Suiciders

lol, your right in german that is

That player has been banned.

Sorry! Did you mean AF has been banned? And was it because of his chosen name, which I assume most European people were able to translate quite easily? If so, couldn't the admin ask him to choose another and change it for him manually?

He was not banned because of the nickname, we had other reasons.
I would rather leave this discussion be and not go into details.

My views on suicide as you put it:
First I think it's a bad choice of words to use for the associated act of attack, as to commit suicide does not involve trying to hurt anyone else, however to give up your life in order to kill another is an act of, as the Japanese call it, KAMIKAZE!
Unfortunately, like most other bad word choices and associations, because the majority use it, albeit incorrectly, it is accepted as correct!
I even use it all the time for fear of being laughed at or ridiculed for using the more appropriate word of kamikaze.

I can tell you now that even suggesting something like this to people who have been using it as a reference since the "dawn of risk", will raise eyebrows and maybe even invite some "who do you think you are correcting us" comments!!

So here goes, kamikazes are a bind to the game, even strategic ones. We all hate terrorism, because it is a selfless act of cruelty that holds no fear of retribution or punishment to the perpetrator, which makes it impossible to stop by threat, diplomacy or any other means, as the intention is set in their mind and is going to happen no matter what!
In risk, if you feel it about to happen and warn the player about it, they normally change their intended target to you, even if they have to pass 2 other weaker caps to get to you!
It's a frame of mind that makes someone a kamikaze player.
I myself have been at the receiving end of many dozens of them and now I just say "Hmmm"!
Here's one for you.....
Players who kamikaze due to team playing. I recognise them easily and always avoid them now, some even high rankers.

I'll give you a clue how to tell... you can watch 2 or more players joining about the same time, playing in the same games most of the time, using a specially prepared set of guidelines to be in the right place to take the world at the right time and does so, always leaving the team player until last in case of failure. They alternate the wins so that they are winning at least 1 in 3 (8 player) games, which loses little points and gains lots. Their rank grows quickly, sometimes up to Colonel from Dot in a matter of a month or two, with one usually being the leader where most of the wins are theirs and the fails go to the other. Oh and don't ever call them on it, or you'll get a mountain of abuse, pleads, lies and whatever else gets them through their lives. I don't know why the superior rank means so much to them, but they came here to get it! Also they forget that you translated their live chat when they first started their team drive and saw them directing each other on which territories to have and who is the biggest threat.. LOL I translated it to be my colour. Guess what happened next?

It sometimes takes a while, but in the end we'll get them

Feel free to report players and give some evidence - that will speed up the process.

Bluebird had a good idea which I think we should consider. Players often use the threat of suicide as leverage against other players. So I think that threats should not be allowed. Maybe 2 threats are warned and the third one is equivalent to an actual suicide?

I disagree, as the threat is hardly ever given for all-out-attack by the ones that actually do it. They normally just pounce!

The ones who threaten it, normally have no intention of doing it and do so as a kind of act of diplomacy, to get the opponent to move a threatening force away.

I have to strongly disagree with you on that, aero. But regardless of whether they follow through or not, threatening to ruin a game by cheating to get your way should not be allowed.

Just look at the games Naxyr has played will change your mind aeronautic.
Faramir was also a master at using the threat of suicide!
1 or 2 times I can live with more than that, is a clear violation of the rules.
Just my 2 cents.

I have been overrulled on my view of these all-out-attackers, but nonetheless, we have all done them, always out of necessity and when they pay off, you get a "well played" response and when they don't you get "what was the point in that, now both our games are ruined"!
The player that forced you to do this, should expect it, as they have left you powerless to do anything else!! I will even tell them what I'm about to do and why!

Now, the kamikaze as I call it, has at least 2 categories:
(a) Someone just willing to give up their game to take out a particular player too.
(b) Genuinely believes it's a good move even though the outcome will leave them weaker than before they did it.

Anyone who does a (b) "Westy" as most players are now calling it, repeatedly game after game, really believe they are playing correctly and need educating, as Westy has now been.
Should he have just been given 3 strikes and out or should we have shown patience and taught him to play differently as Vexer did?
I believe the latter.

The category (a) Kamikaze Heads, are unstoppable, even high ranked players are prone to it from spite, generally bad attitude or revenge!!!

I will look at Naxyr's games as suggested, but have enough of my own points of reference too.
I understand that a threat of all-out-attack is bad and against the rules..... unless it is your only remaining option! I have to agree, it is bad to do so, something I wouldn't do, not even to try and move troops, I would just do the right thing and act accordingly.

See game 217191 where spamfree put 20 troops next to my cap with a turn-in coming... any player with any level of undestanding of the game knows that is a guaranteed attack on your cap next move and if you can find a route and almost enough troops to get to his cap, you go for it and as in this game, it can pay off if you get the 56% average dice.

Anyway, it's only the category (a) guys I feel we need ideas for stopping!

LOL the first and only Naxyr game I could find in his Game History was 162417 and he openly accused you "bluebird005vis" of being the same person as "tantc" in that game!!!!
Off subject, but what timing!!

Lol that was the most fun I've had reading a game log in a long time

Someone start a thread with examples of good/bad diplomacy in game logs

I would fall under the B category.