i thought meta-gaming was when you had a friend who played with you...

well i still think that's mean on Icthys's part. i thought it was just one of those tactics when i first read this. then i saw dipperdon's comment.

Now it all makes sense.

First time it's happened to me. Any ideas on what to do?

Somehow I don't think he will become a good ally in either now. Perhaps you will have support against him easier, but now you can just avoid him in the future.

I have looked at his other games (his?)... He seems to have made a good habit of starting games with players who hardly exist anywhere else. If I were you, I would simply treat him as hostile and keep an eye on how the newest players in your two games operate.

This is cross gaming and it is one of the things that I grew up in the hobby with as the 2nd biggest NO NO ((First was using a false name to play two positions in the same game)).
I would like before each game a clear statement of the do not's sent to each player and they to agree...true some will just blitz it without reading but if we get it down to three lines in 24 point type it might get through to the kids here as they start their games.
I really would like this sort of ethics training/head pounding to be done at the start of every game so

Have you leaked this to the other players? If they're not newbies, then they'll probably be as upset as you. You could even give your password to a moderator (or change your password to a temporary one that you give to a moderator) so that they can check and post here that you're telling the truth. (I am assuming that moderators are so against this that they will interfere in such a way in a game where this is going on.)

I also agree with Edi that any prohibition against this really ought to be spelt out more.

He's a noob and tell him to GTFO! Seriously, that's quite cheap on Icthys's part.

Perhaps he doesn't know any better and it would be better to inform him, but I suppose that since he has already moved against you it would be pointless.

I agree with Toby, perhaps if you "leak" what has happened along with a hint that maybe he is not the best ally to have, you might gain support against him.

I wouldn't even be so subtle. Call Turkey out in public in both games if you don't have any specific reason not to. Cite this thread at http://phpdiplomacy.net/index.php?viewthread=386435#386435 so even the newbies will know it's wrong. Or if you think it was an honest mistake, at least point Turkey to this thread so that they know that they did bad and get them to back off.

@flashman. Big leap from me getting annoyed with BESM to implying I'm a multi-accounter. I do indeed try to play with new players in each game for a multitude of reasons which are irrelevant to this issue.
--------------------------------------------------
I lost my temper with the guy because I felt that in both games he has simply targeted me purely because I'm not a bad player. He went after Russia for that reason. It's a tactic I despise in any game. He claims it was simply because I happened to be Turkey which is strange target for England in 1904. I believe it's the former but either way if he's a guaranteed enemy every time then what's the point of playing? It's almost the inverse situation of having a friend be your unwavering ally IMO. What I did was unsavoury nor did I wish to go down that road but I felt it was a reasonable response.

Given that such conduct is not banned in the FAQ (it says "frowned upon") and this is a game where apparently almost anything goes (I've seen a thread actually asking whether racism is a legitimate tactic) I didn't think what I said was against the rules.

If a mod confirms otherwise then I apologize for my conduct to the community in general.

@BESM. I see from the general responses that what I did was against the spirit of the game. That being said, given your tirade of verbal abuse I refuse to apologise to you personally.

First, I didn'tt say you were a multiaccounter. Nothingg of the kind. I simiply printed your cross game threat which I felt was worse. Sorry I upset you sentive feelings which I guess don't worry about ethical play or any sense of respect the game itself. You don't really ahve to appologize. I don't care. What you did is beneith contempt and beyond any possibility of my acceptnig your crappy appology or every wishing read anythiny your second-rate mind can come up with. You crossed the one. You justify it through some twisted logic. You are full of shit. Go play some other game.

To say that a player is not influenced by previous or current games is crazy. If someone recklessly attacks you in a game, you store that information away. If someone stabs you in a game, you store that information away. If you play with that person again, you may be wary of making an alliance. Conversely, if someone proves to be trustworthy in a game, you store that information away. You may be very receptive to forming an alliance with that player if you happen to play together again. However, I am not in favor of doing one thing in one game in exchange for doing something else in another current game. That is also why I choose to not play with the same people at the same time or even in consecutive games, if possible. I accept Ichthys's reasons for being frustrated, his statement that he hasn't used that threat before and will not use it in the future, and I hope the community is ready to move on. Without looking at the games in question, my feeling is that BESM just needs to move on. This last statement is vitriolic.

I lost my temper with the guy because I felt that in both games he has simply targeted me purely because I'm not a bad player.

lol I use that agisnt sean all the time, get all the nubs on yourside and control their minds :D

me??
What are you talking about xcurly? we have only played one game and it was a bloody GUNBOAT!

something to confess?

Ichthys,

my post was written as advice to BESM, not an accusation of yourself.

In his position, I would certainly:

a) consider you as a hostile player for the duration of both games - that simplifies the diplomacy, strategy and tactics;
b) be very cautious about the other players - especially where they are new and unknown on the site.

Multi-accounting is one possible reading but so is the fact that you could have been threatening the babies in a similar way and getting them to join you across games to make the moves you want.

It is a different kind of no-no, one where you effectively control other player's accounts by telling them what to do. It is not uncommon, especially where groups of friends are involved.

Right now, I would certainly treat any game with you with the utmost caution if I did not already know the other players. I'd call that instinct, not a direct accusation.

I would happily relax my guard if I saw you in a game with five other well-known players.

Ichthys

Why do you need the mods to tell you that you need to apologise to the community when you clearly have gained the community's contempt?

The only reason it is only frowned upon is because Kestas didn't want a zero tolerance policy because it would discourage people from playing with their friends.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you are in the wrong. Stop.

Miles--Meta gaming is any form of gaming the system ("the game outside the game"), so dealing with someone in one game because of how they're playing in another is a form of meta gaming. Two players allying repeatedly in different games is referred to as a meta alliance, and is a different form of metagaming.

It can be difficult to put aside everything you know about a player from other games, but that's just extra intel, it shouldn't stop you dealing with them as a) they may've learnt or b) you may've learnt.

Stabs happen, bed decisions happen, etc. Taking on a player in one game because of actions in a different game is out of order, but then, so is abusive behaviour. Do we have a pot and kettle situation?

Just so I'm absolutely clear, we are not allowed to threaten meta-gaming, we can use hostile language, call one another all the so and sos under the sun, but absoluely under no account should we 'threaten' meta-gaming.

IMHO, if anyone meta-games then fine, after giving a warning take whatever action you deem fit, but lets not limit too much what we are allowed to say.

On the subject of Meta-gaming, I thought when I first started playing on here that it would be a good idea to suicidal position against the first few people who stabbed me. My logic being that if people knew I would become suicidal 'in the game sense' they would stab me less after they had played with with a while. It was pointed out to me quickly that this was meta-gaming, and obviously I now accept that meta-gaming is bad. My point is people don't come to this site knowing that meta-gaming is bad, sometimes they need educating. Lets not always do it by naming and shaming, we will lose players that way.

I'd like to know why it is always the pot that is blamed for calling the kettle black? I reckon the kettle probably calls the pot a few things as well...

If you threaten metagaming, you ARE metagaming.

@Dingleyberry - I don't think you are.

You most certainly are crossing the line when you threaten or offer action in one game for action in another. It's a quid pro quo. Remembering who did what and who plays how or well, is not metagaming and makes sense as several writers noted. But each game is different and real players play each game seperately. I would not have brought this up here if it had been less than an outwrite threat. That is what crossed the line. I go back as far as Edi and it was the worst sin we could imagine back then. Here, it's the same.

Now, just to stir the pot a little :

If you're the recipient of a threat of this sort and you use that in both games you're in with that individual, are you not also then meta-gaming?

It is not the worst "sin" by far. Playing two or more countries in one game is the worst "sin." Forming alliances in multiple games with same person/people would be the next greatest "sin" in my book. This threat of allowing one game to affect another is somewhere down on the list of "sins." As other people have stated, the other players in your game should be aware of the situation right now and you can see if that affects the game in your favor. Quit taking it too seriously. It's a freaking game.

Well Ich, I'm a mod and I'm saying that if cross-boarding is cheating unless specifically allowed.

Maniac,
Can you give me a scenario where you threaten metagaming but you aren't metagaming? Where your threats in one game don't affect another game?

I do so much tire of the, "It's just a game..." line.

Some of us, at least, invest a considerable amount of our humble brain power into making this game what it is: a masterful example of the need for humans to compete through interaction and communication. Rules are essential and observance of those rules necessary.

To be honest, I sometimes put more thought into a game than I do a piece of paid work. I would like to hear someone say, "It's only your job..." once in a while.

there are no rules against metagaming. if the site changes its policy, please let us know.

also, thretening metagaming cannot be considered metagaming