What is acceptable diplomacy in a GMR game?

[DeeBo]

I was playing in Sorc's (Slvynn on here) Chillout 2 game in GMR. One of the other players (playing as Inca) noticed he and said this publicly:

Looks like we share a big barren island, Sorc. Can we get along? I'd hate for this to get ugly.

Sorc, then said he can't promise anything, he's playing Japan, a warmongering civ, said he might offer some "conditions" that Inca might not like in exchange for peace, etc. This was all said publicly in the GMR comments.

Then I said the following

The Great Arab Nation frowns upon such warmongering. However, our knowledge of the world is much limited and as such...... have no idea where either of you are. Seek me out Incan friends and perhaps I will be able to assist.

I considered this just a "denouncement" like the AI would do with the "warmongering" debuff. This was pretty early in the game and most people, as far as I know, haven't even discovered any other civs. However, my justification was he opened the door to this type of diplomacy by publicly threatening the Incas. My intention wasn't to form any type of alliance with Inca, just to give a fair warning.

This then turned into a huge argument and ended up with Sorc rage quitting out of his own game. He kept throwing around words like "OOC" and "RP diplomancy" and really got me confused.

My question is, is this type of diplomacy generally accepted in GMR games? This was my first game on there and really have no clue. Also, keep in mind there were absolutely no rules about diplomacy stated before the game started in the thread or in the GMR comments.

 

[Slvynn]

- you mix up 2 things - OOC (out of character) and in-game diplomacy, in result you get Metagaming
- you and more 1 player conducted cooperation diplomacy before even meeting me and Foffaren. This goes against in-game mechanics . This also goes against OOC normal code - people bang on other only if he threat to win.
- this was in Epic GMR game! means, it just started. I roll Japan (i forced to warmonger) in bad tundra start. I have no choice. Before even everyone researched WRITING you already bang on me using metagaming, and this is for game which lasts for MONTHs. I even did not attacked, and now, being forced by my randoming into Japan, and having crappy Start, i know that i have no chance to do anything in this game, because you already "allied"
- Your language were poor and offending, while i kept polite tone. Next time consider the language you speak with other people. If you will speak such language here , you will get yellow/red cards.
- My game was spoiled, and was forced into clearing my intentions. But such things normally not used by good players i have honor to play normally.
- Your behavior offending : Sense rules of in-game mechanics, or normal OOC (out of character - league style) game code of conduct
- The sentence "In-game diplomacy" do appear in game description/thread, and it was at 1st game which got screwed because some early quiter problem, we just remade it.

So far: you cant bang on player who "may be will fight other player" in GMR games, esp if it epic game which lasts months and things are hardly developed. Hey, for readers i will state again, we didnt researched writing even, and they didnt met Foffaren who initiated the diplomacy talk on GMR game page. This was metagame gangbang , which was followed by bad speech from DeeBo


DeeBo you are banned in my games, have fun in others.

 

[Foffaren]

Interesting how a comment written in a jokingly manner can cause such a storm. I wrote purely to get some laughs. I'm well aware that war against Japan was inevitable and being on our own island (scouted most, if not all of it already) I wouldnt get any help anyway.

I'm sorry if I caused bad blood and I hope you will forget about it some day.

 

[Slvynn]

Interesting how a comment written in a jokingly manner can cause such a storm. I wrote purely to get some laughs. I'm well aware that war against Japan was inevitable and being on our own island (scouted most, if not all of it already) I wouldnt get any help anyway.

I'm sorry if I caused bad blood and I hope you will forget about it some day.

You are ok , or somewhat ok, actually... i don't blame you on all the ending ....
But the DeeBo bad speech (DeeBo could you copy paste all the conversation and your tone into this thread?), metagaming that followed your post and lack of 3 players understanding (which confirmed that such a pre-game devlopment ganbang with promises of assistance is just an "denouncement" , and that even before they meet me or Foffaren in the game.)
Again, hey, this is friendly game, which fueled by months-long interest..... you killed it by ganging against RL player, without reason, before you even met his and his rival civ. Before anyone got Writing. Months before it could be relevant.

And i answered in polite and bit jockingly form, but i warned that please "refrain from such diplomacy" which means conducting OOC diplomacy and ganging on actually weak Japan player, before your civs even met, and before i even started some aggression. And i did answered to Foffaren openly but this was OOC post, and we had months of real time before you could talk about some actual cooperation against Japan.
You (DeeBo, not Foffaren, his action just initiated it) ruined other player interest for challenge, and then talked too boldly and quite in un-polite manner, so i just left the game, which i started, but i have no reasons to continue

I am warlike player. I am ok player. But that's no reason to ganbang in fair friendly game before game started, and when i expressed my unhappiness for your anti-game mechanics diplomacy, i got replies in quite bad tone, which i wont tolerate in games i want to have fun and see as friendly fair matches. And, DeeBo, that was not rage quit, that was quit from game i had no intent to continue due dislike to my certain rivals, spoiled game, where my bad tundra start was combined with senseless game spoling and per-emptitive ganbang against me, which ruined fun and interest. Since its not short game, but a game which should last for months, provided above reasons are severe enough .

If you still think that you are ok, and conducted talk and "denoucements" , which deny in-game mechanics , i'll quote this one , latest Diplomacy you posted just to put light on your tone:

DeeBo
8/16/2012 8:13 AM

Wow he rage quit. What a little ##############. Hopefully admin controls turned over to someone else.

DeeBo
8/16/2012 8:02 AM
You sound wayyyyy too butthurt about something that just isn't, IMO, a big deal. YOU were the one that started this "OOC diplomacy" (whatever you want to call it, not even sure what that means) when you stated publicly you were going to attack the Incas. Not sure why you did that because now the Incas can prepare their defenses and everyone knows you as a warmonger, which will hurt your reputation, weather or not people publicly denounce you as I have. They still have it in their head that you could turn on them at any moment.

Plus, the biggest thing is THIS RULE WAS NEVER STATED WHEN THE GAME WAS CREATED. At the very least, we should put it to a vote if you're trying to create a new rule.

and more...

tip: watch your tone, and play peaceful games if you dont like wars in CivV MP, and do metagaming using friendly discussion and then spam the word "denoucement" which is simply irrelevant... and i dont need to post a poll to confirm that you cant use ooc talk for denying game rules ( game = Civ V mechanics) "denouncement" of yours

I've talked, politely, about spoiling game, metagaming, breaking game mechanics diplomacy rules, politely, about fact that this actually ruins my game and fun of it and you talked in bad form and tone, and denied to understand my point. Have fun in your game. I have much better games and much more worthy rivals, than you, DeeBo.

Sorry to other players in this game, but its your fault too, majority just denied to understand my point , that diplomacy should be tied to in-game mechanics (allowed upon meeting, civ-to-civ diplomacy, denoucements of "i denounce civ X" and not when one player jokingly call for help in ooc chat, and 2 others say in quite solid form "we will assist you against X!" before those civs met, civ X even attacked , before anyone built library and "aggressor" civ X its 3rd unit.), or should be ooc diplomacy which also , as in friendly matches, in any sense will deny such development/diplomacy. I was forced to reveal my intentions, which were obvious, and then, using that ooc comment, few people attempted threat and to force me to no-war play ,which just would kill my game, because i have no chance, if i'll not warmonger.

For GMR such bad diplomacy is fatal - because games fueled by interest, initiative and designed for very long time spans.

Only thing i regret that i am -1 GMR Japan game, ha!
One of my favs, but what to do, when half of players start to complain, threat and gang when i just mention that i might play war game, because i have no choice.

 

[Slvynn]

Summary

GMR are very prolongated games. Players should follow certain rules which are:
1. specific game rules.
2. game-built mechanics, if not overrided by game-specific rules. This include diplomacy/etc.
3. Real Player-to-Player diplomacy (bad example - DeeBo speech tone) and basic honor rules (gang banging on player without any proper reason, or like DoWing weak player which already been attacked by few players without proper reason)
4. No spoiling others (you can spoil yourself) and no metagaming (using ooc knowledge which according to game rules you would not know )
5. Respect to other's fun and time investment
6. Unless game stated as "Peaceful", expect more skirmishes and wars in MP than you could in SP. If you got rushed and lost, or your worker stolen/settler killed - complain to yourself for poor defence, you play vs Human , and they are smarter than AI and , by default, just can use opportunities in better way than AI could.

 

[EEE_BOY]

Interesting how a comment written in a jokingly manner can cause such a storm. I wrote purely to get some laughs. I'm well aware that war against Japan was inevitable and being on our own island (scouted most, if not all of it already) I wouldnt get any help anyway.

I'm sorry if I caused bad blood and I hope you will forget about it some day.

I knew you must be the trouble causer over there

 

[DeeBo]

Summary

GMR are very prolongated games. Players should follow certain rules which are:
1. specific game rules.

None were stated.

2. game-built mechanics, if not overrided by game-specific rules. This include diplomacy/etc.

I didn't break any in-game mechanics, which I take to mean hacking with the save file or something.

3. Real Player-to-Player diplomacy (bad example - DeeBo speech tone) and basic honor rules (gang banging on player without any proper reason, or like DoWing weak player which already been attacked by few players without proper reason)

Again, as there were no rules stated at the start of the game, I don't see I did anything wrong. And it's not "gang-banging". I was the only one to say I would POSSIBLY help Inca (but for all I know I'm half way across the map). India chimed in at said good luck but they couldn't help. That was all.

4. No spoiling others (you can spoil yourself) and no metagaming (using ooc knowledge which according to game rules you would not know )

Ah. See. Here's the big problem for you. YOU told everyone you had a bad start and YOU told everyone you were planning to go to war. Dumb move.

5. Respect to other's fun and time investment

Yea... like how we've been playing this game for a month and you just up and quit because of one comment I made. That ruins everyone's fun and time investment. I know I'm not the only one that hates leavers and IMO leaving is way worse than what I did.

6. Unless game stated as "Peaceful", expect more skirmishes and wars in MP than you could in SP. If you got rushed and lost, or your worker stolen/settler killed - complain to yourself for poor defence, you play vs Human , and they are smarter than AI and , by default, just can use opportunities in better way than AI could.

Of course I expect war. But those that wage war should be aware of diplomatic consequences. It's only natural to see one player waging and possibly winning wars and want to attack that player out of fear they grow too large and become a threat. It's also natural to seek allies with similar interests.

 

[DeeBo]

Anyway, I didn't post this to argue with you. What you have to say is irrelevant now that you just up and quit the game. I really want to know what is and what is not acceptable by the general community.

 

[Slvynn]

I didn't break any in-game mechanics, which I take to mean hacking with the save file or something.

you and more one player used (metagaming) information which is not accessible to you by game rules and threatened me. You promised help to civ which you didnt met , against civ you didn't met. At very start of the game. This deny Civ V mechanics diplomacy by very severe measure.

Again, as there were no rules stated at the start of the game, I don't see I did anything wrong. And it's not "gang-banging". I was the only one to say I would POSSIBLY help Inca (but for all I know I'm half way across the map). India chimed in at said good luck but they couldn't help. That was all.

It's not as simply as you state, the problem that you dont understand that you gangbang and force player against only possible ticket for him to exist, i am not talking about winning. Game barely started. 30 turns in Epic game. stating that i have no sense or chance, because anyways once we all met it will be 3 vs 1? It's the fair game to use OOC knowlege?
And its good diplomacy to have such tone as yours?

Ah. See. Here's the big problem for you. YOU told everyone you had a bad start and YOU told everyone you were planning to go to war. Dumb move.

Spoliling yourself is normal in GMR threads - check threads around, but as its friendly games ,noone will abuse that info and immidiately, like you for example, will force other player to something that will ruin all the sense of his game. Also i did said that because of my respect and friendliness towards Foffaren, if even didn't expected such development. I were able to keep silence, but is that case it would mean the same. I was straight, and explained, that given bad start and pure war civ, i forced by situation to aim for war game. Fair, friendly move. Not as "dumb" as your bad , not polite speech suggests.

Yea... like how we've been playing this game for a month and you just up and quit because of one comment I made. That ruins everyone's fun and time investment. I know I'm not the only one that hates leavers and IMO leaving is way worse than what I did.

I am sure, and i am sure that many players agree with me, that reasons are severe enough. Its not quick game, and you are not my wife , lol, and i dont owe you nothing. You talked bad, you have trouble of undrerstanding basics i trying to explain, therefore i wont invest my few-months game and GMR slot into playing with you. Also my plans were spoiled, and then few players already threaten me with alliance, just before anyone built their first worker... Does such game have sense? No

Of course I expect war. But those that wage war should be aware of diplomatic consequences. It's only natural to see one player waging and possibly winning wars and want to attack that player out of fear they grow too large and become a threat. It's also natural to seek allies with similar interests.

Before you ever meet both civs, in first turns of game, forcing players not to DoW just because you dont like wars (as you explained in the GMR posts) ? go say this to League Players (they will laugh on you), and go roll Japan, and dont play war games when you starting near to Inca - one of best economic carebear civs.

 

[tommynt]

GMR are very prolongated games. Players should follow certain rules which are:
1. specific game rules.
2. game-built mechanics, if not overrided by game-specific rules. This include diplomacy/etc.
3. Real Player-to-Player diplomacy (bad example - DeeBo speech tone) and basic honor rules (gang banging on player without any proper reason, or like DoWing weak player which already been attacked by few players without proper reason)
4. No spoiling others (you can spoil yourself) and no metagaming (using ooc knowledge which according to game rules you would not know )
5. Respect to other's fun and time investment
6. Unless game stated as "Peaceful", expect more skirmishes and wars in MP than you could in SP. If you got rushed and lost, or your worker stolen/settler killed - complain to yourself for poor defence, you play vs Human , and they are smarter than AI and , by default, just can use opportunities in better way than AI could.

sry this is just pure - your own opinion and by no means normal FFA rules.

There isnt a single game I can play where I dont get either called for being a "rusher" or "kill tommy or he ll kill all of us" or where not 1 of my neightbours tries be cool and anoy tommy - or shows me who is really the best and tries kill me.

But so what? Deal with it as i do.

 

[Slvynn]

sry this is just pure - your own opinion and by no means normal FFA rules.

There isnt a single game I can play where I dont get either called for being a "rusher" or "kill tommy or he ll kill all of us" or where not 1 of my neightbours tries be cool and anoy tommy - or shows me who is really the best and tries kill me.

But so what? Deal with it as i do.

i agree, simply you dont play GMR tommy, we are not talking just about general FFA, GMR are months-long games, and i remeber games with you, where you was unhappy (and very unhappy, i remember some Reinassance Ctons year or so ago! ) when people pre-emptitive ganged against you (i remember that, and thats true, and you complained, and alot, and you had sense, sorry for recalling it, tommy, but once you really got mad, and yes, you had your sense, perhaps partially because by that time you already was the winner, so ganging against the winner to deny his victory is much more normal and honorable, than to coup against player before game even starts properly.... and i remember you won that game, but game chat had some bad tone talk fights between you and some other player.... Perhaps now you adapted but i remember you never liked such gangs, even if they were end-game ones. And you always won them, perhaps one game i remember resulted in your loss because of such ganging, but again that was endgame ganging.
I just dont play in League anymore, because dont have time, and if i do , its usually in rare evenings when i am tired and not in mood for competitive score hardcore vs ones like you (Oh, i would not mind non-score game with you, didnt played League for long)

Dont say it wont/didnt annoy you? It will, as it did annoyed me , but allitle, and in polite form i mentioned that, and got quite bad tone speech back, which i dislike.
Everyone hardly built 1st worker in that game, and there months to go! months! before i will be able to actually conquer (if will be, probably will) the Incas, but people, without meeting just gang vs me.
Since its not quick game i could finish and forget, and forced into long game, which already have bad taste.
Do you like to play with non-adequate player? I do not.

Also, this list i posted IS my oppinion, but i think GMR players i play with (majority) will agree on it.
It's not league, Tommy, it's GMR. Months-long games.
This one was Epic Speed one. Means to build early worker it may take like 17 days of game process. I made request not to coordinate and bang so metagamingly - and got tons of bad tone and complains and offense towards myself back.
Do i have reasons to leave? yes. And i never quit in quick games, be it fast League games or NQ 8 h long games. This one wont deserve my slot. Adios, DeeBo

 

[michaeltrnka]

I assume that the one other player who was "gang-banging" you was me and for the record this is the one and only post I made on the matter.

India would like to wish the Incan people much success in this matter. But as for military aid... we can offer none. We are a peaceful people, not built for war or conquest. Take solace on your hilltops my Incan friend. It is there that you will find your victory. May a thousand blessings be upon you. -Mahatma Gandhi

I would like anyone to tell me that this is not role playing. I even signed it Gandhi. If Japan is a war mongering civ that must fight then India must have peace. If I can not use political pressure to prevent wars than how can I possibly win? I never played multi-player in other formats. If this type of politicking is frowned on in other formats I understand but I know that it is common in other formats to re-roll if someone roles India and you never asked me if I wanted a re-roll. I also know that cultural and diplomatic victorys are very rear in other multi-player formats. Maybe that is because there is not enough political pressure against warmongers.

I think you were wrong Sorc. I don't think you should have quit. Sometimes the world turns against you. I am in a game where the whole world is ganging up on me. It sucks, but you just have to try to turn it around. I am very close to you in another game and I would like to work with you in that game. Please don't grief me.

If you are going to quit for whatever reason I think you need to go into all your games and explain that to the players right now. For many people GMR opens up the first opportunity to play Civ as a multi-player game. They have no idea what is acceptable and what is not in other formats, and I don't necessarily think that those rules should apply to GMR. Sometimes a new format means new rules. We are all figuring that out together.

 

[The_J]

Ahem...
First, preemptively, the quoted parts from the ingame chart are tone wise clearly against our rules, and I hope that nobody reverts to that speech here.

Second: I'd suggest that somebody writes down some general diplo rules. At best 2 different types, depending on game type, so that you can link players, which don't belong to the regular player base, to it, so that they get a general overview.

 

[Slvynn]

I assume that the one other player who was "gang-banging" you was me and for the record this is the one and only post I made on the matter.



I would like anyone to tell me that this is not role playing. I even signed it Gandhi. If Japan is a war mongering civ that must fight then India must have peace. If I can not use political pressure to prevent wars than how can I possibly win? I never played multi-player in other formats. If this type of politicking is frowned on in other formats I understand but I know that it is common in other formats to re-roll if someone roles India and you never asked me if I wanted a re-roll. I also know that cultural and diplomatic victorys are very rear in other multi-player formats. Maybe that is because there is not enough political pressure against warmongers.

I think you were wrong Sorc. I don't think you should have quit. Sometimes the world turns against you. I am in a game where the whole world is ganging up on me. It sucks, but you just have to try to turn it around. I am very close to you in another game and I would like to work with you in that game. Please don't grief me.

If you are going to quit for whatever reason I think you need to go into all your games and explain that to the players right now. For many people GMR opens up the first opportunity to play Civ as a multi-player game. They have no idea what is acceptable and what is not in other formats, and I don't necessarily think that those rules should apply to GMR. Sometimes a new format means new rules. We are all figuring that out together.

I, again, 10th time will return
The style you play , i mean RP/India position - Is acceptable once you met ingame me and other civ, and once something happened.
Random mixing of call in ingame char and then using itfor something diplomatic is just "Metagaming" - please google for this term.

civ V game wise mechanics this was not correct, given we even didnt build our 1st worker in almost year long game, and you even did not met the civs you started diplomacy with. You may think its ok, but it is metagaming, and i POLITELY expressed that i dont like it, and such talks kill my interest, spoil my game, and even dont have sence, because there perhaps 1-2 months before our civs will get into contact, if not more.

This is already far from RP and denouncing and just RL/OOC gang bang versus certain player, before he actually done something and at bottom of score list.

Please understand all the issue from my point.

With you i have much less problem, because of polite speech, if any problem at all.....
Actually, player wise its all cool, in some games i might seem to be quite aggressive, but i may play very aggressively when i have fitting civ, or i may not.
I never quited game, ever before, and, 10th time i explaining reason of my quit - since GMR are very long games and not ones you can finish quickly and forget, but all the bad taste will be left for long, I just decided that i dont want to play that given game with such bad taste, and with DeeBo. I still have one other game with him, but i think we'll manage it somehow.
Many people played with me, and i played at NQ abit, and i always were holding to the last.
Bad tone, disrespect for GMR games are fatal, and dont forget - Player to player diplo is important too.
The main thing that i dont want to play game just for sake of it which feels not as friendly game

I agree with The_J
1. The tone of DeeBo was not proper, and that was main reason
2. We need several version of rules, and once game will start they will link the set of rules they will use.

What i propose is to be now more constructive, and actually build them.

 

[EEE_BOY]

I'm sorry if I caused bad blood and I hope you will forget about it some day.

This should be the only good example of 'rule', if any is needed. If anyone felt the discussion is escalated, first appologize to the intended party either privately or openly, before making things worse by further arguments.

There are plenty of smiley faces and icons to use, so it's simple to reverse the hostility that may be miscommunicated by words only. Such an example will be More creative use of emotions sometimes is even funny, like

 

[Slvynn]

hey i found proper smiley!

Spoiler :

Please, could we add it as official to the forum

 

[New Weird Order]

I must agree that the tone towards him was not polite, and did not help matters. He did not explain himself well, but he was in no way rude that I could tell. Trash talk is fun, but just plain mockery serves nobody and is quite unnecessary. Unfortunate incident which I have learned from. Good game everybody.

PS- Let's keep the games simple, with simple rules! With that said, Long GMR games are very different (I assume!, never played one!) from simultaneous turn games and will need their own SIMPLE diplomacy rules as indicated.

No hard feelings here. I too, just want to have fun in a fair manner. I understand your passion Sorc, and I admire it, but quitting is not the answer either. Good luck to you!

Let us also remember that English is not the first language of many players and must be considered a factor in all communications.

ALSO: NO MORE EPIC LENGTH GAMES FOR ME!!!

 

[Slvynn]

I must agree that the tone towards him was not polite, and did not help matters. He did not explain himself well, but he was in no way rude that I could tell. Trash talk is fun, but just plain mockery serves nobody and is quite unnecessary. Unfortunate incident which I have learned from. Good game everybody.

PS- Let's keep the games simple, with simple rules! With that said, Long GMR games are very different (I assume!, never played one!) from simultaneous turn games and will need their own SIMPLE diplomacy rules as indicated.

No hard feelings here. I too, just want to have fun in a fair manner. I understand your passion Sorc, and I admire it, but quitting is not the answer either. Good luck to you!

Thank you. I've told this before - i never quit before, but GMR , months long game are different and they simply require prolongated friendly feeling.
We have many games together NWO, and i am sure and hope we will have more.
Sorry for my leave, and i glad you understand my reasons. Your game is still good, and you have it running, may you enjoy it.

And, yes people, we need few rulesets.
Lets brainstorm!

 

[michaeltrnka]

Ahem...
First, preemptively, the quoted parts from the ingame chart are tone wise clearly against our rules, and I hope that nobody reverts to that speech here.

I hope you are talking about previous quotes from other players and you are not talking about my quote which you posted only a minute after which was:

India would like to wish the Incan people much success in this matter. But as for military aid... we can offer none. We are a peaceful people, not built for war or conquest. Take solace on your hilltops my Incan friend. It is there that you will find your victory. May a thousand blessings be upon you. -Mahatma Gandhi

 

[Slvynn]

ALSO: NO MORE EPIC LENGTH GAMES FOR ME!!!

@michael i am sure he talks about DeeBo quotes (few of many) i re-posted in the thread to explain one the main reasons of my

in this game