Conquer Club

I often set up large flat rate or no cards speed games. These games probably average around two and a half to three hours in length. It is not unusual for a player to be unable to finish such a speed game and the question is sometimes asked about whether the other players would prefer them to suicide or just deadbeat.

Personally, I prefer them to deadbeat.

Yet a lot of players suicide in these situations (often without asking for opinions).

I've given you four options in the poll and assuming I have set it up properly, a big assumption for one as computer-illiterate as I, I would like you to choose one option.

My own opinion is that players should ALWAYS deadbeat in these situations as any suiciding (even the supposed sharing it out) warps the game far more than just leaving neutrals on the board. I would also like to see a 'no suiciding' unwritten rule in CC.



Mr C

It's most honorable to spell it without a "u".

Voted for deadbeat.

Deadbeat, all the time.......

If a player suicides without asking for permission (or even with permission) i believe it ruins the game for everyone, especially the person who takes the attack from the suicide.

TFoote wrote:It's most honorable to spell it without a "u".

Voted for deadbeat.

America raped a beautiful language...

Deadbeating would be best, perhaps move armies to some remote corner if players agree that would be best for game balance.

I think the poll results speak for themselves.

I generally move to a little used corner and get out of everyone's way. I declare that I'm doing it and where I'm going as far in advance as possible though so everyone knows what's going on.

PS. Splitting off topics rants to their own thread.

Neither .... the MOST honorable is to find an account sitter.

But, if you really cannot ... then just deadbeat. I am of two minds as to whether it is best to give warning (when you know in advance), because you could affect play of players close to your turn more than those more "remote" ??? An apology afterward is ALWAYS appropriate ... either in game, if still on-going, or by PM if over.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Neither .... the MOST honorable is to find an account sitter.

He said in a speed game and it is usually very difficult to find an account sitter for a speed game unless you know someone...

PLAYER57832 wrote:Neither .... the MOST honorable is to find an account sitter.

But, if you really cannot ... then just deadbeat. I am of two minds as to whether it is best to give warning (when you know in advance), because you could affect play of players close to your turn more than those more "remote" ??? An apology afterward is ALWAYS appropriate ... either in game, if still on-going, or by PM if over.

Account sitters for speed games? I hadn't thought of that...

It seems the forum consensus is that it is best to deadbeat. Twill's way (and thanks for seperating my thread) is actually probably the best thing to do, but it involves an intelligence beyond the kind of player who joins a 5 player flat rate speed game and is shocked to find it lasting more than 9 rounds. This happened in my game today and the player opted to spread his suiciding out fairly randomnly.

I wonder if anyone agrees with me that suiciding should possibly become against the rules. As in if you do it, you might find yourself being written up in the cheating and abuse forum. I am aware that a player can do what he likes with his armies, but lot's of my games get warped by suiciding (sometimes to my advantage sometimes not).

Any thoughts?

Mr Changsha wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I wonder if anyone agrees with me that suiciding should possibly become against the rules.

I definitely agree with that, some people believe it should be one of those many unwritten rules in CC, but i believe it should become an official rule. The rule should say something like this "Players suicideing in games (attacking random or unrandom players in games when they are no longer able to continue) is not allowed. Although if other players agree to this in game chat you are then allowed to do it" or something like that.

I hate it when people suicide without asking for permission because it usually ruins a perfectly good game, and when people do ask for permission i always say no.

People should suicide to a certain extent, for example, if I owned SA and deadbeated and had 200 units defending both borders the person in NA gets an advantage, and the person in Africa gets less of one. The one in NA would fort his 200 to other borders, handing him the game. Yet if I suicided to a certain extent, maybe attacked the person in NA to completion, then left Africa alone the balance would be reasonable

max is gr8 wrote:People should suicide to a certain extent, for example, if I owned SA and deadbeated and had 200 units defending both borders the person in NA gets an advantage, and the person in Africa gets less of one.

Say you were in that situation and you had to leave, would you use your own instincts and suicide or would you ask for permission in the chat box??

pookey wrote:

max is gr8 wrote:People should suicide to a certain extent, for example, if I owned SA and deadbeated and had 200 units defending both borders the person in NA gets an advantage, and the person in Africa gets less of one.

Say you were in that situation and you had to leave, would you use your own instincts and suicide or would you ask for permission in the chat box??

Or would you fort to Argentina, then deadbeat? No advantage to the NA-player, as there's still a border to be defended and no easy bonus to be captured (though I suppose that doesn't really matter anymore at that point).