Re: On diplomacy and neutral nations

From: RedEyeJoe <juden@algonet.se>

Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0000

E.P. Flemyng wrote:
>
> You bring up an excellent topic. Having played both sides, it IS hard to
> completely separate personal/game. There are some players I cannot trust
> when I encounter them again. There are some players I trust to play
> their nation as I play mine, in character, and it's a lot more fun. Most
> players fall along a continuum in the middle.

Well, it have happened to me as well.
You're not alone on this one.
I choose allmost all time time side/nation by looking who is playing.
And also when I'm signing up for a game.
This is for the MEPBM.

> In MEPBM to be specific, what's difficult to deal with are the
> pre-determined alliances and decisions. I was attacked on turn 2 once
> when playing a neutral because one alliance had predetermined (team
> game) they wanted my territory and didn't care whether I joined them or
> not. That sours you. In a current game, I joined one alliance to
> maintain play balance, since the opposing alliance was starting to win
> too easily. These all affect things.

I think that you should have defended your selfe!
Noone should "threaten" you to join their side.
March your armies to defend/attack and cry out to the opposite side for
help.
That is what I should have done and did in one game.

> These thoughts aside, I fall into what I suspect is your "camp": I
> prefer to separate my personal from my game as much as possible. The
> game seems to be much more fun if you play your role as it exists rather
> than deciding on pure whim. Of course, it's a lot of fun playing
> whimsical, slightly arbitrary roles occasionally. I often choose sides
> based on who "aggresses" against me first. Although MEPBM is the most
> obvious alliance game, this holds true in games like You Rule, Hyboria,
> Starweb, etc. An alliance can make sense from military, economic or
> cultural reasons...or pure survival reasons, but shouldn't be based
> largely on who you like or dislike as a player.

I a person destroys the game, lets say he drops out in turn 3 and during
that time he haven't moved his armies in position to attack or wondered
around with his characters like the world belonged to him,
then it's very hard to trust that person again.
I wouldn't wanna play with him again, I would sign up on the opposite
side.
But if a person stabs you in you'r back you have to live with it.
Example:
I played Cardolan and my brother played N.G in one game.
On turn one I moved my armies in position to attack Dunland.
My brother recruited at Isengard.

On turn 3-4, can't remember, we moved in and wiped him out.
He didn't expect it and I heard later on that this was a ugly thing to
do but that is what you have to take when you are a neutral.
"Allways expect the unexpected"

RedEyeJoe

References

On diplomacy and neutral nations
Mark G Jaede <jaede@acsu.buffalo.edu>
Sat, 09 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: On diplomacy and neutral nations
flemyng@cse.ucsc.edu (E.P. Flemyng)
Mon, 11 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0000