No. Always truce>flags

Welcome to kDice...................

As for flags..........you can feel free to interpret them any way you like...........that's what everyone else does.

On the lower tables, I have noted a distressing tendency for people to throw their allies under the bus as soon as the opposition flags. To my mind, as I have said before, a truce ALWAYS trumps a flag. With no exceptions. Some people will argue that if your ally gets beaten down that your enemy deserves the spot, but I find that to be self-serving crap. In many situations your ally gets beaten up so that you can grow. So you directly benefit from his sacrifice. To then give placement to the enemy is gutless and dishonorable in the extreme. Your ally deserves your unswerving loyalty.

As for adtsm, he is just about the biggest whiner on Kdice, so ignore his endless bullsh*t.

It is your choice what you want to do, you will piss someone off so don't worry about it.

Truces > flags, 99% of the time.

Not that my opinion matters much, but here's my real take on flags/truces. If a truce partner helps you to get 1st, that's great. But if that partner never had more than 4 or 5 territories throughout the game and the "enemy" is a solid 2nd with about 10-12 territories, then the enemy truly does deserve 2nd, and the truce partner should know they deserve no better than 3rd. Being truced with 1st place doesn't mean that you automatically get 2nd IMO. It simply means that you won't be destroyed by 1st when the truce was made, allowing you to place higher than you would have without trucing.

yeah...adtsm is rediculous... you never backstab your truce because of a flag...that's just dumb

I agree with thraxle's second post completely.

depends

rIdiculous. adtsm please don't include yourself as a top100 player, ever again. Thanks.

You didnt make the rules,

adtsm: im usually in the top 100 see the medal

...too many potential jokes to make, my head asplode.