Game #109 - Steel Game

[kevindusi]

Everyone makes mistakes. I make more than some, it seems. 106 has been a travesty on a variety of levels.

That said, and to switch the conversation to 109, I would like to extend my best wishes to everyone in the game except for the Elf (my mortal enemy), Jumbie (my mortal friend), and the Gnome (who nobody likes). This includes the dastardly Underworld.

But again, not the Gnome. Never the Gnome.

[HeadHoncho]

Sure, you made a mistake, but I think most of us -- including the affected player -- agree that you more than made up for it, and that that was a stand-up thing to do.

[Jumbie]

We the Black Dragons wish Kevin well.

We wish the Elves much better, so much better that the Elves mount all Dark elven heads on pikes and march through Lorethane with them, singing 'Whistle while you work', but nonetheless, we wish Kevin well.

[The Gray Mouser]

Sure, you made a mistake, but I think most of us -- including the affected player -- agree that you more than made up for it, and that that was a stand-up thing to do.

Following this thread, I would say most experienced players believe the other experienced players when accusations about who-shot-who come up. Newer players seem to ride hard upon what they had in their mind about their agreement, what they thought "the intent" was. Generally, I would be suspicious of any player, especially new players, that complain on the forum about how they were deceived and another player is dishonorable and that they will blast to all who will listen about what player x, then player y, and z did to dishonor themselves and hold it against them in all future contests. Sort of a boy who cried wolf. And if someone wants to broadcast that they will report to all, any perception they have of a possible violation to an ambiguous agreement, I likely wouldn't want an agreement with that persona. I actually think there should be more gray-area stuff in a game like Alamaze. I can't imagine a game of Diplomacy or Axis and Allies or even Risk, where players would be shocked if they are "double crossed". Half the fun of those games is not knowing for sure or when or from whom, the knife will come.

Here's an example or two of Alamaze diplomacy. In one game, I play the Gnome. The Deliverer plays The Trolls. Around Turn 1, our diplomacy was something like this:

Gnome to Troll: "We'd prefer peace with the Trolls. And that Trolls not come into Runnimede."

Troll to Gnome: "We no crush little green people. For now."

That has served as a standing agreement. While there have been interesting alliance swings and changes throughout, and doubtless pressure on both of us from our allies to "alter" the understanding, the simple truth of the matter has been I have left Troll PC's and people alone, and he has not invaded Runnimede. Would I call him out on the forum if he did? Of course not. Respect is earned, is another way to say it.

On the other hand, I have also had quite elaborate agreements involving multiple parties, triggers, eventualities, contingencies. These sometimes work out fine, but likely one side or the other knows the one thing not covered in all the legal-eze they can swing to their advantage. Does that make them deceitful, untrustworthy? I guess its in the eye of the beholder.

Finally, if any player's diplomacy is summed up by "Game long NAP", you probably are either brand new to Alamaze, or in the wrong game. Or cheating yourself out of a lot of the fun. Just my opinion.

[kevindusi]

I don't think I referred to the Gnomes as "little green people", but otherwise sounds about right.

Respect, and trust, is earned. It's easier to have loose agreements with people you know (and trust) than detailed agreements with people you don't.

[The Gray Mouser]

I don't think I referred to the Gnomes as "little green people", but otherwise sounds about right.

Respect, and trust, is earned. It's easier to have loose agreements with people you know (and trust) than detailed agreements with people you don't.

Right, a misquote. This is more accurate:

"Hail Little Mouse,

I have no interest in putting Gnomes on the menu, at least in the opening stages of the game."

I thought there was a grunt or two in there.

[kevindusi]

The grunt was implied.

[HeadHoncho]

And if someone wants to broadcast that they will report to all, any perception they have of a possible violation to an ambiguous agreement, I likely wouldn't want an agreement with that persona.

That's totally fine with me. Accountability matters to me, however, and people are free to react to that however they choose.

I actually think there should be more gray-area stuff in a game like Alamaze. I can't imagine a game of Diplomacy or Axis and Allies or even Risk, where players would be shocked if they are "double crossed". Half the fun of those games is not knowing for sure or when or from whom, the knife will come.

I love Diplomacy. I've actually won national and international Diplomacy tournaments, and it remains an all-time favorite of mine.

But IMO -- and obviously views may differ on this -- Alamaze feels quite different to me than Diplomacy on this point.

Maybe it's the underlying expectation in Diplomacy that everyone lies and stabs, and that's OK (although sadly, I have also witnessed friendships damaged by playing Diplomacy, though thankfully none of mine).

Maybe it's the money component that makes a stab seem to hurt more in Alamaze.

Maybe it has something to do with the complexity of the ruleset.

Maybe it's just the community here that seems to find broken agreements less acceptable (or perhaps that's just my perception of things).

Regardless, the feel is quite different to me, and until that feel changes, I'm probably not going to approach diplomacy in Alamaze the exact same way as diplomacy in, well, Diplomacy.

I have no expectations that everyone should play this game the same way as me, of course. But I am going to play my own game my own way, and that entails agreements, usually with some level of precision, and accountability, and a nod to reputation.

And if someone blatantly breaks an agreement with me, I will probably let that be known, and if that someone develops a reputation as a backstabber, hopefully newbies who bother to research the point will take note and perhaps avoid getting taken advantage of too badly.

And if that means I just won't be making any agreements with the Gray Mouser or people who feel similarly in future games, hey, I'm OK with that.

[Mokkaron]

Greetings,
The Underworld Ministry of Outreach and Public Relations has recently implemented a few changes. We look forward to a delightful new era in Underworld management, and we hope you will join us on this exciting new journey. Remember, you cannot have FUN without "UN"!

Hugs and kisses,
Christine
UN PR Representative

[Keeope]

So everyone does hate the Gnome. Or is that fear?