All's fair in love and war

[Furkin!]

I'm new to Conquer Club. I have never played a game like this but I am a logical thinker and I am also a fan of shows like Survivor and the USA version of Big Brother. When playing games, I don't believe it is in my best interest to be overtly deceptive or secretive, but I don't understand why it is considered against the official rules to send secret messages to each other, or to blatantly lie to someone. If someone did that to me, I would understand what I was getting into when considering whether or not to play with them again. In the "olden days", when this game was on a physical game board, what was to stop people from sending secret messages to each other? One would have to assume that that was part of the game and act accordingly. I hope that one would not infer from this that I intend to break the rules as I fully intend to abide by them. But I feel that trying to block this aspect of the game is only giving an advantage to those capable enough to find ways of masking secret diplomacy. I feel that if opponents suspect mutual opponents of secret diplomacy, they should be able to counteract that secrecy with more secrecy of their own, thus evening the playing field.

I also think that experts should embrace the challenge of playing with us NOOBS, even if we do target them based on their perceived threat.

Please feel free to drill holes in any of the arguments I have introduced above. I love healthy, spirited discussions, and I love being challenged. After all, this is still just a game.

PS: Are private games more tolerant of perceived secret diplomacy and obvious lying? Are these rules put in place to prevent NOOBS like me from getting so angry about the fact that we were “played” by the professionals that we decide never to play again?

[jrh_cardinal]

You can't do secret diplomacy in any game, public or private. You could try having a secret diplomacy usergroup or something like that, but you would have to clear it with the mods first.

In the board game (the way I played it) there was no official diplomacy at all. People were smart enough to know who to attack when, and we all trusted each other to do that. Diplomacy in any form is only necessary (for good players) because of really terrible players that have no idea what they're doing.

For secret diplomacy, hmm. I've never honestly seen anyone question this rule before (not that it shouldn't be questioned). I could see your point that secret diplomacy games could provide a different dynamic that may be interesting, but these games are not war. In WWII (and 1), the "Allies" all won. In (a game of strategy and R***), there can only be one winner in singles games, obviously team games are completely different. I don't know of a good, concrete reason why secret diplomacy is so bad I guess, but that is a major difference people have to realize (and often don't), which makes this different from real life war diplomacy.

[Furkin!]

I guess the more I think about it, the more I realize that the best way to get lots of people to play is to not allow such behavior as it might ignite a negative emotional reaction in NOOBS not expecting it.

I am still in the middle of my first games, and have yet to complete one, but I could see where it would be to my advantage, if I were down to a few territories, to send secret messages. In my opinion, if someone were to abstain from deploying any means necessary to stay in the game and win, that would make the game less challenging for the opponents and could be considered a form of giving up.

[natty dread]

Secret diplomacy is bad because it can be used for cheating. For example, two players can agree to play a series of games together, and agree to be allied in all the games, then they have an advantage of all of these games and they can just divide the points between them...

This is practically the same as using multiple accounts, only you're using another person instead of a multi.

[darth emperor]

In the "olden days", when this game was on a physical game board, what was to stop people from sending secret messages to each other?

And how could you do that? I mean that means you should pass notes and if you pass notes to another player the other can see that both of you are having secret diplomacy... i think you misunderstood the concept of secret diplomacy... in the game chat you can talk to anyone and do do the diplomacy you want...with secret diplomacy means that you talk by pm/wall/msn/yahoo/face-to-face that is not allowed because the others can't know (not like your case about the physical game board)


And there's no any rule that says that you can't lie...of course you can do that and its a part of the diplomacy BUT of course people will rant you as liar and if happens a lot...the people will know about your reputation and not trust in you (like real life)

[Dauntless07]

I remember at summer camp, I brought RISK. One night we were in the middle of an intense game like the blade of a knife; it could've cut any way. It was splended fun doing the secret diplomacy; no one sure where your true allegiance lay. We eventually had to leave for a meeting and even then, spent the time walking conducting secret diplomacy. Good stuff... when you play it on a board.

On the internet, however, I guess there are some people who don't care about the game as much as their ranking. It's true; joining games secretly allied from the start is practically like using multiple accounts to win your game for you. I questioned the rule too when I first joined, but I realized "multis" are quite a large problem, and the rules against this kind of play were for my protection since New recruits are the most vulnerable to "farmers."

I love the Idea of making a Secret Diplomacy group BTW. Someone should totally do that; I would join.

[darth emperor]

I remember at summer camp, I brought RISK. One night we were in the middle of an intense game like the blade of a knife; it could've cut any way. It was splended fun doing the secret diplomacy; no one sure where your true allegiance lay. We eventually had to leave for a meeting and even then, spent the time walking conducting secret diplomacy. Good stuff... when you play it on a board.

On the internet, however, I guess there are some people who don't care about the game as much as their ranking. It's true; joining games secretly allied from the start is practically like using multiple accounts to win your game for you. I questioned the rule too when I first joined, but I realized "multis" are quite a large problem, and the rules against this kind of play were for my protection since New recruits are the most vulnerable to "farmers."

I love the Idea of making a Secret Diplomacy group BTW. Someone should totally do that; I would join.

So you are saying that the way of doing secret diplomacy is before you start the game...or while you are having a break? in that case I preffer the non-secret diplomacy because you ally with the one that would be more beneficial for you...what if your "secret partner" gets stronger than anyone? if you have decided no to attack each other...