Another group that might not be applicable would be roleplayers, though it isn't really applicable to this game.
Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves
|
Scooter, I'm surprised - I think that's a really pessimistic view. I believe that in practice, most players prefer to be friends with opponents they get along with and who are friendly to them, and if someone is doing well, that's just one factor of many that people use to make decisions.
There will be many points in this game where teams make decisions, where they have no chance of winning. While some people follow the philosophy of always trying to hurt the leader (and CFC certainly doesn't seem to like us in general), many don't.
I guess my perspective there is tilted by the fact that CivPlayers proved pretty difficult to deal with last time due to their spotty and unpredictable communication. Though, things seem to be a little better now. So maybe that was overly negative of me. But last time their diplo guy pretty clearly wasn't even following the game all that closely (I was having to tell HIM where his cities were in relations to ours and stuff like that), so it seems like subtle favors will likely get completely missed with that team.
Anyway, I also think that small gestures and favours will continue to be valuable even going forward. It's often one important part in starting to build trust.
Which is why I'm starting to feel shitty with our planned war with the Germans. It's one thing when they dragged the game, but lately they've been decent in finishing their turns, and they've been pretty easy to deal with too, unlike WPC. I console myself with that they're the target that's makes the most sense from a geopolitical perspective - it won't give us long exposed borders with other teams and they're behind in tech.
Furthermore, I consider that forum views should be fluid in width
(April 28th, 2013, 16:28)kjn Wrote: Anyway, I also think that small gestures and favours will continue to be valuable even going forward. It's often one important part in starting to build trust. well, if you're feeling guilty, we could always play hard mode and declare on the germans and WPC simultaneously. Who wants a challenge?
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
Well if you want to attack CFC instead, I would be in favor of that too...
Civilization IV: 21 (Bismarck of Mali), 29 (Mao Zedong of Babylon), 38 (Isabella of China), 45 (Victoria of Sumeria), PB12 (Darius of Sumeria), 56 (Hammurabi of Sumeria), PB16 (Bismarck of Mali), 78 (Augustus of Byzantium), PB56 (Willem of China)
Hearthstone: ArenaDrafts Profile No longer playing Hearthstone.
Definitely honor our deals. And while we may have been super annoyed about the German's clock shenanigans the truth is we are attacking them because they will be easy pickings. We're here to win. If attacking CFC or CivPlayers or anyone else made more sense in game, we should do that. But it doesn't. I think it's pretty clear that the Germans are the easiest opponent. Plus if we changed our plans we'd make more enemies without even gaining a useful ally. I understand the feelings of sympathy but I don't think they should sway our plans.
Have we had any discussion about canceling some resource deals with CFC since they so obviously didn't hood up their end of the marble deal? No more bullshit from then that they couldn't hook it up for us to fulfill their obligation, it is patently obvious they played us and then slow played connecting the marble until they needed it. We should call them on it. If they aren't going to be bothered holding to their agreements let's call them out and abrogate the deal. They can get their happy resources elsewhere.
Played: Pitboss 18 - Kublai Khan of Germany Somalia | Pitboss 11 - De Gaulle of Byzantium | Pitboss 8 - Churchill of Portugal | PB7 - Mao of Native America | PBEM29 Greens - Mao of Babylon |