Quote:
Originally Posted by [B5]Londo
Even a pre-round CT/P3n alliance may well have kept things simmering, even though from a beginning of the round view such a combination would have been viewed as terrible heretical blocking politics. But you never know which combination might unjam things or whether that route might have just jammed it in a different way.
|
On the other hand a pre round deal between ult and another alliance, or BF and another alliance, or even ND and another alliance (in each case not one of the three) would have stagnated things even sooner.
I agree that it is an all or nothing proposition. If pre round deals are bad they all are. I dont care if you are a tiny alliance it may be your alliance that makes the difference... indeed you are aiming for it to be your alliance's deal that makes a difference in some way so any doing such deals and then complaining about others doing the same is hypocrisy.
On the other hand I agree with mz that it is not abandoning deals once they are causing stagnation that are the real killer. Have free flowing politics through the round in which you know everyone will switch when circumstances change then pre-round deals would be a very good thing; they would get wars started faster and the real business of the round beginning earlier.