Well, it's a stab if your ally felt betrayed, but what you did was still probably advisable.

Yeah, it's only a game. If they feel so hard done by, they're probably an Armoured Duck. If you're going under, better your long-term ally get the SCs than the hated enemy.

If you were just going to take the centers so you both would have the extra units you needed to stave off the others, that wouldn't be betrayal although it really should be discussed.

But it sounds like you kicked him to the curb in order to strike a draw with the others which is a betrayal of your alliance with him.

Still doesn't mean it is wrong.

If he refuses to trust anyone who stabs him, he'll quickly run out of people to trust. Especially if he carries it forward from game to game. And he just hurts himself that way by diminishing his opportunities way more than yours.

a stab is defined by the way your ally feels.

tho i do think it's fair to say that if someone consistently lies to you, you should be more wary of them in the future than of others. trying to not let any past games affect you is like shooting yourself in the foot in that situation.

it depends on how long the knife is. 3 inches long or more is considered deadly. a toothpick is merely a poke.

ive done what youre saying before and had the same results. allies come and go but a win or draw stays on your record forever.

Wary, yes. Never trust again, a bit much.

Normally you can see a stab coming, and if you can´t see it was just your fault. Sometimes you can see but you can´t do nothing, anyway, is still your fault, because if you have done right your job your ex-ally will not suceed stabing you.
I prefer to keep record of the f**** people who goes CD to not play with them anymore.
Just my two cents :-)

@rdrivera - i think that's the case sometimes, but not always. we each bring our own logic to the game, and someone might stab me for what i think is completely illogical reason, or vice versa, so in those situations you cannot really see it coming. we each have a different way of playing the game.

I lied to one particular player quite dramatically three times in a row, which resulted in three very successful stabs... then we allied, and the turn after, I took him out of the game.. now we get along great! :) No reason to carry it on, or believe neccesarily that you can't trust them again (even if they do lie a lot).

reynoldsm, you can do what ever you want in this game. Lie, stab, stretch the truth, change your mind - whatever. Play to win and don't ever feel bad. Sometimes that means using underhanded tactics, but at other times you need to keep in mind that underhanded tactics may bit you on the arse.
The funny thing about stabbing other players is quite often the ally status is salvagable. Most cool headed players will just try to make the most a situation and if that means trusting the person who just stabbed you - so be it.

Reynoldsm, taking those centres is not a stab, despite the claims of those above. No, it's a simple matter of justice.

Many many years ago in FTF games, my fellow players and I invented the "Law of Poorly Used Supply Centres." As in, if your ally isn't making effective use of his supply centres, it's your *obligation* to seize them to use them more effectively in the common struggle.

Just remember - it's about doing what's best for the alliance. Not its individual members. ;-)

That part isn't necessarily a stab. But then he made a deal with the other players to eliminate the player who had the excess centers. That part is definitely a stab. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

No, Richard's right. Unfortunately for everyone else though, I just happen to be a better manager of supply centres in general - afterall, my ally's troops I don't have direct control over, do I? Why would we want troops that don't do exactly what we say...

@Alderian, maybe we need a Second Law of Poorly Used Supply Centres.

"While it isn't the best result, better to let poorly used supply centres fall into the hands of new friends than be wasted ineffectively by old friends."

If I was in the position where I had more centers than units and couldn't build, I'd certainly offer up some centers to my ally to try and strengthen both our position and our relationship. And if that grows my ally to the point where he stabs me, then that was likely going to happen anyway if I tried to hoard them.

So I'd rather propose the Second Law of Poorly Used Supply Centers as...

"Hoarding poorly used supply centers voids any and all agreements with all parties."

I have just one question.

Why not ask for them?

I have in ocasions given SCs to my allies, some because I felt like it was a good thing, and some because my ally asked, and I thought he was right.

So, it's a stab IMHO, but only because you didn't ask first.

For a game that somehow developed the notoriety that gaining trust, building alliances, then turning on your allies and "stabbing them in the back" is all in the name-of-the-game, this may seem a bit radical but-----

There is a simple saying in the US Army:
"Train how you fight, because you fight how you train."

I write this to imply that even though this is just "a game", it may also be revealing the nature and character of the players playing it. Though I may "stab your back" in the game all in the hope of winning, and then shake your hand in the end and call it "all in good fun", am I not exposing my character as a human being? Am I not shaping my character? How much moreso am I willing to "win" in the game of life when the stakes really matter? It's not likely that I would betray an ally in a game, and live my real life as a shining beacon of virtue, honor, and loyalty.

In real life, when I'm backed into the corner, and the chips are down, and my actions are based upon instincts and reactions, I will react the way my brain has been consistently trained to act...
Or am I wrong here?

"Hey Pallyjo-- get a life! It's just a game, dude." Yeah, well, maybe... it's actually more than that----------

Er, Pallyjo, no, I don't agree, Not at all. Some of the stuff I pull in Diplomacy I'd never do in real life, and I've done nasty things in Diplomacy to close friends.

On the other hand, there are times in Diplomacy where different personalities are so powerful, positive or negative, that I put the "smyler with the knyfe under the cloke" game persona aside and try and be as decent as I'd normally be to people who deserve it.

I think FTF Diplomacy can be a good way to judge how long someone can hold their temper, though...

@Pallyjo

I think you've got a point, BUT …

It's very clear in my mind the difference betwee Diplomacy and real life. I come here with the intention of doing something different from what I do anywhere else, engaging in behaviour that is fun in a naughty kind of way but which I know that I can't do elsewhere (and which, I'm glad to say, I'm not tempted to do elsewhere).

If ever I'm backed in a corner and the chips are down …, I don't know, maybe I'll be able to use what I've learnt playing Diplomacy. But I'm pretty sure that I'd have to make a deliberate decision to move into that frame of mind.