Moderator: Community Team
KoolBak wrote:You want opinions?
Making truces / alliances is such a miserably spineless action in the first place that the entire question of breaking one is moot. No worse than entering into one in the first place.
Every player I've ever seen offer / make an alliance has been targeted and foed......in fact, that's how I met ol' Wacicha 6 years ago because be BOTH reacted the same way.....with honor....lol. And THAT'S why I love our group because there's at least 100 people that play with honor. Cowboy up.....win and lose like you got a pair. You wanna play teams, play teams.
BigBallinStalin wrote:People that disparage diplomacy don't understand how to be diplomatic themselves.
In other words, if I can't fight well, then I'll yell at anyone who chooses to fight.
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
KoolBak wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:People that disparage diplomacy don't understand how to be diplomatic themselves.
In other words, if I can't fight well, then I'll yell at anyone who chooses to fight.
You say diplomat, I say pussy
Viceroy63 wrote: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.
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
KoolBak wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:People that disparage diplomacy don't understand how to be diplomatic themselves.
In other words, if I can't fight well, then I'll yell at anyone who chooses to fight.
You say diplomat, I say pussy
BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
Viceroy63 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
Viceroy63 wrote:In a way this is also a role playing game but the thing is that we carry our roles into every game we play. So if we break our agreements then eventually our reputations will proceed us.
If we make a truce it should be towards a certain specific round. For example: "Pink, can we have a truce until round 18?" Then on round 18 the first player to go can fire on.BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
That's too deep for me man. LOL.
AndyDufresne wrote:Viceroy63 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
Imagine a scenario where everyone in the game misses turns and deadbeats. The winner, if they similarly missed turns and never deployed would have deadbeated, but the game crowns them the victor without ever deploying a single soldier. Ha.
Not really a strategy one can employ though on command!
--Andy
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
BigBallinStalin wrote:Viceroy63 wrote:In a way this is also a role playing game but the thing is that we carry our roles into every game we play. So if we break our agreements then eventually our reputations will proceed us.
If we make a truce it should be towards a certain specific round. For example: "Pink, can we have a truce until round 18?" Then on round 18 the first player to go can fire on.BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
That's too deep for me man. LOL.
Haha, don't be discouraged. It goes like this:
You undermine the State, or create/take advantage of a tension between its rulers and their people. This renders the State/political leaders' ability to craft policy and wage war less effective. Much of this is performed through the 5th column (spies). A longer framework would incorporate making alliances against the enemy (or engaging in mutual trade embargos/sanctions). The internal pressure increases, and the external threat of force (from your own forces and from your allies) would hopefully force the enemy to sue for peace---before the physical war has even begun.
Thus, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier.
Gillipig wrote:ConquerClub is just not advanced enough to encompass all of Sun Tzu's philosophies. So we can ignore his "supreme excellence is to defeat your enemies without fighting". However great it is.
This one is one can be followed however:
'There are roads which must not be followed, armies which must not be attacked, towns which must not be besieged,positions which must not be contested.'
Funkyterrance wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Viceroy63 wrote:In a way this is also a role playing game but the thing is that we carry our roles into every game we play. So if we break our agreements then eventually our reputations will proceed us.
If we make a truce it should be towards a certain specific round. For example: "Pink, can we have a truce until round 18?" Then on round 18 the first player to go can fire on.BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
That's too deep for me man. LOL.
Haha, don't be discouraged. It goes like this:
You undermine the State, or create/take advantage of a tension between its rulers and their people. This renders the State/political leaders' ability to craft policy and wage war less effective. Much of this is performed through the 5th column (spies). A longer framework would incorporate making alliances against the enemy (or engaging in mutual trade embargos/sanctions). The internal pressure increases, and the external threat of force (from your own forces and from your allies) would hopefully force the enemy to sue for peace---before the physical war has even begun.
Thus, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier.
That sounds like a lot of work...
I always took it to mean that if you slowly explain to your enemy that resistance is pointless, the actual fighting becomes merely a formality.
Also, peace is not the goal, victory is the goal.
BigBallinStalin wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Viceroy63 wrote:In a way this is also a role playing game but the thing is that we carry our roles into every game we play. So if we break our agreements then eventually our reputations will proceed us.
If we make a truce it should be towards a certain specific round. For example: "Pink, can we have a truce until round 18?" Then on round 18 the first player to go can fire on.BigBallinStalin wrote:As Sun Tzu says, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier. I'm still figuring out how to apply this to ConquerClub....
That's too deep for me man. LOL.
Haha, don't be discouraged. It goes like this:
You undermine the State, or create/take advantage of a tension between its rulers and their people. This renders the State/political leaders' ability to craft policy and wage war less effective. Much of this is performed through the 5th column (spies). A longer framework would incorporate making alliances against the enemy (or engaging in mutual trade embargos/sanctions). The internal pressure increases, and the external threat of force (from your own forces and from your allies) would hopefully force the enemy to sue for peace---before the physical war has even begun.
Thus, the successful general is one who wins the war without deploying a single soldier.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users