Conquer Club

I had a situation come up where I had made a truce with a much weaker player (weaker as in he hardly had any territories left while most other players had many) and I stuck to it for several turns until it got to the point where another player attacked him and reduced him to just 3 territories, which were all on my border.

It seemed like if I continued to follow our truce, in 1-2 turns he was going to get eliminated by my opponent, who would then cash in the cards he won from the elimination to attack me.

So, I decided to eliminate the guy myself and get his cards before my opponent could.

Now, the eliminated player hasn't complained or anything, but I was just wondering if this is seen as the proper thing to do, or if I should have been expected to stick with the truce we had. I wouldn't have attacked him at all if not for being able to eliminate him and get his cards... so what say you?

If he was dead the next turn anyway I would say you made the right thing. Similar things already happened to me, I did like you, I eliminated the player.

Agree with the previous poster, you did the right thing.

If i were the weaker player I would expect you to do so. It's fair.

It's fine. I had to do this as well and I don't think that there were any hard feelings since he was dead anyway with only a few troops left. In my case, whoever took him out was going to win that 7 or 8 player game.

I concur. If it's just a matter of, which player is going to eliminate him first, the truce becomes irrelevant.

I somewhat reluctantly agree. I can imagine that not all opponents will be as understanding as your were, but it's the smart thing to do and should therefore be done.

Always break truces as fast as possible!

But not before you've achieved your objective, unless the risk of keeping a truce outweighs the reward of the objective.