Hi all, In a fair number of single player F O W games i have been in recently this has kept coming up. When a player starts to dominate it is obviously common for alliances to form amongst them to counter this. This is fine, but i have been in the position of dominance a number of times where the other players have openly discussed my troop numbers and positions to coordinate attacks (often going through each others territories to attack me). Obviously as these are FOW games without that knowledge i would be in a far stronger position. I know the rules allow for coordinated attacks but make no mention of FOW. Personally i view this as very cheap tactics and poor sportsmanship, even if not against the rules surely it defeats the whole point of FOW. In most game chat others seem to agree but the issue keeps cropping up with a few players so i would like to get other players views on this, as i have marked players "Cheap tactics" for doing this and want to check that this is a general consensus. Thanks swoopy91
There is no general consensus. We have had this debate ad nauseam here on CC and there is not a clear swaying of opinion towards either side. You would not be alone in describing that as poor sportsmanship but it's not clear if you would be in the majority.
swoopy00091 wrote:Hi all, In a fair number of single player F O W games i have been in recently this has kept coming up. When a player starts to dominate it is obviously common for alliances to form amongst them to counter this. This is fine, but i have been in the position of dominance a number of times where the other players have openly discussed my troop numbers and positions to coordinate attacks (often going through each others territories to attack me). Obviously as these are FOW games without that knowledge i would be in a far stronger position. I know the rules allow for coordinated attacks but make no mention of FOW. Personally i view this as very cheap tactics and poor sportsmanship, even if not against the rules surely it defeats the whole point of FOW. In most game chat others seem to agree but the issue keeps cropping up with a few players so i would like to get other players views on this, as i have marked players "Cheap tactics" for doing this and want to check that this is a general consensus. Thanks swoopy91
even tho i do agree this is a bit of cheap tactics (and i would rate it as such) there's a way to counter it.
if you have the chance, hold a small amount of territories and hope people fight each other (make sure you're not the biggest player around, or at least don't look like the biggest player or most dangerous player at the very least). now make sure you deploy a lot of troops on a country NOONE can see (like any territory surrounded by your own armies) and on top of that being unlikely to be revealed. alternatively you can stack armies in a position surrounded by neutrals, if there is any. off course you have to take a lot of other factors in consideration while doing this, like how much are you behind compared to the others, how good/bad is your position, is it escalating, how much do i know of the current state of the map, etc.
Think of the game as war because it is a war game. Allies in real life work together and share intelligence in order to defeat a common foe. It's what happens when you put everyone at risk of losing. What do you want them to do just deadbeat or suicide. Your asking people to give up and quick so you can win a game without a fight.
Fog of War means just that: fog of war. When someone can see your armies, fog no longer exists. The game does allow for diplomacy; in fact, diplomacy can have a huge impact on the game's outcome. Sharing intel is part of diplomacy. I always play fog of war games and I have no problem with someone stating troop numbers in order to plead their case for desired actions. If you want to stack that army of 60 troops visibly on your border, expect alarms to be raised!
No i didnt particularly mean stating locations of stacks of armies. What has happened a couple of times to me on WW2 Europe is where i border 2 players in a FOW game and am in a strong position (holding entire western side of map for example) one other player will commit everything against me on one of only two borders i need to defend. Then tell the 3rd person to move through their allies territories and attack the breach they have created. This is clearly good tactics, but would you expect to be marked as "cheap" for employing them or not?????
swoopy00091 wrote:Hi all, In a fair number of single player F O W games i have been in recently this has kept coming up. When a player starts to dominate it is obviously common for alliances to form amongst them to counter this. This is fine, but i have been in the position of dominance a number of times where the other players have openly discussed my troop numbers and positions to coordinate attacks (often going through each others territories to attack me). Obviously as these are FOW games without that knowledge i would be in a far stronger position. I know the rules allow for coordinated attacks but make no mention of FOW. Personally i view this as very cheap tactics and poor sportsmanship, even if not against the rules surely it defeats the whole point of FOW. In most game chat others seem to agree but the issue keeps cropping up with a few players so i would like to get other players views on this, as i have marked players "Cheap tactics" for doing this and want to check that this is a general consensus. Thanks swoopy91
even tho i do agree this is a bit of cheap tactics (and i would rate it as such) there's a way to counter it.
if you have the chance, hold a small amount of territories and hope people fight each other (make sure you're not the biggest player around, or at least don't look like the biggest player or most dangerous player at the very least). now make sure you deploy a lot of troops on a country NOONE can see (like any territory surrounded by your own armies) and on top of that being unlikely to be revealed. alternatively you can stack armies in a position surrounded by neutrals, if there is any. off course you have to take a lot of other factors in consideration while doing this, like how much are you behind compared to the others, how good/bad is your position, is it escalating, how much do i know of the current state of the map, etc.
I remember a 8 player Imperium Romanum game where I did this. From the first round until something like the 20:th round I just stacked on a dead end territ hidden behind a neutral. Once opened up I pretty much swept the board .
AoG for President of the World!! I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
I usually avoid FoW for a number reasons...and probably one of the reasons is that players tend to have varying degrees of etiquette when it comes to this setting. I think I've always been in the camp that deception or letting information leak out is all a part of game within the game, but I can understand the negative feedback against these sorts of tactics as well.
.