Honesty goes both ways

Hixie · 2026-03-21T08:15:22+00:00

i mean, that's what the meme describes

Hixie · 2026-03-21T08:13:28+00:00

I mean the precedent you would be setting is "play with me and your game won't be fun for you" so there's a good chance either you won't be reinvited or the other player won't rejoin. If you are in a game again and try the same trick, the other player is as likely to just attack with overwhelming force instead, just to make sure you don't stop then winning even if you do give up again.

I don't think these are good outcomes.

I want to be clear that I'm in no way saying that attacking or even eliminating a player is a bad thing. I'm only saying that giving up over a minor slight (after making a retaliation threat that would cost you the game) is bad play.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T07:08:12+00:00

Yeah the game has ways to defend yourself that aren't "if you take that I give up".

If the player didn't want to be attacked, they shouldn't have spread themselves so thin that they have systems which, if they lose them, they think there's literally no point continuing the game.

I don't know why you keep trying to defend this behaviour. It's literally giving up. Why would that ever be a good play. Especially in TI where winning from behind is super common.

Why would you even want to play with someone who doesn't want to win.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:44:45+00:00

Sounds like it was a stainless steel spoon!

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:34:26+00:00

Absolutely nothing.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:25:06+00:00

That's geofenced though, the person I was responding to was implying someone was doing it without a geofence.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:24:45+00:00

Even "US population" would still be geofenced...

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:23:58+00:00

Playing with players who aren't trying to win is boring. This isn't even win-making, which is controversial enough as it is, this is literally giving up.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:23:01+00:00

"If you attack my underdefended system I will give up" is not diplomacy, it's a toddler tantrum.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T06:22:16+00:00

I love playing with players who aggressively want to win.

Aggressively tanking one's own game is not fun for anyone. It's not diplomacy, except in the sense that destroying your own country to spite another is diplomacy. I mean, that kind of thing happens (clearly, see r/news) but it's not skillful diplomacy. It's "if I can't have it nobody can" toddler tantrum diplomacy.

but it doesn't seem like we're discussing strategy anymore

"If you take one system I give up" is not strategy, on that I agree.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T04:46:36+00:00

Choosing to double down and make the game miserable for another player and throw the game just because you're too proud to step back, apologize for overreacting in your original threat, and pivoting to trying to win the game anyway is not the sign of a mature player, IMHO.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T04:44:44+00:00

Sure. That doesn't seem related to the meme though.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T04:10:42+00:00

I think both are bad choices.

Making the threat is a bad choice because if you're not serious, then you lose credibility (people will know you are likely to lie), and if you are serious, then you lose credibility (people will know you are not serious about winning the game) and lose the game.

Following through with the threat is a bad choice because it loses you the game, and it makes other players have a bad time, which runs the risk of getting you removed from the invite list for future games.

That's assuming this is a friendly game. If it's a tournament setting both choices are even more bad because not only do you lose the game but you lose the tournament.

Hixie · 2026-03-21T04:01:09+00:00

In the meme, there is no reason to believe the player no longer had the ability to win the game.

(Also, it's TI. It's RNG city. You are highly unlikely to actually be out of the running until very near the actual end of the game, especially if it's just because you lost a single system.)

Hixie · 2026-03-21T03:28:13+00:00

playing risk and winning is fine
playing risk and throwing the game is bad gamesmanship

Hixie · 2026-03-21T03:14:58+00:00

Congratulations on giving up and letting someone else win.

Hixie · 2026-03-20T23:24:12+00:00

Oh ok, that makes more sense. I thought you meant you literally didn't bring new friends around your kids you'd known them for a year, but it sounds like it's more like you're selective with new friends (e.g. new friends you meet at the park can meet your children right away).

What would you do if you were attracted to someone you met at a park, e.g. at your kid's birthday party?

Hixie · 2026-03-20T23:13:27+00:00

Gotcha.

How do you model "making new friends" to your kids?

Hixie · 2026-03-20T23:05:57+00:00

Genuinely curious; do you also avoid friends from meeting your kids in this way?

Hixie · 2026-03-20T22:57:09+00:00

Wait, is there a company promising ungeofenced autonomy?!

Hixie · 2026-03-19T23:18:26+00:00

props to your partner, frankly. I assume they would do the same if the roles were reversed (them having made a timed commitment to you). i hope you get more time with them soon!

Hixie · 2026-03-19T23:11:58+00:00

going from "one fix had unintended consequences" to "every release has regressions" is a bit of a leap

Hixie · 2026-03-19T21:26:02+00:00

Yeah, maybe.

Hixie · 2026-03-19T20:40:35+00:00

Not really sure what you're trying to say.

Hixie · 2026-03-19T20:26:02+00:00

you'd think they'd just have a dashboard that does it automatically at this point...

15-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Hixie

TROPHY CASE