round limit suiciders

[betiko]

here is an issue. You are about to win a game in round limit but you are not last to play. The last guy in action suicides on you when there has been absolutely nothing in game chat or on the board between you and that player. You even make him lose less points. How can you prevent this?
Round limit games are only fair in trench.

[Gilligan]

here is an issue. You are about to win a game in round limit but you are not last to play. The last guy in action suicides on you when there has been absolutely nothing in game chat or on the board between you and that player. You even make him lose less points. How can you prevent this?
Round limit games are only fair in trench.

Hate it when this happens. First to play in the last round of the game sucks.

[Swifte]

happened to me twice on BRs now so frustrating.

[betiko]

basically on this last game, we were 3 players left. red was last to play.

-me 51 troops
-blue 46 troops
-red drops and is at 47

he tries to trim us both, but the more he does it the further he is from victory. he heads towards my 10 stack and autos it. complete douchebag attitude. In those case, of course i try my luck, but if it doesn't work i will attack the guy that would ve lost either way to give back the victory to the guy who deserved it.
I had a very similar situation in my conquer cup semi finals. the guy tried his luck; saw he couldn t make it, and as he knew i deserved the victory as i had the most troops before his go, reballanced things. I think this is fair play etiquette.
Another thing is to suicde on the guy who's been a douche on the board and gamechat; you get what you deserve and I can understand. But with the guy you never had any problems with??

[rhp 1]

basically on this last game, we were 3 players left. red was last to play.

-me 51 troops
-blue 46 troops
-red drops and is at 47

he tries to trim us both, but the more he does it the further he is from victory. he heads towards my 10 stack and autos it. complete douchebag attitude. In those case, of course i try my luck, but if it doesn't work i will attack the guy that would ve lost either way to give back the victory to the guy who deserved it.
I had a very similar situation in my conquer cup semi finals. the guy tried his luck; saw he couldn t make it, and as he knew i deserved the victory as i had the most troops before his go, reballanced things. I think this is fair play etiquette.
Another thing is to suicde on the guy who's been a douche on the board and gamechat; you get what you deserve and I can understand. But with the guy you never had any problems with??

solution... *waving hand*

don't play round limit games if it can be helped... dumbest addition to the site thus far... only makes sense in a very limited amount of settings...

[waltero]

I guess my earlier posting was deleted due to the memory loss that CC suffered.

In short...you are not thinking correctly.

Quote:In those case, of course i try my luck, but if it doesn't work i will attack the guy that would ve lost either way to give back the victory to the guy who deserved it.

Who does that!
Think again.

[betiko]

I guess my earlier posting was deleted due to the memory loss that CC suffered.

In short...you are not thinking correctly.

Quote:In those case, of course i try my luck, but if it doesn't work i will attack the guy that would ve lost either way to give back the victory to the guy who deserved it.

Who does that!
Think again.

enlighten me, private! so you are the last to play, try some trims and have let's say 30 troops left, the other 2 have 35 and 34, you are done. The guy who has now 34 was the guy leading before you started your turn and your dice didn't work. Yes, killing 2 troops from the guy who is at 35 is the best way to end for fair play. think again!

and rhp: you don't play enough game types, that's your problem. multiplayer games whatever the spoils can often end in stalements; that's why round limits were created.

[waltero]

Why is it every time anybody gets pummeled, he gets pummeled by a suicide freak.
I have seen it and experienced it numerous times...you win a game even though you are referred to, as a suicider (while in game).

@betiko, Looks like the player was going for the win.

So who is referring to him as a suicidal freak? The guy who he had to break or the guy who won the game.
Then you believe he has to suicide against the winner to put the game back in your favor, thereby being called a suicidal freak by the other player.
And if he had attempted to put the game back in order, being unsuccessful...what then? He is now considered a suicidal freak by the both of you.


It is not suicide, if you eliminate an opponent.
It is not suicide, if you hurt an opponent for no apparent reason.
It is not suicide, when you 'Don't' put the game back in balance.

The only time suicide is relevant, is when a player Eliminates himself purposely.
If a player Declares Himself to Suicide against you, then it ''might'' be considered suicide!

Everybody, just stop with all this suicide Crap. It makes you sound like a sore loser and foolish.

I had posted a detailed answer to this post earlier. It was lost by CC.

I do not feel the need to do it again.
Understand that when a player attempts (goes for the win) to win...he is not likely going to figure out a way (or even care) to put (you) the original guy back in the lead...much less Suicide (as you so call it) on anybody in order to do so.

Good Day