When is breaking a truce justifiable?

[oss spy]

I warned a user that if they continued expansion into another bonus that I would be forced to break our truce. He attacked regardless, and so I broke one of his stacks. This is justifiable, is it not?

[laughingcavalier]

Yup.

[danryan]

It's always justifiable. Just be prepared to deal with the consequences.

[IcePack]

It's justifiable if I win by breaking it

[Serbia]

If you can justify it, then by definition, it's justifiable. If breaking it hands you the win, then it's obviously justifiable.
Just understand that your opponent may not see it the same way. Entering a truce can be a good strategy, but be warned, it can also create enemies who may accuse you of cheap tactics at best, cheating at worst. But that's the risk when you enter into a truce.

[AndyDufresne]

If you can justify it, then by definition, it's justifiable. If breaking it hands you the win, then it's obviously justifiable.
Just understand that your opponent may not see it the same way. Entering a truce can be a good strategy, but be warned, it can also create enemies who may accuse you of cheap tactics at best, cheating at worst. But that's the risk when you enter into a truce.

This post sums it up pretty well. I rarely enter into alliances or truces, but if I did, I'd probably tend to be cutthroat...once the alliance doesn't serve me, no more alliance!


--Andy

[Viceroy63]

I warned a user that if they continued expansion into another bonus that I would be forced to break our truce. He attacked regardless, and so I broke one of his stacks. This is justifiable, is it not?

Like IcePack said, "it's justifiable if I win." But the real question here is why would you use a truce to limit the options or game play of another player?

Is "Truce" then the right word or did you guys make an agreement on that before hand?

As I see it a truce is a cease of hostilities between you and another player. Did he attack you first? In that case then he broke the truce. But if it sounds like it reads then you wanted to manipulate that player, and the game using a truce.

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[oss spy]

I warned a user that if they continued expansion into another bonus that I would be forced to break our truce. He attacked regardless, and so I broke one of his stacks. This is justifiable, is it not?

Like IcePack said, "it's justifiable if I win." But the real question here is why would you use a truce to limit the options or game play of another player?

Is "Truce" then the right word or did you guys make an agreement on that before hand?

As I see it a truce is a cease of hostilities between you and another player. Did he attack you first? In that case then he broke the truce. But if it sounds like it reads then you wanted to manipulate that player, and the game using a truce.

We made an agreement. I can guarantee that I would've lost if he had been able to take the bonus- nobody had the available manpower to stop him from taking another bonus. I warned him to stop but he essentially said "come at me, bro." And...I did The funny thing is that he even threatened suicide after I warned him...

[Viceroy63]

Then why not post the agreement and show us that as well?

The suicide thing is a different issue. He's definitely wrong there just saying that even in joking.

[Brock]

He is referring to game 10762379:

2012-03-28 16:16:29 - oss spy: Truce, grey? You won't be able to win a fight against me and green combined.
2012-03-28 18:13:16 - Brock: green has bigger fish to fry than me!
2012-03-28 18:15:51 - Brock: but I'm feeling amiable I'll pull out of minsk so you can use your Brest armies!
2012-03-28 21:33:43 - oss spy: Okay thanks One round notice before the end of truce.

Not only did I NOT add an extra bonus there were at least three other players with sufficient armies (yellow,blue and green) to prevent me from doing so! This individual was just looking for an excuse to cheat and ironically now feels the need to have others justify his actions!

[oss spy]

2012-04-26 21:04:18 - oss spy: Grey, if you continue your expansion into Cyan's territory I will be forced to break our truce.
2012-04-26 21:14:46 - Brock: No problem Mon Ami! Happy to suicide on you & hand what's left to yellow!

I guess you forgot about that, didn't you?


EDIT: You see, controlling the Moscow bonus region nets you +6. Did you really think I was going to allow that to happen? I was not going to allow a gradual takeover of the region. Further, the moment you threatened to suicide on me, you threw out any chance at a diplomatic solution. You could have said "Okay, I'll leave it alone" and there would've been no problem. But NO, that was too much for you. You instead felt the need to threaten suicide on me. And what did I do, given that there was going to be an imenent attack on me? I launched a pre-emptive strike such that I could still have a chance at not losing the game. Anyone in my position would've done the same thing. You do not threaten suicide and expect to get away without consequences.

[Brock]

This would be funny were it not so sad! 1) we had an alliance so you were under no immediate threat! 2) I was expanding in the OPPOSITE direction of your Territory! 3) If it had slipped your notice both Blue and Green had amassed very large armies on the border of said Territory and would never have allowed me ownership! 4) I was being facetious when I PUBLICLY announced I would suicide on you because your "high handed" attitude was frankly abrasive! 5)Please don't claim anyone in your position would have acted in the same underhand fashion that you did because that insults a vast amount of honourable players that I have had the privilege of playing against in this excellent game!

Just accept that you cheated, live with it and move on!

[Serbia]

It is NOT cheating.

[oss spy]

This would be funny were it not so sad! 1) we had an alliance so you were under no immediate threat! 2) I was expanding in the OPPOSITE direction of your Territory! 3) If it had slipped your notice both Blue and Green had amassed very large armies on the border of said Territory and would never have allowed me ownership! 4) I was being facetious when I PUBLICLY announced I would suicide on you because your "high handed" attitude was frankly abrasive! 5)Please don't claim anyone in your position would have acted in the same underhand fashion that you did because that insults a vast amount of honourable players that I have had the privilege of playing against in this excellent game!

Just accept that you cheated, live with it and move on!

1. I was not under an immediate threat, but the most dangerous threats are the ones you predict and do nothing about.
2. Irrelevant. You were going to have a large bonus.
3. Doesn't matter. Neither of them would've done anything because they would be weakened in fighting you and would be easy to take out by the other.
4. Threatening suicide is still threatening suicide. Spin it how you want, you're still making an obvious threat that I had to eliminate.
5. So what you're saying is that you expect people to simply back down if you threaten suicide? This means that you're perfectly justified in suiciding on someone if it gets you your way. This would be great were suicide not against the rules.
6. I did not cheat. Which rule did I break?

[Brock]

If it makes you happy you didnt: "cheat", you just made an alliance you had no intention of keeping, , you feel no remorse that your word has absolutely no value, honour is an alien term to you. And yet, you started this thread to justify your underhand play! You cant have it both ways accept your nature and live with it!

[JBlombier]

Whenever I come to this website to move digital bits of information around, against people I hardly know, my feeling of "honour" tends to be quite low as well. I always felt that it is the healthy way to deal with this game. Try being honourable and be prepared to meet a lot of dishonourable people. If you can't beat them (at least not always), join them.

[oss spy]

If it makes you happy you didnt: "cheat", you just made an alliance you had no intention of keeping, , you feel no remorse that your word has absolutely no value, honour is an alien term to you. And yet, you started this thread to justify your underhand play! You cant have it both ways accept your nature and live with it!

I fully intended to keep our truce, but then you did something stupid. Honor is alien to me, and yet you threaten suicide? Sir, I believe that honor is alien to you. You will either:

a) Not make threats
or
b) Suffer the consequences

It couldn't be simpler.


EDIT: And stop cyberstalking me. It's getting creepy.

[Jippd]

I think if you posted in chat you would have to attack him if he kept growing (thus outdeploying you) it was 'fair' to do what you did.

After all brock, was your plan to never break the truce when it was just you and OSS left?

Eventually a truce has to be broken, the game needs a winner.

For future advice, create truces with round limits, "end of round 7" for example. You can always re negotiate extensions.

Game 10762379

The game chat is mildly entertaining.

[Brock]

I fully intended to keep our truce-(but attacked me without the agreed upon 1 turn notice thus giving yourself a massive advantage!)
but then you did something stupid.(Had the temerity to not follow your demands How dare I!)
Honor is alien to me, and yet you threaten suicide? (Your moral outrage regarding this is mildly amusing as the statement was made tongue in cheek inthe face of your incredible arrogance!)
Sir, I believe that honor is alien to you (My record stands for itself, so does yours.)
You will either:

a) Not make threats (actually it was a response to your own!)
or
b) Suffer the consequences (the consequence of my response to your original threat was that it gave you an excuse to justify cheating.)

It couldn't be simpler.( Hmmm Old testament I beleive!)

Please continue to self flaggelate in this post for the redemption you evidently seek. This is my last word on the matter as frankly its yesterday's news! Learn to live with yourself Mon Ami! Thank God I dont have to

[oss spy]

(but attacked me without the agreed upon 1 turn notice thus giving yourself a massive advantage!)
(Had the temerity to not follow your demands How dare I!)
(Your moral outrage regarding this is mildly amusing as the statement was made tongue in cheek inthe face of your incredible arrogance!)
(My record stands for itself, so does yours.)
(actually it was a response to your own!)
(the consequence of my response to your original threat was that it gave you an excuse to justify cheating.)
Please continue to self flaggelate in this post for the redemption you evidently seek. This is my last word on the matter as frankly its yesterday's news! Learn to live with yourself Mon Ami! Thank God I dont have to

1. You threatened suicide. Such a threat deserved immediate action; quit skirting around this fact. I acted before you could; get over it.
2. No, how dare you think I was going to watch while you won the game.
3. It's incredibly arrogant that you thought I was going to let you suicide on me. I was giving you a warning; you gave me a threat.
4. I do not have a record of breaking truces or threatening suicide, whereas you do. I break my truces in the most extreem of situations...such as you threatening suicide.
5. I did not threaten you. I warned you. I gave you an "If..., then..." statement, meaning I was not going to act unless you acted first. However, your suicide threat forced me to act first.
6. Cheat? How did I cheat? What rule did I break? I will answer this for you: I didn't.

I suggest you tone down your douchebaggery before I have to further prove that my actions were justified and that yours were not.

[Renee_W]

I don't even see a broken truce, one round notice... if you do x then truce ends certainly qualifies as notice.

[oss spy]

Exactly. I think I'm perfectly justified in saying that he broke his end of the deal first when he threatened suicide.

[Stephan Wayne]

NEVER

[Renee_W]

Exactly. I think I'm perfectly justified in saying that he broke his end of the deal first when he threatened suicide.

Nope, a threat isn't an attack and the threat was clearly an action to be taken if you attacked him.

By your logic you made the first threat and you made it without giving him 1 turn warning you were going to threaten him so if threats are a violation of the truce you broke the truce.