am likely to return the favor then give my stuff to someone who has never helped me.

Of course if I have a close ally in the present game, the help in the present game may outweigh the gift of stuff in a past game, but I still think going down in defeat and taking your gold/gems with you is a mistake.

A quote from the Alpaca Game Thread, my 1st large mp game on this forum:

"Out of curiosity, if I were looking for someone to whom I would give all my gems and items - who feels they are in a good position to fight a successful war with Marignon and Pangaea? Right now I'm inclined to give all my treasures to Man, but whoever is on Marignon's southern border (or across the southern sea) is also a prospect."

This from the wily veteran Dr. P.

[Tyrant]

I think it depends on circumstances. If i have been in a long war with a loyal ally he will absolutely get my stash when i go down, but if i just get punked by a straight rush in the early game i'm taking it with me to the afterlife. If someone double crosses me or if i get dog piled i usually will try to find my enemy's most powerful enemy and help him out.

My notions of honor and sometimes a bit of roleplaying figure into it- i've been known to give small gift to my conquerer in acknowledgment of a well played game, and in one case i even flushed the gems i was given by a player who threw a hissy fit and left the game. But really, for me it's about deterrence. I have tried to build a reputation as a tough opponent so people will sign NAPs and look elsewhere for easy pickin's, and sending off the treasure fleet to an appropriate person is often the last step in this procedure.In my case this is more often lab gear than gems 'cause i try to use those fighting.

One of the many cool things about Dominions is that the community is really shockingly honorable and well behaved. I think the fact that it takes months to play a game and (unless you are Micah) you are pretty much certain to lose drives the lower orders of net gaming scum back to easier games. So this is really pretty much a non-issue as far as i'm concerned.

[Loren]

Thematically I have no problem with it--you're not going to make it but you would prefer to live under an ally than under an enemy.

[Fal]

absolutely yes, the gems/gold/items should go to the player(s) who have the potential to avenge your defeat. It is, in fact, an important part of the game, and part of your strategy. That is to say, if I can't win, I will certainly not let you win either.

Therefore it is a critical factor that one should always take into consideration before he makes the final kill to his enemy.

However I have seen a case where the player A gave his hundreds of gems to the player B who defeated him, simply because he believes the game is over and no one would be able to defeat play B...a rather cynical move, I'd say.

[DonCorazon]

Reading Tyrant's post reminded me, I have actually given my gems to an enemy. In that case, I knew our war had led to both of our stagnations. When I knew I would die, I sent him my stash and so in that case, I think it actually may have helped balance the game.

But I think it is fine whatever your motive. You earned it, you can spend it how you like.

[Sombre]

No diplomacy games make sense to me. If you don't want to go that far, make a 'no giving items, gems or gold' game.

[Omnirizon]

I havn't a problem with trading items, that makes sense. It is just that giving items away because your losing and decide to go AI doesn't make much sense to me. It doesn't seem right somehow.

I can ONLY see it justified thematically if you fight to the LAST province, and before going under, send off your stuff. But if you actually fight to the last province, you won't really have any stuff to send. I suppose if you do that though, it is OK. But I think rarely that actually happens. Typically people have a respectable amount of stuff left, but know their fighting a losing battle. So they send their stuff to someone who might be able to win out over their aggressors and go AI. There are many ways to argue that this is NOT thematic, not the LEAST of which is the AI nation you leave behind; kind of difficult to explain their continued fighting when they just sent all their stuff to a neighbor, who they likely invade in the next turn or two.

I don't think diplomacy is bad. I enjoy all that stuff, all manner of diplomacy: trading to tribute to bribing, it is all plausible and understandable. I think giving away respectable sums of stuff requires some fangling and shallow rationalizing to pass it off as thematic though. In fact, if read through them carefully, most peoples responses even imply if not outright admit that it is more personally oriented. We could debate whether that is OK, though I think most would actually readily agree it is personal, not thematic, and that this is OK.

Lastly, we could examine this from a purely gaming perspective. However, I think that is unwise with Dom3, as many of the wild card factors that competitive gaming tries to minimize (in order to accurately judge skill rather than luck) are the very things that make Dom3 so much fun. However it is worthy to mention from this perspective that feeding is a HUGE wild card, perhaps to much for anything more than casual Dom3. You can build a strategy around diplomacy, but you can't build a strategy around being the benefactor of feeding. Yet the bestowal of this kind of gifting is very game shaping.

[Randvek]

Your whole premise is flawed: feeding isn't a wild card. It's usually very predictable who will give their stuff to whom. If someone's going out, they will give their stuff to their allies and/or the person who took them out's enemies. That's just human nature, and a lot of pretenders are, in fact, human.

When you keep saying that it's unthematic, yet the overwhelming majority disagree, you must at least entertain the notion that it is you who do not understand the theme.

[Ironhawk]

Whether or not this practice is "OK" by some thematic measure is a moot point. Practically every player does it, so you just have to accept it and continue. Personally, I have no problem with sending all your remaining resources to a loyal ally or even to the enemy of your enemy, for revenge.

That said, I do think it would be neat if there was a chance somehow when you destroy the last province of a nation that you could get a % amount of thier remaining gems / gold and perhaps even items in the lab as loot.