PlanetsCentral

Guys, you definitely remember this is the party where all play on their own. No cooperation. No intelligence data exchange. No conversation. Noone but yourself.

And we definitely should trust you.

No doubt.

What do you mean? Could you explain in detail?

What do you mean? Could you explain in detail?

I am confused, too....

the Russians call it "throwing shit on the fan"

Ok Zergio, apparently you are accusing Fed and Lizard of cooperating. If you have any prove or indication for this I suggest to send a message to Stefan for further research. Shouting it from the rooftops ain't the perfect way to handle it

Cheers,
Mike

Hi everyone,

if you think something is wrong, please say so clearly (in PM, maybe, but clearly).

Regarding the no-cooperation rule, I'd like to point out that there's three levels of racial relations:

• FRIENDLY. "You got cool ships, let's trade." - "Let's pool our resources to plunder a third party." - "Can you lay minefields in my name?"
• NEUTRAL. "I would have liked this planet, but you were faster, so I retreat." - "You are scouting my territory, but if you retreat I won't mind." - "I do not attack you (yet) because I'm busy attacking someone else."
• HOSTILE. "If you even look at my planets, I'll shoot you down." - "I want this planet, so I will get it."

(I had written a similar statement here a while ago.)

North Star/Lupus disallow FRIENDLY. But you are of course allowed to be NEUTRAL. You do not need to nuke every outpost you encounter.

Given that this game is at turn five, I find it hard to diagnose full-alliance-level cooperation from an outside point of view, because at that time, you won't encounter anything other than outposts.

--Stefan

--Stefan

thanks for the clarification

What do you mean? Could you explain in detail?

Oh, yeah, its easy! The races 1, 2 and 9 (according to this party numeration) ALWAYS play as one. Literally always. I've found curious when one of them holds the TRN waiting for smth (or smbd), and the reason I suggested looks quite reasonable. That's great if I succeed to highlight this, and mentioned gentlemen will show not any reason for doubts.

In general, I faced two stable teams more (besides the one above) here. Another one is current 3+8 and also the guys not playing here. I hope it is not a secret for anyone. Just recall.

Long live the fair play!

so you're actually accusing me of foul play? be kind - give proof or apologize!

so you're actually accusing me of foul play? be kind - give proof or apologize!

Ha-ha, you're funny! You'll get apologies to the end of the party (unless you confirm my suspicion earlier). Once more: long live the fair play!

Hi guys,

please relax. Two things to note:

(a) This is a game. We're not fighting for life and death. I'm not giving out fancy money prices at the end. Heck, I'm not even giving out T-shirts. It's only virtual internet points.

(b) This is a MULTIPLAYER game. It is a give and take: other players do their best to make it a legit challenge to you, so you should also do your best to make it a legit challenge to them. Otherwise, they won't come back, regret their decisions, and you'll have no-one to play against.

Although I stated rules, those rules are of course subject to interpretation. Please, don't try to bend them too much.

I have checked the turn log files and didn't find anything conspicuous. Of course this could mean that the accused players are just too clever, but I consider it more likely that there's nothing conspicuous happening.

--Stefan

This is a game. We're not fighting for life and death.

Thank you for the clarification - next time I really would appreciate a (high) moneyprize - or at least a Tshirt... *duck*

Anyway, you cannot prevent any coopertation unless all ships are set to "kill" and all planets to "nuk" - so let's have fun and play, like you want.

If you want to attack (everybody) - do so.

If you want to stay away and attack somebody else, well its fine.

Even if you do not want to attack at all its fine for me, but maybe boring for the player(s).

But as far as I see: Do not negotiate peace, ships and strategy - mostly everything happens on the field anyway and can be seen by everybody.

So please do not heat up - stay cool and enjoy the game.

Quapla

in this game there is one neighbor who raised the topic and has already shown aggression against me. and it will be a war to the death. there is another neighbor - whom I could have attacked but did not - this is a hint that I do not want to fight with him. whether he accepts this offer or not is his problem. but the one who attacked me will have problems now. and if the second neighbor does not attack me, he may not have any problems until the end of the game. everyone chooses for himself.

Interesting thread. I never played a non-alliance series and always wondered how it works. However, my perception was that these kind of games limit cooperation only w.r.t. disabeling certain functionalities that ease collaboration. I never thought this meant "NO COOPERATION FOR REAL". Funny though, can´t imagine this works without any means to enforce it.

Terraner

in fact, the description of the game is: A classic game with no alliances: standard ship list, Echo Cluster.

No alliances, thats it. The rest is up to our perception what that means. Additionally, the transfer of planets and ships is prohibited.

Snouka, I appreciate the reply. "prohibited" is what is causing my confusion. Even though easy transfer by command is disabled there are other ways to "donate" ships/planets.

in fact, the description of the game is: A classic game with no alliances: standard ship list, Echo Cluster.

No alliances, thats it. The rest is up to our perception what that means. Additionally, the transfer of planets and ships is prohibited.

I think the intention of the Lupus series is the same as in the North Star series---not only "no alliance", but also "no cooperation" as Stefan put it above.

Does trading ships constitute a form of cooperation?

I think the intention of the Lupus series is the same as in the North Star series---not only "no alliance", but also "no cooperation" as Stefan put it above.

Does trading ships constitute a form of cooperation?

Yes. See my post above.

Please, show some sportsmanship. This is not a rule-bending contest. It says "no cooperation", so contacting other players to coordinate complex operations like a ship trade should be off-limits, even if it is not technically forbidden.

Honestly, how would that even work? I do not want to infest your computers with trojans that scan your emails for "forbidden" communication. And I do not want to bury each of you in a bunker for the duration of a game.

Some things are forbidden even if there is no technical prevention. Taking your neighbours package from their porch is theft, even if they didn't put up a guard or camera.

On the other hand, the neutral area is a wide field. If you accidentally capture a freighter with your outpost, but want to remain on neutral terms, of course, go send it back. If your neighbour needs fuel and refueling them is the better option than them invading you and taking the fuel by force, go ahead. Just apply common sense: would this make us allies forever, or is that just a one-time action to keep the game (and your fights at the other edge of your empire) flowing. Be egoistic.

And, finally, if you think rule interpretation (or game configuration) should be different, say so! With the current software abilities, I believe the interpretation I sketched above simply works best. We could increase the level of non-cooperation a bit with truly anonymous games, but even then, nothing would prevent you from outing yourself "hey, I'm the Lizard".

--Stefan