Re: A Discussion on kingmaking and community standards.
Bleh.
Liddell Hart, (who after Sun Tzu wrote probably the second best book on military tactics) paraphrased said "never fight an even fight".
Fight fights you are going to win.
Most of the vets here, do this, one way or another. Baalz and executor are *famous* for the 2 turn blitzes.
'Even' fights by definition maximize the casualties for both sides.
Asymmetrical fights occur in many ways - military advantage, mage advantage - or even diplomatic advantage.
More or less I find that the term kingmaking roughly equates to diplomacy: Y/N.
It would, perhaps, be good when choosing a game on llamaserver to be able to have a drop box, or post a statement about what was expected in the game.
Sure, I'll support adding
GoodPlayerPledge: Y/N
Kingmaking: Y/N
to any game.
But not allowing kingmaking directly decreases the fun in the game for some people. Suppose I'm comfortably in third place - saying I am not allowed to work for an ally removes a *lot* of the incentive to play the game.
You may find it fun to be required start a fight against an enemy against which you will lose - I am way too proud to want to be forced to take a bad choice. I'd rather stale than do it, to be honest. So in the games where you remove kingmaking - you remove a lot of the reason people stay in the game in secondary positions.
We play games to have fun.
We play players, generally, because the challenge is sharper, and the game more enjoyable.
Generally, the conduct we expect from our players we all learned in kindergarten - or the foreign equivalent thereof. Play nice. Try to win. Don't cheat. If it doesn't violate one of these, I figure its ok.
Its a *game* - ok you didn't expect your opponent to talk a player into surrendering. Congratulate him and move on - maybe you can learn something to elevate your own game.
|