can somebody explain to me why anybody would attack another player while he's already losing a 1 vs 1 fight?

i thought about it several times but i just can't find out why anybody would do that :S

to make u look like a gangbanger?

I think the assumption is that other players all have the same values as you do. Some of the players here don't seem to think of it as an issue. That is until they realize later to live by the golden rule. And I do not mean the one that says "He who has all the gold...rules!"

Well, depending on the situation I could see it being a good move in standard or skirmish campaigns...

For example, say you've basically lost the fight, and you're at the point where you either can't or don't want to deploy any more troops (because if you do you'll lose more experience than you'd gain), but still have some troops around.

Now you see a nice juicy stack or two of comms or some other troop you can kill for easy experience. Why not attack it no matter who's it is? It's probably better experience than waiting for the guy's army you were defending against to get to them. And you've basically lost already anyway (no more troop production). You're basically just trying to get the most experience out of your remaining troops.

I could see this as a viable strategy in circumstances similar to this.

Card

Sounds like a tactic to give another player an excuse to grab a slice of the pie.
I haven't ever used the tactic but in a few games where I was getting "ganged" or saw my opponents committing "fouls" like "bug exploiting", it might be a good spite option (i.e. NOT that I'm saying that spite is the motive in this instance).

TR

"Having lost all hope, one would lash out destructively in frustration and anger" says the hole in the wall to the fist.

Another very interesting tactic that im seeing in the 40+ games is for a player to claim to be your friend, set a small stack next to your small stacks (5 pop observers), then when someone attacks them, they attack you in the same turn so it looks like a planned and co-ordinated gangbang against them. Soon enought the whole game wants you dead for being a supposed banger.

(I love 10 vs 2)

I would try that but it sure seems like a risky tactic to me. On the other hand it is workign in one game im in since its now 3v1. But i dont mind since im ranked 1st because of it!

anyone else seen this tactic?

thus come down to the diplomatic ability of players

i have never really seen this and even if i did,i won`t really care,i`ll message the other guy and ask what happened and if 2 players' words aren`t enough to be more convincing than 1 player`s words....i`ll...errr..i`ll...kill stcrispin
lolz

heh heh, thats the answer to all life's problems, just kick st crispin's a$$!

These crazys now have a huge wall of troops (about 4000 pop stong) matching in a line about 15 units wide and 3 units deep in UNISON!

i dont see how they move since they are all mingled together. the ZOC should be causeing them trouble but maybe they have patterned it right to make it work. thats alot of co-ordination!

its abor 4-1 odds or more in theor favor and they are cOming at me. I need more balistas!

well it worked for you in our game everyone thinks im the banger, even though i been defending the whole time .
not a good way to play but you have to i guess.