That is not what Sam said.

Then what do you gain by awarding a flag? Possibly risking your own position in doing so.

I'm not saying it's wrong to do so, im saying game to game 'favours' are inevitable.

Granting game to game favors is completely different than honoring an in-game truce.

Game to game favors = PGA

Honoring truce over flags = integrity

Get it?

no... i don't think i get it. explain it again?

Your only opponent has the same amount of territories as you and is flagged 2nd. You can 1 hit your alliance partner this turn. If games where played for that game and that game only, a rational player would always betray there truce partner.

I show you integrity this game if you show me integrity next, call it what you want. It doesn't benefit him this game, but it will the next. I'd like to know the definition of game to game favour.

The issue is keeping your word and honoring your commitments in ONE GAME. The person you truce with this game may be the person you kill and give 7th in the next game. The only thing that travels from game to game is your reputation. If you have a reputation of keeping your word, then people are more likely to work with you. If you have a reputation as a backstabber, they are more likely to kill you first. My personal view is that I would rather lose a game and keep my word than win a game and defile my sense of honor. But that is just me. You can certainly find any number of players that consider "honor" to be a joke.

So the game to game favors are only applied to the group of people with a reputation. To join this group you have to grant other people in this group game to game favors. I've uncovered a mass PGA group! And apparently all the top players are in it.

I'm not implying that blatent massive game to game favours exist (eg. turkish PGA-ers).

+1 to existential ... great post.

pretend to be lagging

build to +32

take them down to 1 territory

arbitrarily decide who gets what position