Guess this is a little over-due :-)

We've basically covered exploiting the simple stuff now - so we're now at the more interesting stuff where there isn't an immediate obvious solution....

Politics. We all REALLY hate politicians :-). My main gripe of the US is their President and their politicians, and I don't think much of my own Prime Minister either

But, politics is important, so this is how to go about it!

First, you have two options - to talk to the other players, or stay 'schtum' (quiet :-) )
However, if you do that, even the best player in the world (me, of course ;-) ) will eventually find him/herself swamped by allied opponents :-)

So, I now assume you DO want to talk. If you don't, then wait for the next lecture instead

Two things. First, talk is cheap - it costs you no resources
Second, you are doing this to ACHIEVE AN AIM. Not to get sidetracked. NEVER lose sight of your aims...!

-----------------------

The simplest kind of politics is the agreement of the NAP (Non-Aggression Pact). Or namely, I won't attack you if you don't attack me :-)

However, the terms are very diverse. It could be for the next few turns, until a set time, or even permanent. A popular type is a NAP set for about 50 turns. This essentially says "I won't fight you yet - we'll talk more later". It grants immediate peace and time to build up, but allows the chance to fight later on as pressures increase - so you don't both end up totally boxed in...!

There are other types - the alliance. A DEFENSIVE alliance is entirely based around the principle that someone else attacks first - either in the case that they do, or following an attack. But as you know, an alliance is still simply an agreement to fight together. An OFFENSIVE alliance, on the other hand, is a pre-emptive assault on another player. You attack either because you fear an attack, or because you aim to get something. Of course, the more players you invite along, the more you have to share your loot...! And there's the 'honour' issue...! (below).

But, you must bear these VERY important things in mind...

1) NOTHING is obligatory. Talk is cheap, remember? You can complain on the forums all you like about betrayal - and you could wipe out someone's good name. Great if you can salvage your game, or if your diplomacy partner cares about such things. Otherwise, all that talk? It's STILL worth nothing.

2) It MUST be to your advantage. Don't enter into agreements that are not good for you. You have to dictate the terms, or accept some that work for you. Taking crippling surreder terms will STILL get you nothing. Or more to that point, if you're giving out the terms, it'll give your opponent nothing - in which case, why would he accept your terms?

There's two other uses for poliltics.

The first is reputation. Building your reputation influences your effects on other players. What reputation you desire is up to you - but you are what you act. Breaking a crucial treaty, though it will win you a game, may curse you for EVERY other game you play....! Conversely, never breaking a treaty, and playing flawlessly and gruesomely, will earn you a fearsome reputation that will strike others with awe. Think how you treat a celebrity, scale it down a little, and you get an idea of how a newb sees a grand champion...!
Reputation does help your hand a little in convincing others of your aims... :-)

The second, more...controversial use, is psychological warfare.

(cont.)

Psych warfare requires a good understanding of the human mind. The things that motivate your opponent, what he fears, what he admires....a player who is in awe of you is FAR easier to break...!
Once again, you need to know what you're aiming for. Riling your opponent for fun can be enjoyable, but pointless and perhaps even counterproductive. The benefits from this kind of battle are far less obvious, far less...'honourable' and not even as useful. But they are there. If you can make your opponent crack, he might make more mistakes. If you dent his reputation, you may improve your chances in future battles. Heck, if you can do enough, he may even go into a reckless charge.

Who can you do it against? ANYONE. Go see the champions list...see Mr. Sugarleo at the top? I rattled him THREE times. Sadly, it didn't work perfectly to plan..evidence of just HOW right you have to get it.
(I've made a nice mark on his mind though, one to remind him I can get at him -any time I like- :-) )

More to bear in mind however. My own personal codes and 'religious stance' prevent me from wishing harm or using un-necessary force on a target. It's a game. Treat it as such - no personal insults, no harm to the person. What transpires in that game is just that. Only perhaps future agreements and possible revenge :-)
I won't name-call, or torture for fun. Neither should you, even if you're not following any 'spirit-guards'. Psych warfare is VERY dangerous. Fail to heed this warning - you will REGRET IT.

Where were we? Oh yes - honour :-)

Honour is very lop-sided. The thing you need to nderstand about human beings is that they usually have a view of the universe, and try to convince those they come into contact of it - hating those who are massively divergent, or won't comply. So if you come to blows over someone about honour, it's because they don't support your viewpoint!
Honour, basically, is your currency in agreements. It represents your keeping your word, whether you fight even sides and how you treat others. Take this tip - keep your word, and be consistent in what you do, then others can't touch you. If they try, they will _FAIL_. :-)
If you're a rotting slimebag but still keep your agreements, you'll still have no problems. Just remember that the methods you use are free to be used by everyone else politically. Which brings us nicely on to our final note...

-_*IMPORTANT*_-

There is nothing solid in politics. There are no rules, no regulations and no guarantee of anything. So when you make your agreements, 'sleep with one eye open'. If you leave your castle open to 6,000 troops, don't be surprised when you lose it!
In the end, the score is what's recorded. Not whether a guy went back on his agreements or not! :-)

-_*IMPORTANT*_-

That should cover it :-)
Make additions as you see fit, and tell me if you find this useful :-)

You forget to give us some sound tips on bluffing strategies.

I must say that I just pulled a great one off recently in one my games ( i won't name the game for obvious reasons).

Otherwise excellent work, your lectures are decidedly interesting and useful

A.

CTDXXX>Who can you do it against? ANYONE. Go see the champions list...see Mr. Sugarleo at the top? I rattled him THREE times. Sadly, it didn't work perfectly to plan..evidence of just HOW right you have to get it.
(I've made a nice mark on his mind though, one to remind him I can get at him -any time I like- :-) )

CTD, Yes, I react to personal attacks and will continue to do so. I won't stand idly by and let anyone(especially you), make untrue accusations about my gameplay or character. So if that's what you want to call 'getting to me', then yes, it's going to get a response from me everytime, not only in the forums..but..on the battlefield as well(and we both know how that battle ended, huh?). >

Your posted remarks were both lies and insults and maybe you should study your own woods...CTD:"Treat it as such - no personal insults, no harm to the person." Your comments concerning our gameplay in '15' were insults at the least and you attempted to harm my character by your own words.

I don't hold grudges, and I try to let what happens in a game, stay in that game(a new game is a fresh start..an enemy in the last game may be my ally in this), but I don't forget players actions....or words. I always tried to show respect to you, (and other veteran players), as I learned the game, learned the players, and moved up the ranks, fighting for that number one spot. During the 8 months I've been playing here, I've learned who deserves my respect and who doesn't.

Yes, politics can be critical in this game. You should know more than anyone here as you have demonstrated that 'your head games',(as you call them), has been and probably will continue to be..one of your favorite strategies.

I, will continue to show respect to every player in this game(ranked 1.1 to 59.1), until he or she proves that they don't deserve it. I won't play head games, but I will speak to them, discuss the game with them, ask about their wishes(usually there's someone in each game that wants to fight a certain other player because of some past event), enact naps and alliances with them, and trust their word until they prove different. Diplomacy...true, honest, diplomacy will remain a vital part of this game. I use an old rule...treat others as you'd be treated...then you can't go wrong. A player will always reveal their 'true colors'....and you amend your relationship with them as you play the game.

But perhaps, you've learned the lesson that you now teach to others...and this is an honest submission of advice to others in hope of making their experience in waronline a pleasant and enjoyable one. >

Last Edited : Tuesday, 25 February 2003 - 22:14

If I have learned one thing about sugarleo that is not in regards to his skill. Just because he has Sugar in his name... doesn't necessarily give one the right to call him sweety.... as my ol' pappy would say... that them there is fightin' words

I have, to my knowledge, told no deliberate lies. Made accusations? Yes. Questioned your methods and motives? Yes. But did I call you a bad human being, drop to name-calling and such? NO.
As regards the event itself, I simply see it's overall ineffectiveness being due to everyone else treating it like a soap opera :-). (If you're going to weaken someone's playing reputation, the audience actually has to CARE )
And gameplay? Next time you appear on my border, I will DEMAND a NAP before any talks begin at all. Frankly, I think you were still...*pauses to think of a sufficiently inflammatory word*...outrageous to think you could declare yourself open to suggestions and still attack. In future, you will agree to peace first, or it'll be taken as a sign of war. This assumes you have combat ready forces on the front, of course :-)
I have a long memory. Raptor is VERY aware of this :-)
So should evryone else. NO exceptions :-)
No matter, we go off-topic :-)

For the learners who frankly don't care much for vets at each other's throats, note this as an example of just how cheap talk is. It doesn't give you any more troops, any bonuses or even an assurance of your safety. Make sure your troops are ready to back you up.

Bluffing, eh? :-)
Well, bluffing is of very limited use in this game, I'm afraid. Unless your opponent is VERY predictable, there's little you can do to bluff. You can't read his face, the tone of his voice or any of the usual signs you can when your opponent is not 6,000 miles away ;-)
However, if you are ALMOST CERTAIN you can get away with it, give it a try. Just make sure that whatever you put at stake won't be a problem if you lose it...

quote:"I use an old rule...treat others as you'd be treated.."

I thought it was : " Treat others the way you would not have... treated on yourself."

wait a sec that's actually quite nasty; i'll try again:

" Do not treat others the way you would not have treated on yourself" hmm, the game would need a new name if this became widespread policy: peaceonline.


So i guess its back to "an eye for an eye..." then

s p A. m

Personally I prefer 2 different ones..

"MAKE SOME ENEMIES" and "Shoot first, ask questions later"


heh heh heh..
Maybe one day when I learn how to play this game..
*hates being a N00B*

mal, it is no wonder you arn't liked in the forums. shooting first and then talking is a horable way of meeting new people...

but we shouldn't be drifting off topic.

Politics is just that, politics. It will always be a debatet on weather you had the right of way in attacking or who attacked first or x attacked b so i felt that attacking x would benifit him/her...

just remember, Politics is politics.

(thus emphasising the whole 'talk is cheap' thing even further! )

But seriously, it can't be said enough. There are no points for what you say, no bonuses, no ranks, levels or anything else. It just helps you once in a while
Too many players protest for something to be physically done to treaty breakers and backstabbers, when the only recourse is to fight them in future games and on reputation - not the rules. The rules of the game are not unlike the rules of the universe, like gravity
Gravity doesn't make life fair. It just helps set the environment. And our rules do as much. We just have to choose how to play those rules...

On the other hand, it helps to know how to do it well

Allanon, for example, has already given a tale where politics saved his butt

hear hear! .Shameless luck and some able politicking and that's "all" that is needed to extend your life line; allowing one to possibly later on settle the score or discipline mean or recalcitrant neighbours.



A.

Last Edited : Wednesday, 26 February 2003 - 13:37

u guys talk too much
warrrrr
...

A word of advice, Don't "Overpolitic".

Too many Naps and agreements muddy up the waters. I usually decide within the first 4-5 turns of where I am going and make the appropriate arrangements so as not to be disturbed in my missions. However, I try to judge the time frame in which my mission will take and make sure I don't box myself into a corner with nobody to fight. Remember always that though politics are a required substance, the winner is determined by how many troops he kills not how many friends he makes.

I just like to go out swinging. If some one ask me to help them out i do, but I wont stop attacking someone once they attack me.....even if I do say I wont hit them anymore.Once I get my marksmen.......its on.

Also true. Part of making sure you get what you want from politics.
Peace on every border is great to start with, but is no fun when there's no-one to fight. Fighting everyone, on the other hand, is a sure path to defeat :-)
Personally, I'll usually leave one guy un-napped and fight him. If particularly cautious, I'll wait till the first set of NAPs run out to start the assualt and prepare in the meantime. But bear in mind...when time runs out - the scores are what stand. Not the treaties. As Big said

CTD, good job in setting forth the basics of 'politics' of war, yet I will add one additional "important to know BEFORE" point:

3) Recognize that <FAIR> is a relative term, and what seems <FAIR> to you may drive your opponent into an apoplectic state.

As recent forum, uhm, discussions may illustrate, the use of politics and psych warfare can illicit quite a negative response when it violates the other players sense of <FAIR>. Still, I feel that this element is what makes a strat/sim successful, and to some extent more fun.

bumpd for newbies

*bump*

*Bump* for our Newbies

Thump