MP: Asia Twist - Wraithlord Wins!

[zlefin]

squirrel -> you are wrong, there is a difference. a gift of gems to the second place player, could improve your chances at victory, by making two big powers fight it out while you build up on the sidelines and the big powers exhaust themselves.
Giving someone the final vps to win the game clearly does not increase your chances at victory, since iet directly gives the win to someone else.

Wraith -> the whole point of this is you may have broken implicit rules. There are implicit rules which all agree are valid, like against hacking. Whether what you did broke an implicit rule is in dispute.
Tribunal aren't just for criminals silly, there's these things called civil courts, for resolving disputes. Binding arbitration by a panel of vets, or some other community decision as to what the implicit rules are, is the best way to settle this. Stop using anger, feigned or otherwise, to dodge issues and try to prevent a settlement.


everyone -> clearly, kingmaking in various forms occurs in the game. Clearly, people have different opinions as to which kinds of kingmaking are acceptable, and which are not. Some community discussion as to which kinds of kingmaking are acceptable and which are not would he helpful. If necessary, I will start a thread to assess things better.

[DonCorazon]

IF I were the arbitrator of this situation here is what I would say:

Wraithlord won the game. There was no sinister cabal at the start of the game to give the win to a single player. Wraith managed to score the ultimate diplomatic victory either directly or indirectly over the course of the game - a player was persuaded to give their VPs up. It seems there are enough differing opinions on this that nobody in this game thought they were doing anything wrong.

I don't believe that giving your VP to another player in a VP game should be allowed in the future. Given the differing opinions and resulting confusion, it is something that needs to be explicitly stated as to whether it is allowed or not. I would strongly suggest prohibiting it in the future (I will do so in any games I start). To take the argument ad absurdem, imagine playing a year long game, being in first place, and then suddenly in a single turn you lose because a group of players have opted to give their VPs to a single contender. This would not appeal to most players. However, if you like the idea of an "allied victory" then this should be clearly stated. While I failed to convince Squirelloid, I think most people can see the distinction between gifts, which can serve strategic purposes and help balance the game, and suicide.

Because there was no prohibition in this game and it is clear through the healthy discussion over the issue there are differing opinions, I would bless WraithLord's victory - he got the win message and broke no explicit rules. I think Archaeo has raised totally valid concerns that should guide future games. I completely understand his frustration - he invested long hours over many months and was a hair's breadth from winning. Why bother to spend all that time if, for whatever reason, a player decides to surrender his VPs to your enemy? I see Arch as a victim of a precedent - I have never seen someone give a VP away, so its never come up before. But when you consider there are players from all over the world, with different mindsets, it is understandable that there would be varying views on this topic. I'd ask Archaeo to let it go (then I'd duck )

Then I'd say, life is short and relationships are more important than a game. Both Arch and Wraith are valued members of a cool, small community - lets have a beer and get on with things.

[Calahan]

@ Archea.

Please will you stop this personal crusade against WraithLord. I see no fair way of either solving or settling this dispute, as it all comes down to a matter of interpretation, and every individual persons own opinion on what constitutes 'helping' or 'assisting' another nation. If there was nothing explicitly stated in the rules of this game preventing *any* specific actions by a player, such as 'gifting' or 'not defending' VP's, then I see this one individual case as being closed. It has only taken a small sample of forum members views to deduce that there are some widely differing opinions out there on the 'within the bounds of helping' issue.

But while this case is closed, the wider issue itself in general is not closed.


I for one would like to contribute to the discussion on the issue in general regarding "what is and is not within the limits of helping another nation during a game". But I do not want to do so here, or in any of the other innocent threads the issues from this game has spilled over to. As that would achieve nothing other than prolonging the argument over one specific instance that needs to be put to rest. With the general issue of 'helping another nation' moved to a separate discussion, where all the focus and debate should be shifted, to enable a wider and more thoroughly explored discussion. You have already mentioned you will do this Archea, which is definitely a good idea (and IMO, a better use of your efforts than your current course of action)


I have been sent a bulk of turn files by Pasha from this game, and while I have not yet had time to thoroughly examine them, I must admit that at first glance there are a few things that appear to have happened that I know I would personally not ever consider doing myself, or would like to see by any player in a game I played in. They do leave a bad taste in my mouth. But this is just my opinion. Some may share it, while others may have totally opposite or even surprising views about the exact same thing.

But until there is some sort of players charter, or games start having more detailed rules, and/or lists of do's and don'ts, then the events of this game could be repeated. I don't think anyone is to blame here. There were no rules broken, no files hacked, no meta-gaming deals done. It is just players interpreting things differently to others.


So Archae, please can you ensure that the next post you make on this issue is one that helps the Dominions community. Put your personal opinion of WraithLord to bed, and use your time and energy to start-up a new thread on the main discussion board regarding what is and is not acceptable in the name of helping/assisting another nation. The final few turns of Asia Twist, and the events that occurred in it, demonstrate that there are some vast difference of opinions on this issue, so discussing them in a wider, overall context would be a good thing.

And who knows what the outcome of that discussion will be. If it helps prevent any unwanted clashes like this in the future, then that would be a great thing. If it helps ensure all games are fought on a fairer basis, then that would be a great thing. If it helps keep the community healthy, and avoid it losing even one of its long serving, influential, and important members, then that would be a truly great thing

So Archea, please do a great thing and get a separate discussion going on this issue. Where we can all talk, bash out, and argue as much as we like on the issue of helping another nation. Hopefully in an objective way, but above all else, in a totally non-personal way.

I may well ultimately side with you on this issue, I may not, as indeed is the case for many members. But only a serious amount of harm is being done by your current course of action of sounding out individuals who you claim to have broken, what are ultimately, all un-written rules. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. But if these rules exist only in theory, or practice, or some other mythical form, then they don't exist to be broken. Maybe a separate discussion will result in these un-written rules becoming written. But that discussion first needs to happen. So Archea, please start that discussion..........

[Calahan]

Originally Posted by DonCorazon

@Cal: Butters just wasn't intimidating enough...

He scared the hell out of me!

Are you telling me someone walking around screaming, with a shuriken lodged in their head, and blood shooting out everywhere, isn't intimidating?!?

They must make them uber brave in your neck of the woods then DC

[Ballbarian]

archae,
Start a thread on a discussion of a rule set for future games as we discussed.

archae & wraith,
I am going back to work now, but if I find that this line has continued when I return, I will be issuing points and locking threads. I like both of you guys, and I can sympathize with both points of view, but let this be the end of it.

(I am now late for work and in a foul mood.)

Thanks in advance!