Player "Throwing the game"

[ToWar1901]

I've seen this come up in 2 straight games, potentially the same player (unknown as the current game is an anonymous one)

Well the scenario is, you get into position to take another players centers, they can't really defend it, so they send a message saying "if you attack me I will throw the game to (insert other country name here) by letting them take my centers freely

I'm assuming this is at a minimum poor sportsmanship, just wondering if it also violates site rules in any fashion. My thought is that it is clearly not attempting to win at that point

Just looking for some $0.02 on this, thanks

[Strategus]

This is a valid tactic. I can't say too much, as it may infringe on site rules regarding discussion of live games. But it certainly is not against rules.

[ToWar1901]

Really, I figured intentionally losing would be frowned upon

[Strategus]

Sometimes what people say is not what they do. People will try all sorts of tactics to get the outcome they desire. But also, sometimes people throw games to get revenge or make a point. Basically, most things are acceptable, except for obvious no no things like racism etc. There are site guidelines which tell you what is acceptable or not. There are a few debates in the forum previously on throwing games you should read.

[ToWar1901]

appreciate it, will dig in to see what I can find. I just interrupted the rule of "always attempting to win" as meaning that intentionally losing would be a no-no

[Strategus]

I'm with you in spirit.

[UM85]

"Always attempting to win" is an interesting idea.

Let's assume you are in a position to destroy me and there is nothing I can do about it. My only hope to stay alive (and by definition, possibly win) is to get you to NOT come after me and finish me off. Perhaps the only leverage I have in this situation is that I threaten I will give all my SC's to Player C. I therefore tell you, if you continue to come after me, I will do just that.

Have I not done everything possible in an attempt to win? And if the strategy works and you look elsewhere for SC's, I may be able to recover and actually win. Stranger things have happened.

Admittedly, it is a desperate strategy but I'm dead if I can't get you to change your mind no matter what. In which case, I at least get to pick who I want to give my SC's to.

[jay65536]

Not only is this not against the rules, I don't even consider it poor sportsmanship.

Sometimes in Diplomacy, it will just happen that a player is in a position where they are almost lost. Think of a 4-power endgame where the center counts are something like 16/9/6/3, and if they so desired, the 3 big powers could easily collude to knock out the little one. Most of the time, in this kind of situation, the 3-center power's only leverage is to say, "If you try to eliminate me, I will give my centers to the 16-center power so that the other two of you will lose to a solo." If the 3-center power does not use this threat, they are eliminated; if they follow through on it, they lose to a solo. Either way, they lose. The difference is HOW they lose, not WHETHER they lose. The only way they can get into the draw is by issuing the threat and having the 9- and 6-center powers believe it and lay off, settling for a 4way instead of a 3way.

This is actually an important endgame tool in the arsenal of a small power: putting yourself in a position where you can bring everyone else (except for one) down with you if you get stabbed for draw-whittling purposes.

[Audacia]

Related to this, is passively throwing the game. You don't want to NMR, you don't want to surrender, but you just issue and finalize hold orders throwing the game in no strategic way. In one's choice set to be sure, but game throwing nonetheless.

[zeke234]

There is nothing wrong with this. For instance: the game has come down to England/France/Turkey. As long as England/France stay allied, they can hold Turkey off and claim a three way draw. France tells England if he stabs him, he'll throw the game to Turkey. This is a valid strategy. France can either participate in a 3-way draw, or lose. It is in France's best interest to tell his ally England that he will throw the game. He wants to persuade England to accept a 3-way draw rather than go for a 2-way draw, or win.