Conquer Club

No such thing!

Your game play should take ''Diplomacy'' into consideration.
No difference when you are up against secret or otherwise.
Stop you whining!

I have Spoken

And you are wrong. There's a reason why it is looked down upon. It even says it's looked down upon in the rules. So now u get to jion a game and team up with someone before it even starts? All you have accomplished is a big red flag on ur forehead. You have changed no opinions, as I'm shure I have not changed yours. As if diplomacy wasn't already looked down upon by too many. Thanks for the help.
Maybe your just not good enough to win out in the open.
I have spoken.
I doubt you heard

Shady-Jim wrote:And you are wrong. There's a reason why it is looked down upon. It even says it's looked down upon in the rules. So now u get to jion a game and team up with someone before it even starts? All you have accomplished is a big red flag on ur forehead. You have changed no opinions, as I'm shure I have not changed yours. As if diplomacy wasn't already looked down upon by too many. Thanks for the help.
Maybe your just not good enough to win out in the open.
I have spoken.
I doubt you heard

You miss understand.
When you are playing the game you should continue to play the game as it should be played.
In other words; Don't let your belief of a Secret diplomacy spoil the game (for everybody).
Example: Hey Those two mo foe's haven't attacked each other the entire game, SECRET DIPLOMACY!!!
Continue to play the fricken game, before you decide to fly off the handle and suicide at the accused.
Many players mistake unspoken truces as Secret diplomacy and start spewing out accusations sounding like a fool.
Don't throw a game (any game) just because you don't understand (how he is doing that), figuring the only reasonable explanation is CHEAT, CHEAT!

If I find out I am playing a game against a cheat; I get mad and want to beat him all the more.
Afterwards I will report.
Consider the other players giving you a handicap...Cuz you have the skillz.

From your post there was nothing about unspoken truces. What I read is that secret diplomacy is a viable option. Ofcourse it exists, and therefore taken into account in strategy. But you were not saying this.
You said it simply doesn't exist, and through that statement, u suggest there is no difference between open and secret.
Try again?

Shady-Jim wrote: Of course it exists, and therefore taken into account in strategy. But you were not saying this.

If you consider it (secret diplomacy) while you are in game, it will most likely spoil the game for you and everybody else.
It is not secret diplomacy it is just-''diplomacy''.
I can read about secret ''diplomacy'', I can write about it...I can not (best not too) think about ''secret diplomacy'' while I am in Game.

Much in the same way players might think about CC dice...don't think about the dice being foul; just play the game

Shady-Jim wrote:From your post there was nothing about unspoken truces. What I read is that secret diplomacy is a viable option. Ofcourse it exists, and therefore taken into account in strategy. But you were not saying this.
You said it simply doesn't exist, and through that statement, u suggest there is no difference between open and secret.
Try again?

I said, no such thing...(literally)...no such thing as ''secret diplomacy'' while you are ''in the game''.


On a different Note; Don't expect a (direct) response when you propose an alliance.
Try showing a good faith maneuver (on the game board)...A response might show up on the game board, in the form of friendly actions.
Sometimes, it is not beneficial for others to speak (treaties/diplomacy) in chat.