Page 1 of 1

When does poor sportsmanship become unfair play?

PostPosted: 18 Aug 2019, 00:27
by YoYoDyne
I’m in a game where Turkey, France and Germany are the remaining survivors. F and G, allied since the start, gained the stalemate position when T got to 17. T then backed off yielding centers and space to G which F and G interpret as a gambit to break the alliance (which T has repeatedly tried via diplomacy). F and G are holding position and repeatedly proposing 3-way draws. T refuses to finalize and shuffles his units around, not attacking. T isn’t breaking any site rules, I don’t think, but it increasingly looks like bad sportsmanship. If T’s strategy is to string it out until F or G is forced to surrender or find a replacement due to real life schedule demands, then it feels like a violation of the spirit of the game. Appreciate any perspective, including whether there is recourse.

Yoyodyne

Re: When does poor sportsmanship become unfair play?

PostPosted: 18 Aug 2019, 00:34
by WHSeward
After 3 game years if no SCs have traded hands, then you can call a deadlock to get the game ended.

The entire procedure is detailed online here.

PM me if/when your game qualifies and I'll look at it for you.

Re: When does poor sportsmanship become unfair play?

PostPosted: 18 Aug 2019, 01:27
by YoYoDyne
thank you!

Re: When does poor sportsmanship become unfair play?

PostPosted: 18 Aug 2019, 16:01
by Malarky
I think it's going to be hard to prove, or should be hard to prove, if Turkey is giving ground. And I'm not sure who is being accused of bad sportsmanship here. If Turkey is giving another power the chance to steal SCs, and they aren't taking it, is that because they are holding to an alliance no matter what, or because a solo isn't possible?

I think there's a lot of detail here that we know, and that shouldn't be published in a live game, and more that we don't know, and probably should be left to a Mod to deal with.

Re: When does poor sportsmanship become unfair play?

PostPosted: 30 Aug 2019, 07:39
by Jensen
As the game has ended I'll share an opinion.

My pespective is that this is not bad sportsmanship. If Turkey is trying to entice one party to break from their alliance then this opens the opportunity for either a 2 way draw or even a Turkish solo if the other 2 aren't paying attention. This is a better result than a 3 way draw so it is entirely within the spirit of the game for turkey to employ such tactics.

Germany wants the game to end quickly. By not finalizing, Turkey is withholding something that Germany wants and thereby levering a resource they have access to. If Germany were to take the scs and / or break from the alliance with France, the game may come to a conclusion quicker. So once again, if Turkey is merely employing a negotiating tactic then this is entirely within the spirit of the game.

From the German perspective, if they take extra SCs they risk putting the french offside and if FT gang up on them then they miss out on the 2 way draw. Therfore, refusing to take the SCs is also not contrary to the spirit of the game.


All of this may result in a deadlock which is why the deadlock procedures are in place.