LIST: Opponents that waste your time....

esquire · Last edited by esquire on 08.03.2005 06:36; edited 1 time in total

***Disclaimer: This posting does not apply to an opponent that has at least one piece high enough to keep you from trapping it, and he avoids trading because that would end the game in your your favor. That, in my opinion, is not cowardly--it is a means of survival. In other words--You have a 10 and he has a 9 or a 10. He avoids your piece because you have an enormous advantage and he does not want you to pin all his pieces, which would decisively end in his defeat. This is usually at the end of the game when your opponent has no possible way to win.

Let's start a list here of people to avoid if you do not want to play a game that takes an hour to complete. Now I am not speaking of a player that plays like a turtle (turtle list) nor I am speaking of the opponent that leaves a game (pussy list), I am speaking of the opponent that will never, throughout the entire game, even when they have an advantage, attack. This is the person that wastes moves for an entire hour. They will utilize the "-" tactics that Sadistic described. Instead of attacking, they just move a few pieces back and forth until you either get bored and give them a draw, or drop your guard and allow something stupid to happen. This shameless display of cowardliness should not be reward with a draw. Nor should this type of play be seen by anyone else. I for one will never, ever, ever play this opponent again.

I cannot believe that people rely entirely upon the strategy of boring your opponent to death. I mean what is this? At least mount an attack when you go up. But instead you sit back and wait, and wait some more, and even wait more....This is pathetic and I only hope that others do not have to endure an hour like the one I had just spent.

For everyone else that actually likes to play the game--please continue this list and list every player that utilizes these shameful tactics.

Dirac was his name by the way. I explained this to him the entire game-but he never responded till the end. And yes I still said gg because that is the gentlemen way of doing things, but by no means was it a gentlemen like game.

OGETARTS · Posted: 07.03.2005 21:14 Post subject:

Did he have a clear advantage, esquire? By clear advantage I mean was he was up at least 3 or more pieces? Maybe he knew that he was up, but he wasn't in position to mount an aggressive attack? Or maybe his flag was unprotected and he was leaving some strong pieces back to keep you from getting his flag? I have played dirac twice (1 win a piece) and I have never seen him use this tactic.

OGE

esquire · Posted: 07.03.2005 21:36 Post subject:

The entire game he was up a 7. From the 6th move. But he continued to move peices back and forth--throughout the entire game, not just the end. He avioded every flank confrontation and did not attack once he went up a piece. But I continued being the only one to create a game. I eventually went up a piece-then HE TRADED our 9s, 8s and 10s. So I was left with my 6 and four 3s (miners). He had three 5s, one 4, one miner, one Spy, and one scout.

Now to the endgame. He blocked all the openings and did nothing. He only waited for me to move a miner. So I kept going around the board with my 6 (clearly avioding attacking his peices because I was sending him a clear signal that I would give him an ample opportunity to create some offensive). Then I got bored of this so I moved a 3 and went up with it, i was able to get him to take the 3, putting his 5 on the same piece as mine, and clearing it out of the way so that my other 3 could advance up. In short, I managed to kill one of his 5s, the spy, and his miner. I hate draws I took a guess--even after I was guaranteed a draw (my flag was bombed in and he had 0 miners). So, it was my fault I have a loss and not a draw, but his play throughout the entire game was mind-numbing and I do not want to experience that again.

As for Dirac personally, I like the guy. He has never done this to me before. But lately I am getting so tired of this tactic with people that I took the Sadistic approach and posted it.

Frank_gravon · User Joined: 27 Oct 2004 Posts: 33

esquire i played dirac earlier today and he was doing the same thing, so i took one of my majors a poof took it too him and captured his flag with a massacre attack that he could not handle.

sadistic · Posted: 08.03.2005 02:03 Post subject:

Lovely post, frank!
There is no excuse for - tactics. Play to win or quit. That gaybird tactic of circling and running is a waste of time. Players who do this are cowardly and have no concept of the fact that the game was meant to be fun. Esquire is correct and I have seen these fairies utilizing this type of nonsense more times than I can remember. The - list will be compiled so if any players do not wish to be on it, do not resort to this type of play. When the - list is complete, all enlisted players will be flown to Las Vegas where they can share hotel rooms and blow engage in - activities as they wish. Perhaps these heathens will leave their homosexuality in the hotel room and away from the gamefield.

-deleted463 · User Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 28

Sadistic,I have read where on several occasions you have bashed players for as you say "running" from a chasing piece. Are you saying that if a player can not trap an opposing piece and that same player has no minors left to capture a bombed in flag that the other player should just give up? An example would be that you and I both have a colonel and my flag is bombed in and you have no minors, and lets say you have all four capts, but my col is free and you cant trap him. Should I give up to you?

esquire · Posted: 08.03.2005 04:12 Post subject:

Potter, please see the Disclaimer at the top of this post. Your answer is encompassed within it.

Frank--excellent job--I wish I would have done the same before he trapped my pieces.

sadistic · Posted: 08.03.2005 05:27 Post subject:

No wonder you go by the name potter. You smoke a lot of pot. What a shame.
Seriously, when I refer to a player in such a way, I am usually talking about situations where he has given up winning. Instead he begins running around avoiding confrontation, when in fact if he applies himself, he can win. Some players do this hoping that I will be forced into making something happen by hitting unmoved pieces. This is also gay.
Now, stay off the drugs, potter and get some sleep.

Frank_gravon · User Joined: 27 Oct 2004 Posts: 33

I am going to go out on a limb here and say potter has a serious problem with his people skills. I think all that pot has gotten to his head and he has realized that it cannot take him away from his miserable existance all the time. So pott, get some help and lay of the pain killers.

-deleted463 · User Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 28

I read your disclaimer esquire and I agree, but it seems as if Sadistic thinks what you call surviving is playing like a "-". That's why I wanted to clarify this with him. And Frank, you have no right at all to post anything about anyone after your countless games of getting killed and then repeatedly asking for draws. Everyone just read the past posts concerning this punk. Sadistic , I've never ran across a player who had a decided advantage then refused to put the game away, anyone who does this IS a "-". You never answered the question Sadistic, is what esquire describes as "survival" considered "-" play by you?

jackbauer · User Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 36

If a player with a piece disadvantage,but who has at least the highest piece of or better than his opponent is in a situation where he has no miners, assumes the opp. flag is bombed in, his own flag is bombed in, the opponent has minimal or only 1 miner, there is strategy involved in keeping the miner away from this bombs without trading which can lead still lead to a loss, or secondly a draw, but possibly a win (if the opponent gets bored and likes to see games end agressively (that is his choice to attack)). Then under those circumstances that is survival. He might end up losing 1 bomb before taking the miner, but that is his choice. If he can take the miner before any bombs are taken, that is his best chance to push the draw.
This is survival. Playing against an opp with same or slightly lower rank th an his highest piece, no miners, opponent minimual miners. Everyone gets those messages from the opp, saying "wait I want to make sure your flag is not open before I agree to the draw"

On the other hand this opponent with the majority of the pieces should continue to attack even if only one miner. He is in position to lotto for unmoved pieces, or attempt a trap (even with his own flag open). It is this opponent who waits on the other player of lesser capabilities who is the coward.

Frank is who he is. He's not afraid to post a trailer inspite of his being outcasted. Unlike others who post just to pick at the one who makes them question their manhood. Who try and irk the GrandMaster of posters, by picking out one sentence particple and saying "nana nana boo-boo, gotcha Sadistic". Go take your testosterone pills. Regain your manhood before that face in the mirror makes you run to the dr. for that gender operation.

-deleted463 · User Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 28

Then let me ask you the same question Jack. Let me give you a scenario: Lets say you have a capt and 2 leuts and I have only a scout. My flag is bombed in. Do you consider me playing like a "-" to run from you and request a draw? Sadistic I would be interested in your answer too and anyone else.

jackbauer · User Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 36

antares · User Joined: 06 Sep 2004 Posts: 27 Location: Neu-Ulm

Hi all.

If you're not able to eliminate all of of your opponent's movable pieces or nail down his flag you don't deserve the win. 100% draw.
What's that "-"-crap all about?

gg, Ant
_________________
Ease on Perth!

-deleted463 · User Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 28

I wholeheartedly agree , just wanted to get other's opinion.