Coping with the Suicidal

[matildathehun]

In my experience, the suiciders are the ones that become frustrated with you, for whatever reason. Some people get mad when you (GASP!) actually attack them instead of getting entrenched. Others, well, you just rub them the wrong way as some have mentioned here. (Yep, that's happened in my case a few times...)

In one recent Casual, multi-player game, I sent two diplo truce requests, both of which were ignored. So, I attacked that border to consolidate my two positions into (a more defensible) one. That triggered a barrage of "you didn't have to attack me for no good reason" and ultimately a suicide. I wasn't exactly surprised, but it can be frustrating. We're not here to lie on the beach, are we? Isn't attacking neighbours and gaining more territory sort of the whole point of the game?

In any case, I've learned to consider the possibility of a suicide in certain situations, and plan accordingly. If I can absorb the hit, then I'm a little more cavalier than if I'm stretched too thinly. In that case, maybe it takes more diplomacy or a Plan B.

Is suiciding cheating? As others have mentioned here, probably not, technically speaking. Not very honourable though, and definitely the sign of a poor loser. But it is a part of the game in any case, and one that needs to be considered in certain situations.

 

[mkemBANNED]

Thanks to all for your excellent recommendations for countering the suicidal/homicidal maniacs: avoid them, attack them, wait them out
They either give up, or they are Banned by the administrators for other unsavory conduct. Insanity manifests itself in more than one behavior.

i have alzheimers and cannot remember what happened the day before.
So I can't play casual 24 hour. But sure seems like real good players and nice people in those games !!

So I play 4 player RT classic :

First - for fun - when the other players, the drop, the dice and the cards allow - but then, life is not neat either!

Second - for brain training
i) thinking develops brain cells

ii) psychology - correctly assessing how other players will react to your move is critical - helps to handle the interactions with normal and abnormal humans in other settings

iii) general knowledge - for example, thanks to Matilda for proper use of 'lie' on the beach - after you 'lay' the towel down!
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/lay-versus-lie

You learn something new everyday !! (on MC!!)

gl

mkem

 

[kenjoh]

Is suiciding cheating? As others have mentioned here, probably not, technically speaking. Not very honourable though, and definitely the sign of a poor loser. But it is a part of the game in any case, and one that needs to be considered in certain situations.

As a victim of a suicide twice in the last two weeks, I have given this some thought.

I think that if a suicide occurs in a game, the remaining experienced and honorable opponents should consider playing a side game whenever the suicide signicantly benefits one player over the other. Who should want to win because of the intentional interference in the normal flow of a game of the targeted and disrespectable play by one unruly opponent? Not me.

If the suicide is obvious but not complete, the side game should include the targeted player as well. Of course, the experienced and honorable players should immediately acknowledge the side game will be on and eliminate the opponent committing the suicide.

This seems to me to be a good way to deal with suiciders and suicide threats. Just as we have an unwritten rule about not ganging up in a three player game, I think we need this practise, or something like it, to discourage the few among us who would dishonor our games by going suicide, or even threatening it.

What do others think of this suggestion?

 

[riskyone]

As a victim of a suicide twice in the last two weeks, I have given this some thought.

I think that if a suicide occurs in a game, the remaining experienced and honorable opponents should consider playing a side game whenever the suicide signicantly benefits one player over the other. Who should want to win because of the intentional interference in the normal flow of a game of the targeted and disrespectable play by one unruly opponent? Not me.

If the suicide is obvious but not complete, the side game should include the targeted player as well. Of course, the experienced and honorable players should immediately acknowledge the side game will be on and eliminate the opponent committing the suicide.

This seems to me to be a good way to deal with suiciders and suicide threats. Just as we have an unwritten rule about not ganging up in a three player game, I think we need this practise, or something like it, to discourage the few among us who would dishonor our games by going suicide, or even threatening it.

What do others think of this suggestion?

I was just called untrustworthy. This by a player who threatens suicide on me. He is board with the game as I am and the third player also. I hate being threatened. I've done it once this year to namelochil in a game of 1984. I might have been in the wrong, but at least strategically it made sense. I would have been giving up a command that could then fire from a ship at my command. So I mentioned it in very strong language, but this is just a guy who is board and thinks it should be a two on one. I want no part of this. I don't have the morals to 2 on 1 someone. I offered suggestions for a solution but was rebuffed as untrustworthy. Sometime UDO'S bother me, because I would rather play the same quality players. Players who can beat me and I can sometimes beat them. Always fun. Sometimes you learn something. good conversation. ETC:vollkommenauf::vollkommenauf:

 

[TormentaBANNED]

Kenjoh your proposal seems fine but the problem i see is that it is often difficult to distinguish between suicide and strategy, i see a lot of suicides all the time and i would say the suicidals don't even know they're suiciding.

If we speak only about the suicidals who admit it, well there are times when it is justified and sometimes it isn't but they think it is.

I would say that the solution would be a harder punishment policy. Not necessarily a permanent ban (MC could lose some admins and TOs lol) but smaller ones like loss of rewards, temporary bans...

Maybe an scale of bad behaviour could be useful, sometimes filthy playing is clear for all but sometimes isn't.

 

[micky]

Honestly, I used to suicide as a newish player - as a desperate move kind of and hoping for the best - not knowing what an impact it would have on the game/players. No one ever told me but by reading threads in the forum I figured.
Ban from MC - even on a temporary basis seems very harsh to me. I would propose to give a warning of consequence (temporary ban) first.

 

[kenjoh]

Thanks for the input. I would like others to share as well, so we can maybe come up with a solution that is effective.

A warning or ban might help after the fact, but I would prefer a more immediate resolution. I feel bad winning a game mainly because 1 opponent went suicide on another. If a suicider does not eliminate his target, my honor tells me to elim the suicider and start a side game if someone benefits from the suicide (if it doesn't have much effect, like when the clear leader remains such, I would not expect a side game).

I would prefer to know that other honorable players would support me with this in a game if this comes up. I would support others now who call me on this if they are the victims of a suicider in my games. I don't think it should be dishonorable to gang up on a suicider. I would consider it a disciplinary action to protect the integrity of our games.

Yes, there are grey area concerns. Maybe we can address some here for guidance, but experienced and honorable should keep this method of resolution in mind during their games, I would suggest.

Isn't this a good way to take the power away from potential suiciders? And isn't that what we want to accomplish?

 

[Cardinalsrule]

I don't disagree with what you said, but the actions would have to be repeated and egregious before a ban would even be considered.

 

[namelochil]

I just read this whole thread. It's the first time I've nosed around in the forums in a while. I have some thoughts.


First, I don't think there's a solution to this suicide thing. I for one wouldn't be interested in a side game resolution. The only time I'm for a side game is when there's some sort of bug--like the dreaded "zero troop bug"--that affects the outcome of the game. And I'm only really in favor of side games in the context of a tournament or something. If it's just a regular game and something goes wrong, why play a "side game"? Why not just play, like, another game?


Second, yes, there are some poor players who get pissed and suicide for no good reason. And yeah, it sucks when they do it to you. But I think it's just part of the game. You have to be able to read your opponents and plan your strategy accordingly. If you figure out someone is a loose cannon, that's great! Simply think of a way to point the cannon at one of your other opponents! Look meek. Don't try to take a command. Write something tactful in the chatter to redirect his/her attention. The options are endless. If every opponent in every game was perfectly rational, the games would suck. It's the crazies that make the game fun and hard.


Third, I think some of this discussion is missing the forest for the trees. Most of us on this site play each other again and again and again. In this context, suiciding in a game is a terrible strategy for that particular game, but it may very well be a great strategy with future games in mind. Th-child--I think unintentionally--hinted at this in his comment earlier in the thread. He said there was a guy who kept attacking him in every game they played. So what did Th-child do? He started "going after" that guy in some games. After that, the guy stopped attacking him. It's sort of like the old adage about punching a bully in the nose. When a player pushes you too far and you suicide against her, she'll likely be warier about pushing you around in the next game you play together.


Finally, I think suicide can be a rational response to a slow death situation. Recently, I was playing a in huge doubles game and Player X was one of my opponents. His partner was dead and he was in a weak position. It was very clear that my team and another team were going to slowly eliminate him. So he suicided against the team that was doing the most damage to him. That doesn't seem dishonorable to me. It seems a perfectly reasonable response: "If you're going to keep attacking me even though you know I'm not a big threat at this moment, I'm going to come back at you right now with everything I have."

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Finally, I think suicide can be a rational response to a slow death situation. Recently, I was playing a in huge doubles game and Player X was one of my opponents. His partner was dead and he was in a weak position. It was very clear that my team and another team were going to slowly eliminate him. So he suicided against the team that was doing the most damage to him. That doesn't seem dishonorable to me. It seems a perfectly reasonable response: "If you're going to keep attacking me even though you know I'm not a big threat at this moment, I'm going to come back at you right now with everything I have."

I think that I actually SAID that in the chat as well as doing it, lol