Conquer Club

In a recent game of 3 people freestye, the opponent held asia and oceana. i held africa and the other held no continents. I told the third player that we should not take our turns till he was offline so he would not get his cont bonuses. He accused me of deadbeating and threatened bad feedback. We still lost the game but that tactic did delay it by a few rounds. Is this fair?

game number 335526

was it a RT game?

you suck

A cheap tactic, but entirely fair.

Unless you missed your turn, then I would pretty much consider it completely fair.
(Unless it was designed to be a RT game, which then...)

supercheap, and exactly why I don't play freestyle games. but fair.

Fair? 100% yes. Ethical? Not by my book. However, you can't expect more than that in a freestyle game.

Freestyle makes me want to poop.

boooo freestyle boooo!

I don't think it is a cheap tactic. It is agressive, and fair by all rules.

Attack when you aren't expected! whats wrong with that? It makes sense to do it. Force the enemy to be on defcon 1 while you laze about your day.

Morally wrong? no

It is clearly allowed in the CC rules, and follows the alls fair in love and war ruling. Now if it was RT and you intentionally deadbeated to gain the advantage I would agree that it is morally wrong to do. You agreed to play RT, so let your yes mean yes.

If you ask me any tactic other than secret alliences, multis, or somehow hacking the site is fair

lozzini wrote:In a recent game of 3 people freestye, the opponent held asia and oceana. i held africa and the other held no continents. I told the third player that we should not take our turns till he was offline so he would not get his cont bonuses. He accused me of deadbeating and threatened bad feedback. We still lost the game but that tactic did delay it by a few rounds. Is this fair?

game number 335526

I find that unethical. It is not against the rules but I still find any ingame deals unethical. If you play a singles game you are supposed to be single. If you play in a 3 player game and gang up on 1 player he can not win no matter how good he is. So if you want a partner go play doubles.

Edit: I would go after the strong player and hope the other players see that only right thing to do is just that, but I would never make any deals. Just hope I was in a game with players who want to win, do what need to be done without having any no attack deals.

GrazingCattle wrote:I don't think it is a cheap tactic. It is agressive, and fair by all rules.

Attack when you aren't expected! whats wrong with that? It makes sense to do it. Force the enemy to be on defcon 1 while you laze about your day.

Morally wrong? no

It is clearly allowed in the CC rules, and follows the alls fair in love and war ruling. Now if it was RT and you intentionally deadbeated to gain the advantage I would agree that it is morally wrong to do. You agreed to play RT, so let your yes mean yes.

but the rules dont decide your morals, just coz something is legal dosent mean its not unethical. anyways thats for another time and someone far more intelligent than me to argue.

i think this is extremely cheap and there are other things bout freestyle which is why i personall y avoid it! can you imagine on a real board game everyone having there go at the same time? a mad panic to deploy and attack, then waiting till everyone goes to bed to have your turn, seems a bit unlike the game to me,

but hey, all you freestylers out there enjoy it! ill stick to old fashoined seq games

lozzini wrote:In a recent game of 3 people freestye, the opponent held asia and oceana. i held africa and the other held no continents. I told the third player that we should not take our turns till he was offline so he would not get his cont bonuses. He accused me of deadbeating and threatened bad feedback. We still lost the game but that tactic did delay it by a few rounds. Is this fair?

game number 335526

Of course it's fair!

That's the way to play freestyle! People who say otherwise are just a bunch of whining sobs.

There are no ethical problems whatsoever (unless it's a RT, but RT's are played sequential).

If not playing freestyle the way you play freestyle, well, then one is a bad freestyler. Good work. Congrats.

alstergren wrote:

lozzini wrote:In a recent game of 3 people freestye, the opponent held asia and oceana. i held africa and the other held no continents. I told the third player that we should not take our turns till he was offline so he would not get his cont bonuses. He accused me of deadbeating and threatened bad feedback. We still lost the game but that tactic did delay it by a few rounds. Is this fair?

game number 335526

Of course it's fair!

That's the way to play freestyle! People who say otherwise are just a bunch of whining sobs.

There are no ethical problems whatsoever (unless it's a RT, but RT's are played sequential).

If not playing freestyle the way you play freestyle, well, then one is a bad freestyler. Good work. Congrats.

Lol. I am not sure, but think I am greatly outnumbered when talking about ingame deals. But I still find it unfair against the one that is being ganged upon. In singles you supposed to be single. I play board game and I have friends making deals so it is not uncommon, but I still do not like it

Oh. I agree. I don't care much for alliances. Never really enter into them (with one or two exceptions as I can recall, but that was when I was young and green). I prefer living and dying by my own dice and my own moves.

I concur. But, I cannot really be upset with people who resorts to alliances. I just put them on the ignore list if it was really badly done.

DavSav wrote:

lozzini wrote:In a recent game of 3 people freestye, the opponent held asia and oceana. i held africa and the other held no continents. I told the third player that we should not take our turns till he was offline so he would not get his cont bonuses. He accused me of deadbeating and threatened bad feedback. We still lost the game but that tactic did delay it by a few rounds. Is this fair?

game number 335526

I find that unethical. It is not against the rules but I still find any ingame deals unethical. If you play a singles game you are supposed to be single. If you play in a 3 player game and gang up on 1 player he can not win no matter how good he is. So if you want a partner go play doubles.

Edit: I would go after the strong player and hope the other players see that only right thing to do is just that, but I would never make any deals. Just hope I was in a game with players who want to win, do what need to be done without having any no attack deals.

I agree with you about the unethicality (is that a word?) of this but not on the truces thing. However, as you say, any good player knows when to go after the leader without being told.

I think speed games will fix the problem once they are set up and make freestyle a truly skilful game type