Questions considering secret diplomacy

[Rodion]

1 - Is it allowed to give advice via PM to a player if I'm not playing a game?

2 - If I'm eliminated in a certain game (thus, I am not playing it anymore), can I give advice via PM to one of the remaining players?

[Darwins_Bane]

1 - Is it allowed to give advice via PM to a player if I'm not playing a game?

As far as i know this is fine to do.

2 - If I'm eliminated in a certain game (thus, I am not playing it anymore), can I give advice via PM to one of the remaining players?

This however I believe would fall under secret diplomacy.

[eddie2]

think of it another way if you were in the same game as him would you be allowd 2 babysit his account for that game. no you would not so there is your awnser.

[Rodion]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

[eddie2]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

because if it is a fog of war game and you help someone as soon as you are eliminated you are giving that player the advantage because you could see what they could not troop wise.

[Rodion]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

because if it is a fog of war game and you help someone as soon as you are eliminated you are giving that player the advantage because you could see what they could not troop wise.

Then consider a sunny game.

[eddie2]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

because if it is a fog of war game and you help someone as soon as you are eliminated you are giving that player the advantage because you could see what they could not troop wise.

Then consider a sunny game.

ok put it another way i guess the rule is there because of fog games. if they were 2 use it in a sunny game. they would have the escape cause 2 say they thought they were allowd so instead of saying fog only thy dont allow it full stop.

if you want 2 do this kind of thing why not consider team games that is allowd.

[squishyg]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

because you can benefit point-wise by helping a higher rank win. you'll lose less points.

[Rodion]

The thing about question 2 is I believe secret diplomacy involves using armies from two different colors (actually coordinating attacks, leaving 1 in their borders, sharing fog information etc) in order to achieve a "common" goal.

From the moment you're eliminated, you have no armies to help with. You're not part of that particular game anymore. What I'd like to know is if the fact that you played that game in the past should somehow prevent you from being able to advise someone, even though someone else that never joined that game can advise that person.

because you can benefit point-wise by helping a higher rank win. you'll lose less points.

Exactly! Is that reprovable?

[Fudoh]

didnt want to open a new thread so...

if you've openly declared a truce/alliance with someone in a standard game, so other people know you're working together, would discussing strategy in private be considered "secret diplomacy"? or does everything still need to be made public?

[drunkmonkey]

didnt want to open a new thread so...

if you've openly declared a truce/alliance with someone in a standard game, so other people know you're working together, would discussing strategy in private be considered "secret diplomacy"? or does everything still need to be made public?

Everything must be discussed publicly.

[Forza AZ]

because you can benefit point-wise by helping a higher rank win. you'll lose less points.

The only game type in which you don't benifit at all would be a Sunny Terminator game. There it won't matter who wins because you already lost your points.

So I think it should be allowed to sit for a player in such a game where you have already been eliminated. For all other gametypes, it shouldn't be allowed.

[ljex]

didnt want to open a new thread so...

if you've openly declared a truce/alliance with someone in a standard game, so other people know you're working together, would discussing strategy in private be considered "secret diplomacy"? or does everything still need to be made public?

Everything must be discussed publicly.

also in English

[Bruceswar]

didnt want to open a new thread so...

if you've openly declared a truce/alliance with someone in a standard game, so other people know you're working together, would discussing strategy in private be considered "secret diplomacy"? or does everything still need to be made public?

Everything must be discussed publicly.

also in English

Not true, just has to be in a lang everybody understands, though most times english.

[darth emperor]

because you can benefit point-wise by helping a higher rank win. you'll lose less points.

The only game type in which you don't benifit at all would be a Sunny Terminator game. There it won't matter who wins because you already lost your points.

So I think it should be allowed to sit for a player in such a game where you have already been eliminated. For all other gametypes, it shouldn't be allowed.

And not part of any tournament

didnt want to open a new thread so...

if you've openly declared a truce/alliance with someone in a standard game, so other people know you're working together, would discussing strategy in private be considered "secret diplomacy"? or does everything still need to be made public?

Everything must be discussed publicly.

also in English

Not true, just has to be in a lang everybody understands, though most times english.

Not true, English or a language everybody understand... if someone doesn't understand english, english is still allowed