A case of SMACX ethics

[Adam_Smith]

A got shamed for something that I think is a grey area, but some of you might have some strong feelings about it.

What do you do if you are about even with your pact mate, but they are rushing ahead in tech and trying to build the Hunter-Seeker Algorythm? You offer to trade tech with them or even buy tech, but they don't negotiate.

Obviously you must get the tech if you hope to win. The ethical question is "should you probe them or declare V'detta and then probe them?

Well of course I did the first and I got shamed for it. I'm not sure if its wrong or not. What do you folks think?

I would like to start off with a word of defense on my part. I didn't want to end the pact or go to war with them, but I had to get the tech. This was the only real solution to do that.

What is your 2 cents?

[Grosjos]

Sounds like some real world diplomacy to me. I think it is ok, it is now up to your pact mate on whether they should cancel the pact, declare vendetta, or let it slide. Thats what probe teams are made for.

If it is the pbem tournament then it would depend on the ground rules. I think you have to cancel your pact before you are allowed to probe or other things. Don't quote me on that though.
[This message has been edited by Grosjos (edited April 27, 2000).]

[sunchaser3]

I thought that you could probe anyone at anytime without warning. The only "rule" is that you select the "declare vendetta" option AFTER the probe, which it sounds like Adam did. warning the opposition, or even your pact brother, is just silly. Probing a pact brother may be underhanded in a sense, but its not against the rules. The AI does it to my quite often. Furthermore it's just a game. If a player wasn't prepared for the possability that his "ally" might probe him, it is his own fault. If Adam had been playing the board game Risk, and had sneak attacked someone he had previosly been working with no one would question his ethics. I mean eventually they would have to fight each other, every one knows it. It is just a question of who will show their hand first.

[Ned]

Adam, If it is an AI Pact Bro, let them build the SP, then trade one of your size one cities for his city with the SP.

This obviously is one of the cheats that simply must be fixed.

Ned

[Garth Vader]

You did nothing wrong. You made a fair request to an ally. If the ally is not willing to be complete allies with you then obviously he think of you not as an ally but as just another faction that he will defeat. Since you were not regarded as a true ally by your "ally" your action should have been expected and so their is no basis for a complaint.

If he had given/traded/sold the tech to you and you still attacked then you would be wrong as you would have betrayed a true ally.

[Jasonian]

Just a little question here... but I was under the impression that if you tried to probe an pacted city, your probe team just went inside.

Is there a way to probe a pact bro/sis without breaking the pact?

[Helium Pond]

What do you mean when you say you "got shamed?"

The most important question is, is this multiplayer or single-player?

If it's multiplayer, it's all dependent on the ground rules agreed to at the beginning of the game. If it wasn't explicitly banned, then it's fine. It may p*** off your opponent, though, and that's part of what you have to consider in multiplayer games.

I'm assuming it's multiplayer, actually, because in single-player, who cares? Go ahead and steal all you want.

So, when you say you were shamed, you mean that the other player/s accused you of playing dirty? And you want to know whether the people here think what you did was fair? Well, if the only facts given are that you would lose the game without getting the Hunter-Seeker, and your Pact mate wouldn't give it to you, I'd say your conduct was fine. But I don't believe that there's any single Secret Project that you have to have to win, so I'm not sure I can support those given circumstances.

The bottom line is, if you acted within the agreed-on rules, you're within your rights. If they're mad about it, well, that's within their rights also. They just can't say you cheated.

[Adam_Smith]

sunchaser,

In PBEM, after you probe a pact mate it asks you if you want to declare v'detta on them. That is a bug. The probed pact mate should have the option to cancel the pact not the prober. To declare v'detta in this fashion is considered a cheat in the sense that it is taking advantage of a bug and there for not an intended type of play.

Helium,

Yes multiplayer. no such rule was created before the game began. Again, this is not a normal play for me. I have found that, in general, if you are in a pact with someone they will at least negotiate trading tech. That is, unless they want to make sure and build a special project. In this case my pact mate was certainly not behaving like a, as someone said, "true" pact mate.

The question here is, "is there some code of play where you renounce the pact before probing." According to everyone here, there is no code.

[Mongoose]

Adam_Smith, you have it backward, as I tried to explain when Styx got all bent out of shape in 4LL.

The general consensus, at least at ACOL, is that you MUST select the 'declare vendetta' option when probing a pactmate or treatied faction.

Item of note - selecting this option does not result in vendetta if it is a pactmate. It lowers the diplomatic status to treaty.

[JAMiAM]

Adam Smith,

If you chose "declare vendetta" after probing the pact mate, then you did the "legal" thing. If you are playing to win, you also did the "ethical" thing.

If playing anything other than a game specifically set up for team play, I will always value a win by a single player, over that of a "cooperative" win. Pacts are to be honored, in general, but when they outlive their usefulness, should be abandoned.

Your case sounds like the pact was not serving you as well as it was the other player. That you were able to obtain the HSA is icing on the cake.

The downside to this, is that you will likely not have the trust of that player, through the balance of that particular game. You might get a reputation for underhanded tactics. You will have to work a little harder (diplomatically) to make sure that other players see the benefits of peaceful relations with you, rather than vendetta.

Of course, for me, the diplomatic aspect of the game, is the primary draw of multiplayer SMAC. And, if your opponents are worthy of your time, they will realize that your actions within a particular game, though indicative of general play style, do not (should not) influence your decision making, in a different game. Play each game, to its fullest, within the peculiar geopolitical context that it begins with, and develops. Weigh the results of a backstab carefully. If it will make the difference in winning or losing, do not be afraid to do it. However, do not break faith lightly, either.

Remember, that you are a leader, responsible for your people's survival and prosperity on a harsh, dangerous, and unforgiving planet. Chiron, and your enemies, would like to swallow you up. Don't let their false protestations of alleged unethical behavior keep you from securing their future.

JAMiAM

[Adam_Smith]

Mongoose,

Ok I see the problem now. Can't the probed person end the pact on the next turn without hurting their diplomacy rating? If not I can surely see why you would be mad.

[Adam_Smith]

JAmaiM,

I don't think that what I did was a "backstab" It was merely liberating technology that we had a right to.

[Garth Vader]

AS: Yes they could but as far as I know the probed person never knows when they get probed and so would have no reason to cancel the pact. If you are just treatied there is also no way to cancel that and declare vendetta in PBEM. Does anybody know if IP play is different than PBEM?

[Velociryx]

All part of the fun, bud....
-=Vel=-
(Probe on!)

[Master Marcus]

I gladly probe an AI Pact to procure a research data I really need to catch up for a SP, thus I think the ethical point of view is logical when he refuse to negociate because of the SP. What is really unlogical is when a Pact still refuse to give a tech with no related SP ( most specifically between a human and a progenitor ) - but that is also enhancing in the same way the diplomatic engine.

Of course the irritating part of the process is that small text bug when a probed Pact declares vendetta, when in reality you're still in a peace relation reduced to Treaty.

------------------
The art of mastering:"la Maîtrise des caprices du subconscient avant tout".