Thowing a game to save points

[tomtorresson]

Hey- Curious what folks think of this.

When I am 100% sure (or close to it) that I am not going to win a match I announce my intention and just focus on bringing down the person with the lowest record. My thinking is that I want to lose (point wise) to someone better than me (or at least not the lowest rank playing).

A bunch of folks get PISSED when I tell them my intent.

Thoughts?

[sully800]

This is a big problem with the current scoring system, and that is why I like several of the ideas recently proposed to stop it- mainly basing the points gained/lost off of the average player so that it doesn't matter who eventually wins (as long as it is not you). Throwing a game to save points even though you lost is very lame.

[AndyDufresne]

This is a common tactic, and of course not illegal to do. But you may not garner very much favor, and perhaps negative feedback and some ignore list additions for employing it, but it is just one in a myriad of tactics out there some people don't agree with.


--Andy

[tomtorresson]

Yeah- it does have a tendency to piss folks off...even the ones that are to benefit. "I'd rather win fair".

Frankly- I am out to get my rank up...even though I am not having much luck. I would think that there are a bunch of people that are thinking big picture (more in terms of their long term score...rather than the outcome of a single game).

I haven't gotten any bad feedback yet officially...but on the half dozen or so times I have done it (and said what I was doing...even when apologizing for it) pisses people off...to an extent that surprises me.

[Machiavelli]

I usually play in games with people of my rank, so I dont really have to do that, but if you know you are going to lose, then you must not have alot of troops. If you dont have a lot of troops then your attack wont do much, and the tactic is not very effective

[mandalorian2298]

It is your right to attack whoever you whant for whatever reason (save a secret alliance). That being said, I think this attitude adds realism to the game. In real life, as well, cowards and losers allways side with the "pack leader". It makes gaining rank harder and rank more valuable.

[gerry22]

This is a big problem with the current scoring system, and that is why I like several of the ideas recently proposed to stop it- mainly basing the points gained/lost off of the average player so that it doesn't matter who eventually wins (as long as it is not you). Throwing a game to save points even though you lost is very lame.

i agree, it's lame.

[reverend_kyle]

I usually play in games with people of my rank, so I dont really have to do that, but if you know you are going to lose, then you must not have alot of troops. If you dont have a lot of troops then your attack wont do much, and the tactic is not very effective

[HotShot53]

I'm leaving for vacation, and one of my games didn't end yet, do to one player never taking his turn till the last minute... so I'm going to lose, and I'm throwing the game to the player with 1,400 points rather than the one with 600, even though the lower ranked player had been winning before. But with the current system I have no choice... which is why I proposed the scoring tweak (see the suggestions section).

[what,me worry?]

thats what i do some times when i have zero shot at winning. But i dont announce it tho...

[Sammy gags]

sounds like a good idea, but i dont care about my points as long as i get respect as a player

[MeDeFe]

I think it's reprehensible. You play for real until you're taken out or don't play at all. If you're intentionally going to be a loser you should do that somewhere else.

And if you're going to miss your turns because you can't be there... hit everyone equally hard or even the playing field, but don't concentrate on one person.

*contemplates making use of the ignore list*

[HoustonNutt]

I don't think there is anything wrong with it. I do, however, think there is something wrong with how babyish and whiny some players are. "Oh, boo hoo, it's not fair to gang up. That's not how the game is played!"

Yeah, dickwad, it is. If the game is to mirror real world strategy at all, saving oneself (even if only slightly) by taking out a weaker opponent (or by ganging up on a weaker opponent, or by trying to get someone to attack another player instead of you) is all completely valid. Hell, I admire anyone with the sack to utilize every inch of the rules (explicit or implied) in an attempt to win a game or protect his or her points for another day.

[Evil Semp]

If I think I am going to lose I just try to build and not screw anybody over. If it is a no card game sometimes you get to build back up and maybe make a difference. If it is a card game I will not try for a card or trade as early as possible so it is less desirable to kill me.

[RobinJ]

It is not the nicest thing to do and I don't think I would be too bothered (but I might feel different if I was of higher rank) about taking out the lowest player. I think that it is a mistake to announce it in game chat.

Still, there is nothing against doing it. This is a reason why the points system does need to change. I quite like it but unfortunately it can be abused