Conquer Club

one of my opponents in game 522738 announced in chat that he "gave up on this game" then the next turn went suicide on me.

he had no way to take me completely out and get my cards.

I'm not big on giving negative feedback . . . so I am asking for opinions.

I wouldn't consider negative feedback except for his comments right before he went postal

by the way, i was not the strongest player, not even close. It was highly unlikely that I would have won that game.

opinions please?

what say you?

neutral or negative, it's up to you, and thanks for reminding me. I was in a similar situation recently.

In game 567332 it was just a constant buildup game but the red started to suicide. I knew he was gonna suicide on my so I kept all my troops in siam with ones reaching all the way to SA and NA. Heh. That won me the game. There was no way he could damage my stack at all and since he took out the ones I could use it to take him out and win.

He got a positive for that. Ahhh good game.

kwanton wrote:In game 567332 it was just a constant buildup game but the red started to suicide. I knew he was gonna suicide on my so I kept all my troops in siam with ones reaching all the way to SA and NA. Heh. That won me the game. There was no way he could damage my stack at all and since he took out the ones I could use it to take him out and win.

He got a positive for that. Ahhh good game.

Thanks for stepping on my thread with your irrelevant story that didn't even include an answer to my question!

thanks again!

kwanton wrote:In game 567332 it was just a constant buildup game but the red started to suicide. I knew he was gonna suicide on my so I kept all my troops in siam with ones reaching all the way to SA and NA. Heh. That won me the game. There was no way he could damage my stack at all and since he took out the ones I could use it to take him out and win.

He got a positive for that. Ahhh good game.

Ah. That's a sweet story! I love it when a prediction like that actually turns out to be correct. There's a thread in Strategy on how to beat build-up players, perhaps you've found the perfect way? Patience. Try to invoke CC-rage in one of your opponents. All you need to do is to predict who will crack first, and take measures accordingly.

alstergren wrote:

kwanton wrote:In game 567332 it was just a constant buildup game but the red started to suicide. I knew he was gonna suicide on my so I kept all my troops in siam with ones reaching all the way to SA and NA. Heh. That won me the game. There was no way he could damage my stack at all and since he took out the ones I could use it to take him out and win.

He got a positive for that. Ahhh good game.

Ah. That's a sweet story! I love it when a prediction like that actually turns out to be correct. There's a thread in Strategy on how to beat build-up players, perhaps you've found the perfect way? Patience. Try to invoke CC-rage in one of your opponents. All you need to do is to predict who will crack first, and take measures accordingly.

So when a player announces that he has given up on the game, pulls all of his armies off of his continent, then blows them up the next turn after saying "I gave up on this game", there should be no negative feedback for that?

If that's the consensus view, then fine...I'll leave him on my ignore list and skip the feedback....future opponents will have to discover his idiocy on their own.

Because going postal on someone is part of the game, I tend to leave a neutral feedback
and just say, HE GAVE UP and CIDED to end his game.

If you feel really pissed about it give him a negative and say the same.
It sucks when players announce they've had enough and cide...
unless you've been an ass and earned their attention.

oVo wrote:Because going postal on someone is part of the game, I tend to leave a neutral feedback
and just say, HE GAVE UP and CIDED to end his game.

If you feel really pissed about it give him a negative and say the same.
It sucks when players announce they've had enough and cide...
unless you've been an ass and earned their attention.

don't think I did anything to rile him up...I was behind from the very beginning of the game and had to play very conservatively to stay in it..I managed to slowly work my way up to nearly third place...i hadn't attacked or even been near this guy all game..suddenly he pulls 80 or so armies off his continent and piles them up in russia after posting
"he gave up", then the next turn blew them up...I happened to be th eone he chose to blow up against.

yeah, that's part of the game, losing players will do stupid shit...

he's a dumbass and now is ignored...now I move on to find the next dumbass..

he'll get his feedback...maybe negative, maybe neutral...we'll see.

that's what feedback is for...to warn other players...and other players need to be warned about what they are getting into when they sit with him...that's all...I'm giving feedback for the other members...not because i'm pissed at the guy.

string - Dunno...

Whether or not leaving feedback is up to you. I really don't have an opinion. Personally, I haven't left any neg. feedback, don't bother. I don't read feedback before joining a game anyway, so I don't expect anyone else to read what I left.

Guess it depends on how strongly you feel about suicide attacks. I never seen it as a problem, it happens (at least in my games) to seldom. Dunno.

well, you will always have suicides...and honestly, when there is no longer a chance of winning the game, i can see taking a shot at the player who took you out most of the way..after all you don't want to wimp out an just go lie down...this is a war game and I want the reputation that if you decide to take me out you better finish me off because I will make you pay...i want that reputation...


there is a huge difference between that and just popping off on a random player because you give up...a huge difference...

I don't want that sort of pussy quitter in my games...

now if i do something stupid and fail to finish you off and you decide to make sure I don't win...that is entirely appropriate..

again..there is a huge difference

Lol i was that player in game 522738.If you had any idea what was going on in the game,you might of understood why i deployed where i did.It does'nt help when some idiot wants to stack there main deployment in line of where i was going.If you studied the game as it was going,red was building up & had set of 5 cards.Which meant 55+ armies for 3-5 of those cards.So my deployment in the place it was put was to try & disrupt reds possible build up.Which would of been a grave threat to me.It was obvious that red would of went for me & depleted my force to the extent of having few or being wiped out of the game.It did'nt help when you Stringbeany,put your main deployment in my path.It was quite obvious i could'nt go back or attack someone else.The game was ended there,when you,put your deployment there.So there was only one thing i could do.Attack you.Which ended in you throwing your dummy out of the pram.Anyway it's pretty sad when someone needs to come here to talk about some thing like this in game.It's quite obvious actually,this is done to make me look bad.Go ahead give me a negative feed back.I think the people in the game & any one else that wishes to study the game log.Will decide that i had no choice but to attack red,but some one decided to put there main deployment in front of me.Anyway i would look @ your feed back,before you start to talk about someone else on here.Your negative(Which was'nt given by me)is very much similar situation than the game we played.Basically you threw your dummy out of the pram.
Anyway this will be last i say on the matter.Give me a negative if you please,i really dont care.

Jaleb, why could you just not attack that turn, since string was probably in red's way as well?

Jaleb wrote:Lol i was that player in game 522738.If you had any idea what was going on in the game,you might of understood why i deployed where i did.It does'nt help when some idiot wants to stack there main deployment in line of where i was going.If you studied the game as it was going,red was building up & had set of 5 cards.Which meant 55+ armies for 3-5 of those cards.So my deployment in the place it was put was to try & disrupt reds possible build up.Which would of been a grave threat to me.It was obvious that red would of went for me & depleted my force to the extent of having few or being wiped out of the game.It did'nt help when you Stringbeany,put your main deployment in my path.It was quite obvious i could'nt go back or attack someone else.The game was ended there,when you,put your deployment there.So there was only one thing i could do.Attack you.Which ended in you throwing your dummy out of the pram.Anyway it's pretty sad when someone needs to come here to talk about some thing like this in game.It's quite obvious actually,this is done to make me look bad.Go ahead give me a negative feed back.I think the people in the game & any one else that wishes to study the game log.Will decide that i had no choice but to attack red,but some one decided to put there main deployment in front of me.Anyway i would look @ your feed back,before you start to talk about someone else on here.Your negative(Which was'nt given by me)is very much similar situation than the game we played.Basically you threw your dummy out of the pram.
Anyway this will be last i say on the matter.Give me a negative if you please,i really dont care.

wow...what a completely irrational rant.

I'm glad you are done speaking. I will do as you say and post the negative feedback so other players know that you are unable to make rational decisions and are likely to behave irrationally at any time in your games.

OK I've posted your negative feedback. Let's see if you can refrain from posting retaliatory feedback. I have my doubts.

flame his ass

He hasn't the ability to construct a coherent flame. He's welcome to try though. When he's done I'll fix it for him.

-Rational Process Rocks-