Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...

« Back

1309 days, 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and Replacement players.
I see nothing on that in the planet.nu universe, except of course what each mean or do.

I maybe new to this site, but I have played since 1993 from AOL. Yes that is over twenty years so i am old. Players back then at least had some ethics or morals and cheating was discovered by the Tim Continuum. In the game Cider Sector http://planets.nu/#/sector/152888 I am playing the Birds (Romulans) and here is the situation or rant as some may put it.


At Turn (1) I join this game obviously. By Turn (8) I pledge an Alliance with my neighbor the Fascists (Klingons) played by Morgan Kell. Everything was fine until before the second week of December. Morgan Kell quit the game, resigned due to real life issues. I can understand that, sometimes even I can take hours doing a simple turn, but real life comes first. So by turn 33, he is no more.

I wait for a replacement, and even post for one in the forums, at least once I believe. I keep the Fascists as one ally, even though no player and communicate with the Lizards for the second for Turn (34). On Turn (38) after 19 days and 5 turns later, I break my side of the Alliance with the Fascists which are still without a player. On Turn (42) I establish my second Alliance with the Rebels.

On Tuesday Turn (51) calbasi joins as the replacement Fascist player. I sent a message to him, with the exact content here:
"Thank you, for joining my previous ally left, without much notice. He and I were planning a strategy, but it didnt last. Thus I had to occupy what I can to stop the Empire and Colonials.
If you want to stay, I will forgo the destruction of the starbases. You should have enough resources there to build Ill Winds with Disruptors and Mark 7's"

I should really place the rest of the communication here, because here is the tricky part. My last message to him was
"No thank you, I want you to build those ships for yourself. Fascist have a better way with GA.
Yes I can do that, provide you with Resolutes, that is why I am building two bases close to yours. Or I was without a player present anyways. I plan to build two bases this turn, then merlins for the supplies, then resolutes.
So only travel to the two planets I mentioned or any that you already own, please. For the next three turns, building Ill Winds with the specs I mention will be a good start.

This ended for Turn 51. On Turn (52) this player revokes the alliance status and changes to share intel, which is understandable and moves his ships to other planets of mine. On Turn (53) I lost a starbase from Fascist GA, its current ship build, and six other planets in one swoop.
I asked nicely didn't I ? I even said please "So only travel to the two planets I mentioned or any that you already own, please."

First he wants to continue the terms of the alliance, of which he revokes, then shares intel then revokes, ground attacks a starbase my starbase I own, that I informed him exactly what was being built and for what purpose. And does this for the six planets I lost.

So what are the Ethics here if any? Sadly this is why I have trust issues.












1309 days, 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
View razorback's profile
razorback
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
You see, this is why I try and keep a log of notable interchanges with other players in-game both good and bad. It's important to know who you can trust, who isn't a team player, and who just can't be reasoned with.

My personal philosophy in VGAP is to act honestly at all times. Don't cheat deals, don't randomly stab an ally in the back, and a mine is a terrible thing to waste. The game might last 80 turns or whathaveyou, but your word (or lack of) can last alot longer than that.
1309 days, 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Profile Image
llessur
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Well I am of your vintage but I think you are looking at the past "through through rose -tinted glasses"

Back stabbing was just as bad back then and because of the game design you have to expect a high dropout rate. As the game progresses the turns get longer and longer and MOST people do not have the sort of time it takes to play those turns, so the game has a high drop rate.

I just played a version though that I will want to play again. It was a small game, 300 planets, 11 players on a reduced map so there was a higher planet density, total planets condition and and it used "fight or fail" 30 planets on turn 30. Most players did not make 30 planets by turn 30. The result was an intense fight among the survivors which was all over by turn 51.

I may be biased as I did well but I think that it addresses VGAP's Achilles Heal viz the effort and time your have to put into the end game.
1309 days, 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
Profile Image
llessur
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
btw the game was hosted here by Larry Mccarthy
1308 days, 17 hours, 34 minutes ago
View donaldworrell's profile
donaldworrell
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
AOL. that brings back memory's. I moved from a local BBS to playing on AOL when it was the Internet.
1308 days, 17 hours, 5 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Razorback Backstabbing sure I have heard of it, being in the games but not so much as now. But maybe I played with a bunch of tech guys moreso than the laymen. I hardly saw any drops, and the third party apps were very cool!

@Donaldworrell my name back then was janomaly@aol.com, I played like 30 games during the first year. I was hooked after my first game with a friend from EDS.

The point of this that gets me, this player joins a game 51 turns in, agrees to be my ally, revokes it, then shares intel, gets all the information, then Ground Attacks a critical Starbase, and six planets.
If I was paranoid, I would say he joined as a plant, a tool for the Privateer, Evil Empire or Colonial players who are my enemies in this game. This premise is logical, because it is something I would have thought of doing, but only in thought, not practice.
1308 days, 16 hours, 49 minutes ago
View donaldworrell's profile
donaldworrell
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
I was "Link" on AOL but it was so long ago. Back in the old days each game had a person running it. Now like the web sites that game after AOL games are just run blind and there is no one looking at them. We are alone in space.
1308 days, 15 hours, 29 minutes ago
View whisperer's profile
whisperer
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@r.caffrey,

> shares intel then revokes

That's a sign that you can't trust him. I'd have bailed then and attacked him.
1308 days, 12 hours, 27 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Please allow me to do an entirely different read of the situation.

A player with zero drops/resigns joins a game as a replacement on turn 51. He finds his area under siege by current planets leader, who is already allied with two other players. Instead of finishing the game as a loyal vassal, he decides to create his own destiny or die trying.

My respect goes to the replacement, he has zero obligation to keep peaceful and it was your duty to offer him a treaty worth taking. Sounds like you failed with that, so instead of going into a pointless ethics discussion, you would be much better off pondering what you should have done differently to make the deal a win-win. It'll help next time.
1308 days, 12 hours, 5 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Smn your interpretation is highly opinionated. It lacks one minor thing, the facts. Here they are.

Cider Sector TURN 51 • 4 DAYS AGO • LIKE calbasi has joined the game in slot 4 as The Fascist Empire.

(***NOTICE I SENT THE FIRST MESSAGE***)

Sent to: R.Caffrey (The Bird Men), Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 51 • 4 DAYS AGO • LIKE
Thank you, for joining my previous ally left, without much notice. He and I were planning a strategy, but it didnt last. Thus I had to occupy what I can to stop the Empire and Colonials. If you want to stay, I will forgo the destruction of the starbases. You should have enough resources there to build Ill Winds with Disruptors and Mark 7's

Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE Hi, I'm interested in work as your ally as my predecessor :-)

R.Caffrey (The Bird Men) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
Excellent!
Can you make Ill Winds? You should be able to build Ill Winds with Transwarp Tech 10 Engines, Plasma Bolts Tech 2 Beam Weapons and Mark 7 Tech 8 Torpedo Banks

If you can make those, Two Ill Winds will destroy one Virgo Battlecruiser. At least they should if under 120 fighters. You would need a maximum of 30 torpedoes for each.
All my ships are converging on the Privateers. And the rest will go towards the Empire and Colonials.

Calbasi (The Fascists)TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
By the way, if you have no problems, I re-take planets near my SB with just a 1 of your clans, to build a more solid economy.

R.Caffrey (The Bird Men) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
Sure, but you will have to be patient, lots of ships have orders, plans building starbases across the sector.

Start with p#306: Australis, its a Humanoid with one clan, and with :

Neutronium: 292 /513 (64%) mining 1/turn
Duranium: 89 /4600 (20%) mining 0/turn
Tritanium: 186 /511 (34%) mining 0/turn
Molybdenum: 326 /169 (76%)

p#34 Saratoga is not developed., one clan Start with these two. You can also start with also the planets you own, that are undeveloped, north of the two starbases.

Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
I could try to build 2 III Wind, and give them to you. Could you give me 2 of your ships? Resolutes could be best, to drop tons of colons ;-)

R.Caffrey (The Bird Men) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
No thank you, I want you to build those ships for yourself. Fascist have a better way with GA.
Yes I can do that, provide you with Resolutes, that is why I am building two bases close to yours. Or I was without a player present anyways. I plan to build two bases this turn, then merlins for the supplies, then resolutes.

So only travel to the two planets I mentioned or any that you already own, please.
For the next three turns, building Ill Winds with the specs I mention will be a good start.

(***NOTICE I even said please, such as please do not eff up what I have going for your own personal agenda, which pays no tribute to any alliance.***)

Turn (52)

Sent to: R.Caffrey (The Bird Men), Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 52 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
I really had hoped you would take my advice. Did you build those two Ill WInds?

Diplomatic Council
TURN 52 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE The Fascist Empire (calbasi) has revoked their offer of alliance.

Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 52 • 2 DAYS AGO • LIKE
No, I have other urgent builds, but if you need III Wind, I can build them for you (but I'd like Resolutes in exchange)

R.Caffrey (The Bird Men) TURN 52 • A DAY AGO • LIKE
Well, when the three Colonial Virgo's destroy your starbase in four turns, hope it was worth your "urgent" builds.
Don't forget about the two Empire Gorbies, also not that far away.

Turn (53)
Combat From: Helms Deep ID#54
The colonists on Helms Deep ID#54 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Saratoga ID#34
The colonists on Saratoga ID#34 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Crete ID#11
The colonists on Crete ID#11 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Sol ID#378
The colonists on Sol ID#378 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Teris-Ceti 9 ID#535
The colonists on Teris-Ceti 9 ID#535 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Australis ID#306
The colonists on Australis ID#306 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.
Combat From: Merah-5 ID#210
The colonists on Merah-5 ID#210 have been massacred by attacking Fascist (calbasi) forces. The colonists fought hard...
...but to no avail.

Diplomatic Council
TURN 53 • ABOUT 19 HOURS AGO • LIKE
The Fascist Empire (calbasi) has revoked their intelligence information sharing. We can no longer see information from their ships and scans.

I have pondered what I should have done differently, and that exactly is to not allow him to continue playing by destroying the two starbases, just as he joined.

Lesson Learned as not to trust players at their word .


1308 days, 11 hours, 52 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
True, it's possible you had no winning move available and he was just playing time with the friendly message because of the vulnerable position he was in at the start. But my point is, I find it awfully hard to blame a player for doing that.

Sure, saying "I'm going to cast my lot with the Colonies and attack you" would have been more honest, but it would've also been suicidal and thus unacceptably stupid.

Finally, remember that you already had the 2 max allies. Which one were you prepared to drop in order to make room for the new player? My guess would be neither and that was likely the new players guess too.
1308 days, 8 hours, 3 minutes ago
Profile Image
blazde
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Saying please doesn't give you the right to control the relationship. It really seems like a lot of your communication is jumping the gun a bit. It's understandable because you want to pick up the alliance asap where the old player left off but read carefully what Calbasi said and consider it from his perspective with no background, he may well have been honest...

He's "interested" in working you (not definitely going to). He never promises anything (as far as you posted he only ever downgrades the diplomatic status?). Then you started bossing him around and criticise his build decisions. Meanwhile quite possibly he was exploring other political options, as is surely wise when the position has been unplayed in nearly 20 turns. Then only one turn after joining he's made up his mind and attacks you. If he was stalling on purpose he didn't stall for very long. It seems more plausible to me that he spent the time getting his bearings and then made a swift decision he didn't want to be allied with you. Telling you so was a bit redundant, his ships and diplo status are clearly doing the talking

It's tough but I think you have to blame the original player for dropping, not the replacement
1308 days, 7 hours, 45 minutes ago
Profile Image
captain storm
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Poot! Your word is your bond! If your word is no good, you are no good! And that applies to games as well as real life!
1308 days, 7 hours, 33 minutes ago
Profile Image
glyn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
A game simulating war should encourage you to leave ethics at the door much like war does.

The only reason to 'behave' is for self benefit to prosper from good social skills... if you want to get along with peers in the community in other words.

I suppose some of you may have assburgers... :I
1308 days, 7 hours, 21 minutes ago
Profile Image
jellyfishspam
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
i'm guessing the planets he took were some of those 1 clan planets you mentioned. could it be he just doesn't have a clue? the game i'm in, the lizards kept trying to get me to be his 'allie' but continued taking my planets with only a few clans. later on when i decide to full out engage him, he calls me 'traitor' for taking back the planets i owned but he took. my thought is, this person only sees the carrot in front of his face.

also consider he didn't need to drop alliance status with you to clan drop your planets.
1308 days, 6 hours, 51 minutes ago
Profile Image
captain swine
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Well, I played in one game only and briefly with calbasi some time ago, and I would look at the situation a second time, presonally. His English was far from perfect, and he had the tendency to ignore parts of messages I sent him if he didnt understand them. It's possible the explanation lies in the fact that he asked you if he could retake those planets and you said "sure...". Now to Anglophones there are a lot of qualifiers and conditions that follow on, but Calbasi may have just ignored those. I hate to sound like Basil Fawlty, but you probably need to speak slowly and loudly :-)
1308 days, 6 hours, 37 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Smn I have done many actions, and in partnership that went against my best interest, for the greater good. Such as in the first Mentorship game I played, I lost four ships bringing supplies to my ally, when I knew he was going to lose those ships anyway. I did it, because he asked.
Another is providing a enemy teammate a ally ship that was given to me, since he was down to one planet,
I ask to have a alchemy ship made for me in return, of which I am still waiting on. Oh and becoming an ally to a race instead of out right attacking him, closing me in to a smaller area of space. Yeah, I make lots of those choices and I stick with them.

@Blazde
When he joined as a replacement, he already has a visual of every turn from Time Machine. He also has a diplomacy status of Alliance with Fascist. That is upon joining.

Look at the first message. And I quote myself "If you want to stay, I will forgo the destruction of the starbases. "

Granted I took what he said at face value, and not a method to deceive me with his own agenda. As I mentioned earlier to the player, he had a choice, he lied to me about his intentions, I believed him, and next turn, as @Whisper points out, Alliance to Share Intel to Peace to ground attacking my starbase and 6 other planets. That is clear now.

Another valid point here is his word.
Calbasi (The Fascists) TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE Hi, I'm interested in work as your ally as my predecessor :-)
He made a choice to stay. He made a choice to articulate those thoughts with these words. Sure you could say I am bossy, or you could also say I am providing instructions to someone. To a player who has in fact missed 50 turns prior to joining.

@Captain Storm, I agree and with that I gave my word exactly. I did not attack the two starbases when every fiber of my being said "don't trust him"

@Glyn So I should lie, deceive the public trust, manipulate my constituents and cheat to achieve my own goals.
@Jellyfishspam, No! He knew exactly what he was doing, without regard to what I ask, requested, demanded, depending on how @Blazde would see it.

But I learned my lesson, never again will I trust a player! I will for now on believe each player has a arterial motive and act accordinly.
1308 days, 6 hours, 21 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Captain Swine - What I should have said, NO. Those are mine. Use what you have left. But I said exactly what was in the post.

Sure, but you will have to be patient, lots of ships have orders, plans building starbases across the sector.
Start with p#306: Australis, its a Humanoid with one clan, and with :

Neutronium: 292 /513 (64%) mining 1/turn
Duranium: 89 /4600 (20%) mining 0/turn
Tritanium: 186 /511 (34%) mining 0/turn
Molybdenum: 326 /169 (76%)

p#34 Saratoga is not developed. one clan Start with these two.
You can also start with also the planets you own, that are undeveloped, north of the two starbases.

So he partially listened, but took planets south of his starbase, east of his starbase, and planets with more than one clan on them.

p#378: Sol Colonists: 5,100/4,900
p#535: Teris-Ceti 9 Colonists: 5,700 (+200)
p#54: Helms Deep Colonists: 5,100/6,900 Starbase
p#210: Merah-5 Colonists: 11,500 (+500)

""Calbasi (The Fascists)TURN 51 • 3 DAYS AGO • LIKE
By the way, if you have no problems, I re-take planets near my SB with just a 1 of your clans, to build a more solid economy.""

Well with the information I have provided, what should I beleive? That a player cannot count or use a calculator os simple arythmatic? 5,100 does not equal 1
Or should I believe he is deceiving me, placating me, or flat outright lying to me?

And there is such a thing as Google Translator.
1308 days, 6 hours, 14 minutes ago
Profile Image
blazde
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.caffrey
> Look at the first message. And I quote myself

You keep quoting yourself but what really matters in assessing *his* ethics is what *he* said. It is very nice of you not to destroy his starbases, and surely a necessary start to any positive relationship, but unfortunately not a sufficient one :)
1308 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes ago
Profile Image
jellyfishspam
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
google translate is hardly perfect.

he may have other ideas of what an alliance means. he might be expecting you to help him back on his feet although that is probably a bit of a stretch since he did mention 1 clan planets.

on turn 51, from the offset he changed your diplomatic stance. that shows up a turn later, so you find out turn 52. if he wanted to deceive you, he should have kept up alliance stance until he was ready to clan drop on turn 53.

ultimately, all we're doing is spitballing here. none of us know his true intention. at this point though, i'd treat him as an enemy. that much i'd assume most of us here would agree on (you do know what they say about assumptions though.... it's like peeing in a dark suit, it makes you feel warm and fuzzy but nobody else notices).
1308 days, 4 hours, 55 minutes ago
Profile Image
glyn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.Caffrey: "So I should lie, deceive the public trust, manipulate my constituents and cheat to achieve my own goals."

People weigh the perceived pros and cons and then make a decision... most of us prefer to not piss others off, but it is a choice some make... as being upset in others choices is also a choice, keep in mind.

I've been backstabbed by a player that did it to quit Nu Planets... he wanted to end the game, with himself as victor and quit Nu Planets, so dropped our alliance and joined my opponent.

That was a dick move, he should have just resigned.

Now players doing something but then staying here? That sounds like they are giving you a chance for revenge at least.

All you can do is bitch about it once, just to vent, then move on.
___

If you think about it, the misunderstandings are the worst possible outcome... the alliances and backstabbing are when things ARE going to plan (may not be your plan, but at least it was someones).
1308 days, 4 hours, 18 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Glyn, yep I thought about it in four different variations (1) Honest mistake, the player cannot read or understand my messages. He cannot understand 11,000 is more than 1... (2) He has is own agenda, what I do or say doesn't matter. (3) He was asked to JOIN by either the Privateers, the Colonies or the Empire, reasons being their own.. (4) I was too brutely honest! Before he even joined, I was set to destroy the last two Fascist starbases. He joined, I sent the message, and changed all ship orders. That was my first mistake.

My next turn message will be clear, concise and direct.

1308 days, 4 hours, 14 minutes ago
Profile Image
llessur
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
The bottom line is look at the situation from the replacements side. If it is in his intrest to resist you then, beware!

1307 days, 15 hours, 50 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
I did look at it from the "replacement" side.. Why would anyone join anyways after missing 50 turns initially, and another 19 without any player at all?
1306 days, 13 hours, 4 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.Caffrey I re-read those messages and I don't know if you realized it, but you were not actually offering anything at all to help the new player, except for 'advise' on what to build. No ships, no resource dumps, no nothing. He even asked for trades and you said no.

As you said he had a bunch of Virgos coming in. You also told clearly you won't help, that all your ships are tied up elsewhere. So his choise was to either make a worthless deal with you and take on a bunch of Virgos, or to make a deal with the Colonies and fight you while your fleet is tied elsewhere. I don't know what makes you think you've been somehow wronged here.

1306 days, 12 hours, 10 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
I am being harsh because you made a 'name and shame' thread on someone who didn't do as you wanted in a game. It is the 'nuclear option' of diplomacy that should be reserved to those truly deserving it. If you start calling out other players publicly, you should have a rock solid case and be prepared to your position being challenged. And from how I read the situation and the exchange you posted, you are completely without substance in this one.

I also pointed out what I think you missed in the diplomatic exchange and I still think you are missing it. What a new player decides to do when joining a game is entirely up to their discretion and you 'lost the bidding' to the other guy. Simple as that.
1306 days, 10 hours, 34 minutes ago
Profile Image
vultur
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.caffrey, By and large I share SMN's view. However, even if you stick to your opinion this:
"But I learned my lesson, never again will I trust a player!" is petty sure the wrong conclusion. You are limiting your choices, and there will be situations when you need to trust someone.

So: Be wary. Think twice before you trust someone. Doublecheck check from time to time if your partner's interests are still in accordance with your own goals. Don't "invite" your partner to backstab you (especially if you don't know him well). Formulate and read contracts carefully as some players will stick to exact word, not the likely meaning.

But don't shut the door by not trusting anybody. Very often both sides will be better of if they trust each other. Many, many players are very trustworthy. And some will rather go down in flames than desert you.
1306 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes ago
Profile Image
vantucci
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
I just keep track of those I cannot trust. Unfortunately there is nothing you can do about it all. If they lie or are untrustworthy once, I never agree to things with them in the future.

I will say though that my experience with @Calbasi have been honorable. He has held true to his word.
1306 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Vulture Sorry but certain players do indeed lie, cheat, manipulate, deceive, and the greater masses respect them for it.

By his own admission, in at the panels of diplomacy, a player who shall remain nameless respects treachery and deceit over honesty, as he calls honestly " suicidal and thus unacceptably stupid. "

And I suppose next time I should offer a replacement player, "Oh here, thanks for missing the first x-amount of turns, I am the lead player, let me give you 1/2 of my planets, 1/3 of my ships and 1/4 of all my resources just so I can make it easier for you.
Would that not be a mockery!,....Never trust a player who promises to do something that goes against their self-interest.

It is not my duty to make the game easier for him, nor is it my obligation to hold his hand, stand bye and watch as he stabs me in the back.

And I did not make this a name and shame thread on the first post. The person who decided that actually was you, @Smn since you did not want, wait what " instead of going into a pointless ethics discussion," I went into a factual one.
1306 days, 8 hours, 50 minutes ago
View ted's profile
ted
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Diplomacy ... and all this unlimited possible ally relation what force Commander work for each other ... it's a sickness and the nails to the coffin of Planets pure game play. Did i tell you this already how much true pain in produce in the end only?

How easy to play... how clean and shinning... how fine and consistence is Planets if you know only 10 other opponents! :)


@R.Caffrey
I suggest only this. If you max ally roster is full then simply attack what is not on your side and you are (most time) fine!
1306 days, 8 hours, 43 minutes ago
View jessilaurn's profile
jessilaurn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Donald: "Link" is familiar. Did you play in games hosted by Sumdawgy back then?
1306 days, 8 hours, 21 minutes ago
Profile Image
sacaleches
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
Dear M.Caffrey, with all due respect, reading messages that's what I think:

If I join as a replacement and an ex-ally contacts me, maybe I would show interest on continuing the alliance.
2.- Then he tells me what to do
3.- , then I look at my game and I offer him the ships he thinks I must build,
4.- He tells "no, build them for you", and offer a trade (remember I just met you, we didn't even bought me a drink, yet)
5.- The unknown-ex-ally, tells me "NO, told you to build them for you, told you twice ! .... Kid (I added "kid" to emphatize)

Maybe he thought that it was no more interested in the alliance...

Anyway, diplomacy wouldn't be the same if we didn't had to suspect our neighbors, try to read messages like a lawyer, until we decide that there are enough signs that support trusting. Knowing that you can find treason from time to time... adds some spice
1306 days, 7 hours, 33 minutes ago
Profile Image
martinr
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.Caffrey

Reading the various posts from various people.

I conclude that your very hurt from this.

You are very aware of what you think you offered and what you got in return.

I know its hard but can you take a deep breath and look over the posts again?

You are aware what you sent. But do you know actually what the other person read into it?

The person you are talking about may not have English as their first language. Or they may have not looked over the previous history. Or read it as meaning something else when they read it only once.

You offered one thing and yes you can reread you messages several times and confirm what you offered but what if they read it once and interpreted it slightly differently?

Today I had a similar thing. I just had this with a recruitment firm. Sent in my C.V. to a job description that was practically identical to my last job. The recruitment person said it did not sell me to him and could I change it after I told him over the phone what I meant to say.

The fact that he said the company manufactures cosmetics when I mentioned personal care (and to a technical person its very similar). And the fact he said I mentioned pharmaceutical development in my C.V. and he forgot it was mentioned on the job description and when I got the company name it is plastered all over their web site!

I was a little peeved that he was rejecting my C.V. even though the terminology was slightly different but given to a person who was from a similar industry would identify me as a very good match.

So once I talked to him and explained to him that I was a bloody good match to the job description and he was going to actually going to put me forward, I was a little happier.

I had to take a few deep breaths and stop my self calling him an idiot for only half reading my C.V. which obviously I though I had rewritten it perfectly for this job description.

But hopefully I may get an interview out of it.

So you know what you meant to say. But is there a possibility that a person who has not got English as their first language (or not know your strategies as well as you do) / quickly read the message / not understanding what you actually meant etc and acted as you thought you meant and remains friendly may mean you can trust other people in the future?

People make mistakes. And in the end its a half read message leading to a few mistakes in a computer game.

I am hoping my miscommunication won't lose me a job!
1306 days, 0 hours, 15 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@R.Caffrey

'And I did not make this a name and shame thread on the first post. The person who decided that actually was you, @Smn since you did not want, wait what " instead of going into a pointless ethics discussion," I went into a factual one.'

Maybe here lies the problem. You didn't mean to, yet it reads like one (supposedly-bad-faith player named in the first post, discussion framed based on his actions). You know very well what you mean to say, but the reader doesn't. The reader reads what you write and makes of it what he can. You do post and re-post the exact messages you sent, but reject all the analysis you are offered about them. I honestly think you place too much importance on what you exactly said and way too little effort into trying to figure out how the other party interpreted what you said. It's not about what you mean to say, it is about how it is read.

Many posters in this thread helpfully attempt to guess how the recipient reads the message, I don't see you giving those attempts much attention. I tried to describe the overall situation and how it would look like to the other player (your alliances were already full, you were not actually offering help to kill the incoming Virgos etc), I get the feeling you didn't give it serious thought, but instead reverted to reading again the exact messages you sent.

Finally, yes I wanted to avoid an ethics discussion based on actions of a named player that weren't from my point of view even questionable. I did it because it felt both unfair and misguided. There are true ethics issues with replacements, for example calling up on a 'friend' to replace a dropped enemy, sometimes with the said friend not being an autonomous player at all. These pop up in the discussions every now and then.
1304 days, 16 hours, 0 minutes ago
Profile Image
r.caffrey
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Sacaleches - Your right! I made a mistake, I should not have contacted him at all! I should have just eliminated his two no defense bases, and 9 ships there.
And I denied the trade twice, because I did not want those ships, I have better ones. And as i explained earlier, I was building the merlin first. Then the resolutes at a Starbase close to his, all of which were allocated in minerals and MC's.
So no trade needed, I said he would get "my ships" now if he did not understand that, then that is a pity.

@Martinr have you considered the possibility, that even though, yes in the messages it appears as though I am bossy. And being polite does not even matter, even if they were suggestions. How about the fact that this player joins exactly when the Colonials and Empire make their move together in this area. Coincidence perhaps, just timing? And Yes, perhaps I mis-interpreted, he said interested, not committed.

@Smn Here is a different perspective from the other side, maybe both of us are not aware of.

My friends are playing a game, asked me to join them on planets.nu. Since there is an open spot in at the Fascists in a game they are already playing, I join. I get this message right away from a ex-ally, who seems insistent to work with me. He has already dropped my alliance and formed two new ones, so where do I fit in?

I know, I will tell him I am interested, just to keep him from destroying my starbases. I look around my empire, in this part of space he allocated for himself, and I start to send ships to regain planets. Oh I know I will ask if I retake 1 clan planets, but it doesn't matter if he says yes or no, I don't care. He is a bossy one, telling me what to build, I just got here, and I do not know him.

I look through Time Machine, and see what I missed. I drop my alliance and change to share intel. I ask if he wants to trade, but he does not agree. He tells me of a starbase he built close to mine, good I can use that. I will wait till the next turn.

He seems troubled that the colonials and empire are closing. I am not, they are my friends, I am not concerned.
Oh I almost forgot, I have to drop the share intel alliance. I can't have this guy looking over my shoulder. I send my warships and freighters to ground attack his starbase, his supply lines around me. He should not have a problem with that.







1304 days, 15 hours, 50 minutes ago
View donaldworrell's profile
donaldworrell
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
smn once again makes me rise and say no replacements should be allowed. "My friends are playing a game,asked me to join...open spot..."

1304 days, 15 hours, 30 minutes ago
View smn's profile
smn
RE: Ethics with Alliances, Share Intel, Peace Treaty and...Write Reply
@Donaldworrell don't jump the gun, check the background first...

@R.Caffrey

Have you ever done a player background search? It is what we are supposed to do when we suspect foul play. Your not-so-subtle hinting indicates you haven't, because if you had done it, you would have found out that:

1) Calbasi has been around since the very start, including game ID 1004
2) He has played in a total of 23 games
3) Quite a few of these games have been replacements, sometimes in hopeless positions
4) Many of these games, he has played to the bitter finish (i.e. death, not a resign)
5) He has completed a 350+ turn game with some very senior players
6) The Privateer, Empire or Colonial players have not been in the survivor list in *any* of those 22 other games

This is the profile of a serious player who likes to put himself in front of serious challenges and not to give up easily (at all?). It is pretty much the complete opposite of the profile of a helpful "friend".

Yes I spent 10 minutes digging that information out. I didn't check the list for killed players, you can do that yourself. In fact, go and verify my summary too, open a few finished games of his, it'll be a useful exercise.