hm. im not sure i agree that is how i interpret the rules. but its definitely a much smarter strategy in every cae.

Because he played two games with his brother? Or because he said he would prefer to ally with me than with you? I think you'd hard pressed to find any forum regulars who would want to ally with you Draugnar. Nobody wants a half-wit, bi-polar child as their ally, which is what your forum persona has made you out to be.

ok draugnar so i have a question, if you play 5 games with the same person and know they are trustworthy and your placed in neighboring countries every game would you call it cheating to ally with them in all 5 games because u know you can trust them?

No because the game situation dictates it. But Frank enters the game intending to ally regardless of position.

Entering a game intending to ally with another known player gives one an unfair advantage.

Not if that player doesnt intend to ally with you.

ok, i was just making sure that i wasnt cheating without realizing it because one of my friends in real life (doctorjingles) has played a few games with me but in every game we were in good positions to help each other and decided to ally with one another. i knew i could trust him but never entered the game thinking ok so i know who my ally is, i just saw where we were positiond when it started and went from there.

maltizok, you have the best stories.

That's the right way, mal.

i feel better knowing that i didnt break the rules, thank you for that =)

Do you really expect us to believe that line, Frank?

If that were the case then you wouldn't "know you can trust him".

Draugnar, you are the most fucked-up person. In another thread you agreed with someone saying that this game is about finding a way to win at all costs; doing whatever you can to get that extra edge. I geeve about finding the exact quote.

Now, Frank suggested that using knowledge of a player in a non-anon to decide who you would most prefer to ally with is cheating.

Which side are you on??

I meant more that I know that certain players are trustworthy. Some players are more stab averse than others. If I know that, I can use that information.

In the case of the two games with my brother, they were passworded games with friends from high school. so everyone knew that we were brothers

For example, LittleBigMatt doesnt really believe in stabbing people. If I ever come across him in a game again, I will use that information somehow.

This is my rule of thumb when it comes to playing with people I know. I only do one of two things:
1) I play with 6 people that I know from real life, or
2) I play with 6 people that I only know from this website

Nothing in between, since I feel that:
A) if it were not anon, knowing someone from real life could very likely bias at least one of us, or
B) even if it were anon, we might figure out (from conversational style, timing, etc.) who each other are and hence issue A applies.

Even in scenario 1, with 6 players from IRL, the game is bound to have some degree of meta influence. Even if one player plays the utmost unbiased game, he can't prevent the other six from being biased.

When I play against my friends from high-school, I will usually try and fight a way to eliminate Jonathan Gregory. Sometimes we do have to form stalemate lines together, unfortunately.

Would it be fair to say that if you enter a game expecting to rely on the person and doing so that would be cheating. Enter a game and if the situation warrants, doing so does not. Clearly the best remedy to this is stab your brother when warranted and treat him like anyone else, at least once in a while. besides, isn't that what brothers are for?

I used to play with a few guys I know IRL. Metagaming was never really an issue, and we rarely, if ever spoke of those games outside of the site, anyhow. The only time anything did come up was when I knew my friend wouldn't be able to make the deadline for his moves, and I backstabbed him that turn. I know, poor sportsmanship, and all that, but he seemed perfectly okay with it at the time.

God damnit this is why the rules need to be re-evaluated and rehashed. Tomorrow I'm devoting a good three hours to writing an effing essay with everything that doesn't make sense or needs revision/discussion.

@Lando - When you actually grow up and learn to read subtlety and for clarity, you might notice that I only say going into a game predispossed to ally with a specific player is cheating. The mdos have backed thi snumerous times. Using your knowledge once you are in the game and then deciding between two potential allies based on who you think is the most reliable is fine. And I didn't say anything goes, I said anything *within* the game goes. Metagaming is, by definition, *outside* the game.

But one who hasn't yet achieved even a complete high school education wouldn't necessarily know that, especially considering the state of our current education system.

lol I'm not American.

And the things you say are effectively the same thing.

PS nice meltdown.

@Frank - It sounds like those two games were fine then.

The clarification to the rule that Lando, with his profanity laced insults (something I haven't done to him despite his attempts to prod me into it), doesn't seem to get is intent. Now, I knoe common sense eludes the typical 16 or 17 year old, so I don't expect him to quite grasp that rule. After all, these are the same kids who think they are invincible and do donuts around the roundabouts in my neighborhood and wonder why the cops are waiting for them when they leave to give them tickets and impound their cars for driving 55 in an elementary school zone.

But intent is all important in the analysis. If you enter the game intending to ally with someone, no matter what the natural relationship of the two nations is, then you are metagaming. If you enter every game with an open mind and *then* use your knowledge of the trustworthiness of the player to make the decision when faced with two possible allies, then you are fine.

It's subtle, I know, and I guess I have to forgive Lando for his ignorance in recognizing the subtle nature, but it is how the mods will make their determination when they question you in an email.

Meltdown? Really? I thought I was polite and didn't use any words that could be interpretted as swear words, and I tried to keep the vocabulary to something a 17 year old would understand. I'm sorry if you somehow think that was a meltdown.

Who will the mods be e-mailing?

ps great descriptions of me lol

The mods email anyone they think is cheating to give them a chance to defend themselves. This in no way implies you are cheating. I'm just showing how answering their questions wrong could show intent.

Oh ok I get it now. I apologize my adolescent brain couldn't understand your refined and elegant prose.

I honestly think that it would be a good idea to get a real-life friend to play a game with you, you would have a lot better strategy and you would know you wern't going to get betrayed.

@Elkas, so imagine that you go into a game with a friend with a pact not to attack each other and to work together to form a great strategy. Can you see why other people in that game might see that as an unfair advantage?