Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea
| |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Mon, 28 August 2006 14:13 |
|
joseph | | Lt. Junior Grade | Messages: 440
Registered: May 2003 Location: Bristol | |
|
Ok - I really have to step in here.
(obviously to cover my own honor, but I will come to that later).
First the others
Ducks "Backstabbing" Brutes (Me), this came about due to a miscommunication. I was stomping Ducks when the player took over.
He said "Leave me alone and I will give you 2 things"
I said "Give me 3 things and I will stop attacking you and instigate a 5 year NAP"
He said "Give me one of my planets back and leave me alone and I will give you 3 things and more things in the future"
I accepted and assumed that we had a NAP, he accepted and assumed we didnt.
Later he attacked me - I was very cross , he was worried about his reputation. We emailed back and forth, decided it was genuine misunderstanding and agreed not to mention it further - which is why I think its a bit unfair to bring it up now.
Note we are still at war to this day (but I do not consider him a backstabber! I will however read emails from him carefully )
Second
Steve (Tribbles) this is easy. One of the rules is that every 10 years 1&2nd place are published and any treaties between them are voided - and they cant make any treaties.
This happened between you and Steve in 2480, in 2481 he attacked you. This is not only honest it is in fact encouraged by the rules.
Finally Me (Joseph, Brutes)
We did indeed have a 5 year NAP, at some point in the past you also asked for the removal of all my ships from your worlds.
Due to you allegidly "Backstabbing" the Breads, I set you to neutral. This was to stop you gating fleets into my worlds (as others have pointed out on this thread sitting with pants down invites a kicking and you had just been accused of using your foot).
I am aware, that one of my fleets has encountered and destroyed one of yours, this was not as such intentional. I had intended to use Witter to refuel that fleet so that it could continue to further Duck worlds (and bomb them)
- for those not playing in the game Witter belongs to my ally the Breads and did have a big Star Base - (its now a smoking ruin due to Vegi bombers so I am glad that I have some fuel transports in the fleet or it would be moving slowly now.)
You will notice that NONE of my other fleets targeted any of yours, none of your minelayers around my worlds were targeted (and I have a few sweepers in the area that are clearing it of Duck mines and layers) and NONE of your worlds were attacked.
The only other attacks were of scouts orbiting worlds of mine where I happened to have armed ships, and these were a side effect of setting you to neutral.
(For those of you interested - I have sent an email to the Breads actually the Vegies informing them that in 2486 I will be attacking their worlds and fleets)
I dont see this as a backstab - I see it as making sure the area near my back was cleared of knives (and an unfortunate diplomatic incident due to me thinking Witter was still a friendly star).
It being a bank holiday here all I really had time to do when I heard that the "Pricklies were Backstabbers" was change a setting friend to neutral and upload again.
Joseph
EDIT - changed who I sent the email to telling them I was attacking them - the Brutes are an unsubtle race not known for patience or good eyesight
[Updated on: Tue, 29 August 2006 10:52]
Joseph
"Can burn the land and boil the sea. You cant take the Stars from me"Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Mon, 28 August 2006 15:25 |
|
|
Quote: | Without an explicit treaty there can't be a backstab can there?
| If you have friend status and use such to a) gate in large forces, or b) get by many minefields, some may consider that a backstab (it is a grey area). Gating in would likely be seen as worse of 2.
Backstab comes from real life idea of stabbing someone from behind who trusts you.
...
One style of playing coming from an old warmonger strategy page was called "honourable warmonger". Since warmonger lacks minefields, he doesn't want unexpected extra wars, and he prefers one on one wars where his advantages work best. So he tries to manipulate the games diplomacy style so that all wars are like gentlemens duels... two insult each other and meet at a specific time and fight it out. Anyone not playing nice duel with warning is considered dishonorable and punished by the gentlemen.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Mon, 28 August 2006 15:56 |
|
vonKreedon | | Lieutenant | Messages: 610
Registered: March 2003 Location: Seattle, WA USA | |
|
multilis wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 12:25 |
Quote: | Without an explicit treaty there can't be a backstab can there?
| If you have friend status and use such to a) gate in large forces, or b) get by many minefields, some may consider that a backstab (it is a grey area). Gating in would likely be seen as worse of 2....
|
To my mind, if I set you to Friend without a well thought out and written treaty then I am inviting trouble. There would be no backstabbing if you gated in a fleet, really there would have to be some significant in-game reasons for you to not take the opportunity I handed to you.
Further, even with a treaty it is incumbent on me to keep a wary eye on my allies because, assuming Sole Victory condtions, at some point my allies are likely to become my enemies.
[Updated on: Mon, 28 August 2006 15:59] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Tue, 29 August 2006 05:05 |
|
m.a@stars | | Commander | Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004 Location: Third star to the left | |
|
PricklyPea wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 19:11 | The earlier Dukk 'backstab' against brutes (although later determined that no NAP was actually in force).
|
Possible nitpicking here, but those two races were never friends to start with. Their peaceful coexistence was always a tight balancing act and neither had reason to trust too much the other.
Quote: | Brutes (Joseph) against Veggies: breaking a 3/5 year NAP (can't remember the exact terms);
|
Of course you can't.
But the Brutes, unlike you, are my faithful allies and battle partners, and, unlike you, can choose to honor our covenant, that is, defending each other against all comers, and might even consider that by backstabbing me, you backstabbed them, too, double backstabber!
Quote: | Tribbles (Steve) against Veggies: breaking a 10 year NAP.
|
Strictly by game rules, it seems. Though I can understand them actually *wanting* to attack you.
Quote: | I actually was wondering how to deal with this NAP since Tribbles being a 4% HE with 25/3/25 mines would soon be unstoppable as a race and giving notice would give too much warning
|
So, theirs was a "preventive backstab" by your book, then?
[Updated on: Tue, 29 August 2006 06:37]
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Tue, 29 August 2006 05:32 |
|
m.a@stars | | Commander | Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004 Location: Third star to the left | |
|
PricklyPea wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 19:03 | I'll have to check my email when I get back, but I remember sending it to both Dukks and Breads as both had no official treaty in place.
|
Well? Did you find it?
Funny to think that all this time you were stringing me up and readying my funeral you were afraid of my attacking you!
Quote: | That was the turn immediately after I saw the freighters being 'disabled'
|
Disabled? How? By Jove I want to know that trick!
Also, how do you manage to automate packet-stealing freighters in the 1st place?
Quote: | free reign over my gates for 6 turns while I was away so I switched breads to neutral.
|
Not even your allies? How sad.
Besides, as our host carefully arranged and explained, you were to skip just ONE turn.
Quote: | I thought it was a clever move and much more subtle than shooting down the freighters. I'm not sure what other valid explanation there was for moving 1200kt of minerals to my packet catching freighters.
|
Subtle? Sending my ships in plain view to rendez-vous with yours?
Worse, these were pop-carrying freighters, slated for the colonies you so "generously" allowed the Breads to take near your border. Your scanners should have picked all the pop liftings and droppings... if you had bothered to check.
Quote: | I did consult with another stars player about that manoever so I hope it wasn't all dream
|
And he also thought it was a clever move to send unarmed valuable freighters to mess with packet-catching fleets very possibly protected by cloaked no-nonsense skirmishers?
Quote: | >same as you say you did when another race attacked another different race.
Not sure what you're talking about here.
|
You say the Duck attack on the Brutes alarmed you so much you decided to actually write down that vaporware treaty you had conned me into believing we had. Yet you claim you watched a dangerous, clever, subtle move of mine against your 1st line of defense and you didn't bother to wake up your diplomats for it? Awww, c'mon!
...
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | | |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Tue, 29 August 2006 09:47 |
|
|
Quote: | You lucky you don't have stargates in real life
|
Real life I believe it was famous murders that helped coin the metaphor such as Julius Caeser. A number of rulers got the stab including from their own kids. There are also famous stories from Shakespeare's Macbeth to tales about Siegfried the Volsung (including a Wagner opera).
...
Some people get angry if you insult their mother, some for being called chicken, in Ptol's case I know he gets angry over a "cheater". I don't know details but assume the debate was over whether his actions were intentional or an accidental triggering of unknown bug.
[Updated on: Tue, 29 August 2006 10:03] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Tue, 29 August 2006 11:33 |
|
vonKreedon | | Lieutenant | Messages: 610
Registered: March 2003 Location: Seattle, WA USA | |
|
m.a@stars wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 02:09 |
vonKreedon wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 16:04 | MA - I note that you are not claming that there was an NAP in place. Without an explicit treaty there can't be a backstab can there?
|
That is because I, as replacement player, have absolutely no proof of any treaties signed nor their special clauses.
I just found two races set up as "friend" when I opened the 1st m file, I asked them both if we were allied, and they both said "yes".
|
I'd say you did not perform your due diligence in this matter. Simply being told that you are allied without being provided with the text of the treaty is like the proverbial verbal agreement being worth the paper its written on. When I take over a race I at the least insist that supposed allies provide me with the text of the alliance, if I know that the race I'm taking has allies. If I'm taking over the race blind then I simply broadcast that all treaties are now null and void, and invite players to open communications on establishing new treaties.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | |
Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea |
Tue, 29 August 2006 22:17 |
|
|
Quote: | I'd say you did not perform your due diligence in this matter.
|
imo it is more of miscalculation of another party. Diplomacy includes trying to sense what motivates the other parties.
With some you want careful legal rules of conduct, others you may actually do better without, they will treat you as a higher level of relationship based on trust compared to those they see as lawyers. That doesn't mean you won't go to war but that war will be a funny negotiated thing that keeps both parties happy.
Effort always goes into risk management... trying to minimize damage done if backstabbed. No treaty is ever sure thing.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 05:16:13 EDT 2024
|