Opinions on Game etiquitte and strat

[Iron Butterfly]

This is a classic case of The fat man blocking the door so everyone burns to death. We are playing this game on disc world and its in its 19 round.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=1682164

This game started as a stalemate for everyone except yellow from almost the beggining. I started the game being placed on all four islands and troll Mountians was my start point for building. so I had to scrap my way up. Its not until turn 12 I get my territory Yellow had the fortune to take the bottom map almost unchallanged while light blue ploped himself in the Hub area just building armies for the whole game. At his strongest light blue had 20 armies on the hub with smaller sateillites

In the early rounds he tried the deadbeat trick which took me by surprise. One turn I have 1 army and in a blink all of a sudden there are 7. I had good die and beat him down.

His strategy from the start seemed to be to slowly build hoping to take an island. When seeing that would not be acheived he spited us by just building and blocking us from breaking yellow.

He has refused to negotiate doesnt speak or respond.

I understand he can play the game the way he wants. I also understand he was caught between a rock and a hard place.

There does seem to be some sort of secrete alliance or collusion as yellow has not attacked blue nor has light blue attempted to break yellow for the whole game.
I have no problem with the alliance as we tried to get him to help us.But we went through all the channals. Light blue is purposely helping yellow win the game and has been since he knew he wouldnt take us.

Just seems like a crappy way to play. They both have good feedback so its not like its a pattern. But somthing doesnt sit right with me.

the game isnt over.

Whats everyone think?

Rant Off

[LittleTitan]

Hmmm...you'd probably have to try and see it objectively when you ask yourself, "How many times could the "fat guy" in the middle have actually broken yellow had he tried?" Then if he could have succeeded often, but for some reason decided not to, would he have benefited from the situation afterwards?

You were right in accessing that he is in between a rock and a hard place. If he is the kind of person that hates alliances of any type, he might want to make sure that anyone building alliances doesn't succeed.

On another site, there have been numerous times when I was the player in the best situation against two weaker opponents. When one of them decides to openly ask the other to help take me down, of course it frustrates me. In that situation obviously, I hate alliances (when it doesn't benefit me). So what do I do? I make sure that when I retaliate, I make it nearly impossible for the "diplomat" to win the game. If I'm going to be in a lose/lose situation, then I at least try to sway the game in favor of the player which I feel played "the most honorably".

Being the most talkative in a game can sometimes be a clue to others that you are trying to manipulate their play. Depending on how much that upsets them, they may just play stubbornly to spite you.

I hope that helps.

[Iron Butterfly]

I fully understand it is a matter of perspective. People have different ways of playing. Likes and dislikes

You need allies to win these games.

If we had not allied ourselves the game would have been over. The game IS a game of diplomacey as well.

Finally just say somthing. You dont want to alli fine...just say so. But dont alli yourself and not say anything.

Its more about being spiteful then gamesmenship on his part.

[LittleTitan]

I agree. My guess is he'll finally say something once he is eliminated from the game.