Forum
People who back off from alliance - no ethnics
CP03 wrote
at 2:20 AM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST
I have come across a few players like that and I totally have no respect for them.
Therefore, I though I create a thread to post their names. Feel free to add to the list: thad - he attacked people he has an alliance with and then beg the #1 player to kill others first so that he can be 2nd/3rd |
Replies 1 - 8 of 8
frambojan wrote
at 4:02 AM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST While I agree this is in poor character, it’s in equally poor character to make whiny a thread in an attempt to tattle on them. If someone plays in distasteful fashion don’t play with them again, or, attack them should they be in the game. Creating a thread to call them on a playing strategy you don’t agree, but is legal, just comes across as being a poor loser.
( For future reference Ethnics= people of a race apart from majority. Ethics = moral principles. I’m not trying to be dick, since many people on here don’t speak English as there first languge, but I figured you might want to know your thread title sounds racist :) |
joby.d wrote
at 4:37 AM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST Sounds like he tried to make a better alliance? ;)
|
empath wrote
at 11:43 AM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST you can't even SPELL ethics :)
|
HarryPotter wrote
at 3:52 PM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST i don't see anything worng with this thread. now i know to avoid thad, or at least not make an alliance with him.
read #2 in the etiquette post: http://aplayr.com/kdice/kdice/forum/topics/dice%20wars%20etiquette/ frambojan - you post does sound cocky, even though you mean well |
z3dd wrote
at 7:24 PM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST You know countries do that in real war too? It's called strategy. It makes no sense not to do it if it furthers your cause. I do it so you can post my name. I mean someone already made a whole thread about me because they don't like the stratagies I use.
|
kersplatt wrote
at 9:57 PM, Sunday December 24, 2006 EST I think it's perfectly agreeable to form an alliance until you and the other player are strong enough and then set about each other. In fact, I think it's healthier than an alliance where one huge player protects a player that just sits there stacking in a corner while going on to destroy the others and giving the partner second place. Sticking to an alliance, maybe, but it doesn't seem sporting.
|
Anarki wrote
at 9:15 AM, Monday December 25, 2006 EST lol, the "no ethnics" in your title made me click it. Are you a secret KKK member? It's time to confess, my boy :p
turning on alliances just gives you a bad name, and probably enemies. Kill them when you have the most power in a next game ;-) http://aplayr.com/kdice/kdice/forum/topics/dice%20wars%20etiquette/ |
Lindsay wrote
at 6:11 PM, Monday December 25, 2006 EST People should just be clear about the terms of their alliances or truces from the start, when they ask for them. I've been accused of "turning on" someone when neither or us ever spoke a word about an alliance or truce (we had been participating in an unspoken truce). Just be clear: "Let's ally until so-and-so is dead" or "until so-and-so is split" or, my favorite, "until one of us attacks the other."
|