Forum
Truce -vs- Flag respect
|
|
Lemonion wrote
at 1:50 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT
I've looked around to see if there is anything related to this topic, couldn't find anything.
Back story: I try to play with honor (try) and respect flags as much as possible (as long as I am not getting farmed). If ranked above, don't attack lower flagged. If ranked below, don't attack those flagged higher. Everyone else is pretty much fair game. I don't normally truce. I am beginning to realize that trucing in higher ranked games may be required. I hate being double teamed, thus my reluctance to truce - and my inability to crack a higher rank on a regular basis. Here is the nut I am trying to crack. Truce early in the game, and it starts to work. Am sitting at 1st, and only one party would be able to knock me down. He stops hitting me, flags for 2nd, so I figure he can fight my truce buddy. Now, we are not allies (I never said I would help him fight), yet I owe my position to him (I probably would have been wiped out if he decided to take me on). He asked for the truce, I agreed. 2nd place enemy is now taking on the fellow I truced with (again, reluctant to call him ally). I protected his flank against another foe, yet 2nd place enemy is making some big dents. My truce partners is losing, now he's pissed at me for not helping. What is the deal here? Does truce trump flags? Should I have pushed back the flagged fellow so my truce partner could survive, maybe even excel? I am starting to think that either I should have set the ground rules quickly (truce = no attacks from me, but does not necessarily include aid later), or I should have informed the other fellows that flag will be respected if they do not attack partner (then does that give partner carte-blanche to attack others with the implied threat of my retribution anytime?). I dunno, maybe I am over-thinking this. |
Replies 1 - 5 of 5
|
DaShiVa wrote
at 3:00 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT I'm similarly inclined - I prefer to let an honest flag beat a truce, however, it seems general convention is that truces trump flags.
Basically, if u make it clear when you agree to a truce that you will still respect flags, you should be fine. |
|
sho wrote
at 5:32 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT I actually think that not truces nor respecting flags are fair to the expectations of other players. I don't truce, don't flag and don't respect flags.
Also think that both strategies make the game boring or at least I don't see the fun in waiting to collect points. Then again, I have to say I don't mind points and as I can see many times for some people the most important part of the game are points [forget about having fun] and I guess that option is as good as mine. |
|
moneymango wrote
at 8:46 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT I just played a game where I was clear first with three players left, and got beat by some bad luck. Anyhow once it was clear i wasnt going to win i flagged for 2nd and then the person who was in first claims that they had a silent truce, and truces over flags...any opinions on this
|
|
Earl Grey wrote
at 8:54 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT Lemonion,
I've had some "Hate-Chat" about this topic. Bottom line is the flag means different things to different people. One that causes problems is is a high placed flag (say 3rd) while the game is still young. At this point 1st hasn't gauranteed his place and 2nd has no reason to flag (and often the flagger is in the way!). The flagger will then moan about having some "taxes" taken - the bottom line is, however, without being allowed to benefit from the flaggers weak position you risk not winning the game. Don't allow honour and mercy to get mixed up with self-preservation. Take it one case at a time. Since you play with honour then you have little to worry about. EG |
|
Bugaboo-X wrote
at 9:03 PM, Sunday May 4, 2008 EDT You're gonna piss off someone no matter what you do. ... So follow your conscience and hope for the best. A good life is its own reward.
|