RBP2 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!

[Jowy]

Nothing bad in lying and backstabbing. Sure, it doesn't feel good when it's done to you. Yet, it's been designed to be part of the Civilization games just like it's part of real life diplomacy. For me, it's one of the most interesting parts of the game! Gotta keep in mind that it's just another gameplay mechanic that you can use to your advantage. Some lie, some build cottages. Your choice. But it shouldn't affect outside the game.. just because someone lies and backstabs in a round of Civ4, doesn't mean they'd do that outside.

Now, this particular move, seems a bit stupid if it's true. Slaze would be a valuable ally to Athlete. Reliability is of course an issue, but he'll need all help he can when the inevitable showdown with India occurs.

[Selrahc]

Whosit's been quite honorable - the most so of any player - but his "allies" are selling him out.

Which is interesting since he basically started his game off by violating a NAP.

[Rowain]

And it was Athlete who pointed him out the error of his ways. Ottomans also helped him to sign peace with Korea on that occassion.

[antisocialmunky]

This is a joke right?

Athlete has no morals and no honour, very shady indeed.

Yes, yes that is mean but epic.

Its kinda understandable since he sees it as his only option but still even underhanded by my tastes.

[Swiss Pauli]

What was the rule for Great Spies in this game? Sullla has forgotten that FP gives Spy points not Merchant point in BtS...

[Beamup]

Which is interesting since he basically started his game off by violating a NAP.

I mean since then. He's mended his ways quite nicely.

[Rowain]

This is a joke right?

Athlete has no morals and no honour, very shady indeed.

This is a game so no restrain personal attacks if you can.
The move would be shady indeed if he makes it which is in no way guaranteed. If slaze didn't sign a traeaty while gifting the units (along the line of: 'May not used against Inca' or 'must be returned to Inca if Ottomans declare war') it is his fault if he get cought with his pants down.

[Morgan]

This is a game so no restrain personal attacks if you can.
The move would be shady indeed if he makes it which is in no way guaranteed. If slaze didn't sign a traeaty while gifting the units (along the line of: 'May not used against Inca' or 'must be returned to Inca if Ottomans declare war') it is his fault if he get cought with his pants down.

Stating the obvious is not a personal attack, I am entitled to an opinion and I will state it here.

Do you really think it is acceptable for althelete to attack slaze with his own Army? You think it's ok because Slaze did not state that Athlete should not attack him with it?

I've played a lot of pitboss games and i've not encounted such bad faith as i've witnessed amongst a minority of the players in the 3 pitboss games on this site, what surpises me the most is the casual way it's overlooked and tolerated. Certainly if some of the situations occured in other forums and pitboss sites then the player involved would not be invited to the next pitboss. Who wants to spend 9 months on a game only to to have it ruined by a player that cannot keep his word or agreements.

Perhaps my views are too old fashioned; that ethics and morals can be (and should be) suspended when playing a 'game'.

[Adlain]

Stating the obvious is not a personal attack, I am entitled to an opinion and I will state it here.

Do you really think it is acceptable for althelete to attack slaze with his own Army? You think it's ok because Slaze did not state that Athlete should not attack him with it?

I've played a lot of pitboss games and i've not encounted such bad faith as i've witnessed amongst a minority of the players in the 3 pitboss games on this site, what surpises me the most is the casual way it's overlooked and tolerated. Certainly if some of the situations occured in other forums and pitboss sites then the player involved would not be invited to the next pitboss. Who wants to spend 9 months on a game only to to have it ruined by a player that cannot keep his word or agreements.

Perhaps my views are too old fashioned; that ethics and morals can be (and should be) suspended when playing a 'game'.

i wouldnt say they have been casuly overlooked, people can and will pick up reputations, take a look at some of the other threads in other games and personaly i see people saying things like "i dont beleave a word or it because he did this in another game" or "he is known to stretch the truth/ omit the facts in these mesages and you need to look real close to see what he realy means" to see that what you reap you sow on this board like meny others. However 1 game does not make somone a dishonorable player, sure people may be wary of him next time, but most will take on face value unless given reason in that game to think otherwise.

[Rowain]

Stating the obvious is not a personal attack, I am entitled to an opinion and I will state it here.

You derive your conclusion of Athlete based on a game and no this is not stating the obvious but a unnecessary personal attack. You are free to critizise his actions but not his personality. This is a game and the agreed rules here allow (shady/dishonorable) diplomacy.

Besides as of yet he has not attacked slaze and so your so called obvious isn't even in existence

Perhaps my views are too old fashioned; that ethics and morals can be (and should be) suspended when playing a 'game'.

Perhaps you should learn to differ between 'Game' and 'Real World'? Besides Athlete had stated various times that he will honor any deals he signed. For example he would be far better of had he attacked slaze immediatly instead of waiting the 25 turns of cooldown. So based on his actions (regarding deals) he has acted absolutly honorable so much for your obvious