#Hall of Lame

[bold wing]

I would say go ahead and add me to the list. While I agree with you in principle, my experience and the scoring system would disagree with you. When it comes down to final 3, lets say you and I both have 50 troops, and player C has 100. My hope, and my earlier method of play would be that you and I would be at least neutral with each other and work towards eliminating player C. But in my experience, the vast majority don't/won't do that and will instead try to kill me at their earliest convenience. So for me, as soon as I see that you're not willing to get in and work against the 3rd player, experience has shown me that I need to kill you before you kill me.

[stray meteor]

I agree with @bold wing . This isn’t the board game. There is indeed a 2nd place. And it’s better than 3rd. Sometimes it’s not worth the risk of 3rd to try and go for the win. But it’s a video game, play it however you want to have fun. I just don’t agree with making a public post calling out players who don’t play the game exactly how you want

[bold wing]

Well said Ace thanks for the additional context. I'll just add that often times also (just had one of these games literally right now) it came down to 3 of us and one player just kept attacking me and breaking bonuses and refused to work together while the third player kept growing and an active bot kept poking around. So guess what? I took my chance, killed the annoying player who clealry wasn't going to win and I killed the bot to make sure I got 2nd place. I'll do it EVERY time in those circumstances.

[stray meteor]

What makes a good player is knowing how to maximize their position. And sometimes that means going from what should have been 3rd or 4th, and turning it into 2nd exactly as you did

[undone trout]

I agree and disagree. I think you should always play for first place, even if it means taking a risk (= game name). This just glorifies teaming to get second place in games, which is not the goal of the game. But I do agree that making a post to call out players is inappropriate and kind of dishonorable. People play the way they want and see the game how they want. Nobody has any say in what's a right or wrong play in any scenario, but they can give their opinion about what they think shouldn't be acceptable. So I agree with you that calling out names is a no-go, in my opinion.

[bold wing]

Always? Not up to a point? No possible times where it's just not feasable? Never in a situation where you have 20, I have 20 and the only other player left has say, 200? You're still saying in that situation you are somehow going to try and "win" the game?

[stray meteor]

Agree again. I will always go for the win when I think I even have a remote chance. But sometimes that’s just not possible like the scenario you describe. Or when the board has turned against you and the two other players are allies. Sometimes you just can’t win

[undone trout]

You never know if the big player bots out for any reason. Killing the other player might then be an attempt at getting first by then 1v1 ing the big bot. I honor the game principle and the people in game. I know the other person wouldn't want to get suicided and getting 3rd while they still had a very slight chance at winning. 😉 But it's always nice to see some other views on this regard. I appreciate you for having this exciting discussion with me and Ace.

[short sedge]

This isn't a public message board for calling out individual player's strategies, or suspected cheating, or for any other reason - we'd not be letting someone host your name in a player list called #stupid players because of a failed kill, why do you think this would be allowed to stay up?