Would this be considered a truce or not

by **DoctorX** on Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:41 pm

Game number 1741180.

So, at 8:56 a truce was offered by Anti Haze, I didn't see the offer until 2 rounds later. I said I would accept as listed below. He would have read it because he made the comment after I agreed. Then read the rest. So is this a truce or not.

2008-02-07 06:53:07 - AntiHaze: green, why are you attacking me, blue has half the map
2008-02-07 08:56:20 - AntiHaze: green, we need a truce if either of us are going to survive
2008-02-07 12:45:24 - DoctorX: Sorry, wasn't reading these. The reason I attacked a couple rounds ago (and I really wish I didn't feel like I needed to) is because you placed 7 armys boarding my land value.
2008-02-07 12:47:00 - DoctorX: I took this as a offensive move. I won't have attacked had you left that army in Nisil.
2008-02-07 12:47:39 - DoctorX: I can agree to a truce. 2 rounds??
2008-02-07 13:28:23 - AntiHaze: well, the ball is in my court now, i'll have to see what blue does...
2008-02-08 10:06:52 - DoctorX: You offer a truce, I agreed and then attack me?? Pretty backhanded move.
2008-02-08 10:19:00 - erniefu: Green, if red is massing at your borders, then its pretty obvious the truce is over
2008-02-08 10:19:54 - DoctorX: I wouldn't have spread my defenses so thin had I known...that is crappy of you.
2008-02-08 10:21:44 - DoctorX: he had those armies there prior to the truce and anyway truces are suppose to end with an anouncement from what I understand.
2008-02-08 10:23:11 - erniefu: Then you truly don't understand the situation at hand.
2008-02-08 10:24:53 - AntiHaze: you never agreed to my original truce, and i never agreed to your proposal of a truce. therefore, there never was a truce.

by **newline** on Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:45 pm

you did agreed to a truce,or at least mutual none aggression until blue was dealt with. Not much you can do now except leave a negative feedback

by **timmytuttut88** on Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:46 pm

idk. if he made the truce two rounds before then you agree to it. He still has to approve it again since it was two rounds. But i can see where ur coming from also.

by **DoctorX** on Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:58 pm

Above is the entire game chat. So, all that was said is listed above.

by **demon7896** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:00 am

i really don't know... no obvious
maybe a misunderstanding.
i think that you were agreeing to his previous truce, while he thought they were seperate.

by **Scott-Land** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:03 am

DoctorX wrote:Above is the entire game chat. So, all that was said is listed above.

that's what you get-- truces are gay

by **Scott-Land** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:03 am

woops- double post

by **sfhbballnut** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:41 am

almost agree with you, an out right truce will get you killed, a mutual understanding that someone needs to be dealt with is abosolutly necessary in many games

by **owenshooter** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:12 am

IT'S A THREE PLAYER GAME, and people are calling for truces?!!! play your own game or play doubles. chat like this in a game annoys me, especially when people try to direct your game play... a truce... *snicker*-0

by **Dangerous-Die** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:49 am

imo - that is NO WAY a truce agreement. it was offered - it was not accepted for 2 rounds, it was then 'accepted' but was no longer valid to be accepted. the original offeree then did NOT accept the belated attempt at an acceptance. this is definitly not a grey one imo. its black and white - - No truce was agreed.

by **oggiss** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:53 am

Play speed freestyles and those basically don't exist

by **Maggog** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:10 am

Probably not considered a truce because of the time gaps. More of a misunderstanding I'd say. He didnt want to burn bridges tho so he didnt outright say no.

by **KoE_Sirius** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:03 am

owenshooter wrote:IT'S A THREE PLAYER GAME, and people are calling for truces?!!! play your own game or play doubles. chat like this in a game annoys me, especially when people try to direct your game play... a truce... *snicker*-0

I agree..........what are you having a truce for...Play your own game.

by **DoctorX** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:09 pm

KoE_Sirius wrote:
owenshooter wrote:IT'S A THREE PLAYER GAME, and people are calling for truces?!!! play your own game or play doubles. chat like this in a game annoys me, especially when people try to direct your game play... a truce... *snicker*-0

I agree..........what are you having a truce for...Play your own game.

When I saw the offer I thought the other opponent was hit hard enough and was not a real threat. I was in a pretty good position so I thought. Hell with it, it give me an opportunity for gaining an extra land mass.

Seems like a lot of you hate truces. In general they sound like they backfire for most. And for the short time I have been playing that seems like the truth. Any of the games that have had truces seem to work for someone else. What are the are the arguments for and against truces.

by **monkton** on Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:43 pm

Regarding your original question - that was not a truce. An offer is basically withdrawn after a turn goes by and you haven't outright accepted.

Regarding truces in general: they're lame - especially in a 3-player game. you don't want to be hamstrung by a truce. if it's a 3-player game where 1 player is in a much better situation than the other 2, then the other 2 of course should direct their energies toward knocking him down. you don't need a truce for this; you just need to be playing with people who don't have their heads up their asses. an artificially-defined time limit for non-aggression just gets in the way of the natural flow of the game.