Would like your help settling an argument

Let say your playing a game. To your opponent you stand no cha ce of winning. You keep going to other parts of the map and build up little resistances. After a while (1.5hrs) the enemy quits saying you should have given up already. Is it still a legit victory?

  • Yes win is win
  • Yes but you should have given up
  • No

0 voters

To me the answer is yes. It’s the oppo to fault for not being able to finish you off and Givin up. We are not talking about hiding vills in corners this is just attempti to come back a lot.

The game is already lost when I give up so I will never give up. I also hide villagers in late game when enemy can’t get enough gold for spy. There is always a chance that enemy will get disconnected or give up for any reason.
This game is encouraging people to get good and win games or there wouldn’t be prize for the world champions. The people who don’t want to try to win in ranked games are wasting everybody’s time.

1 Like

That’s grieving, and if it’s something you do regularly, you should probably be banned from ranked. It’s not ok to hide vils just because someone can’t afford spies. Learn when the game is over, and don’t try and win through unethical means when you have honestly lost.


Hiding vills isn’t cool but if you keep build up a base and actually trying to win I see no problem


I don’t view this as grieving - as long as you have resources and the will to fight back, never give up. regardless of how bleak the situation seems; sometimes you will pull out of it and gain valuable experience even if you win by holding an extremely small corner of the map or happen to lose in the end - it’s all valuable experience.

1 Like

Imagine thinking this is normal behavior. Don’t do what you wouldn’t do to your sparringpartner.


Rebooming and relocating are essential skills and if you can master those to the point where you become unkillable, that is a legit victory. However if you hide vills, wall in vills and hide eco, or in short do things that in a fair matchup only lead to ‘victory’ if your opponent decides to resign (without you actually killing his eco) out of frustration or boredom, that’s griefing and shouldn’t be encouraged. This isn’t a survival game, and victory should be based on defeating your opponent, not outlasting his patience.


The way he worded it suggests it isn’t a comeback style thing. He is literally hiding vils because people can’t afford spies all in the hopes that:

A position which pretty clearly suggests that he knows the game is over, but is hoping to win, because the other person gets bored or drops.


Exactly. This^^^, it definitely seems like griefing to me.


OP has already shown many times how toxic he his, now confirmed once again through this topic.

1 Like

The wording suggests that the ‘enemy’ believes it’s over while probably spamming resign already. Meanwhile he the player believes he can still attempt to win and has a chance in his mind. I say go for it.

I’ve seen plenty of players think they’ve won at minute 12 when the game is clearly still going. The perception of each player matters - until both agree to end the match, one dies or one resigns, the spam you can resign again types can take a hike.


Hiding vils in the hope that the other person drops isn’t him believing he can win. At least, not in any legitimate way. @FreeWinPlz1739 can you please clarify what you mean. Also, look at the name. A username containing FreeWin suggests that he would be willing to grief if it gives him the win.

1 Like

Honestly it really isn’t hard to find vills - use the idle military hotkey and spam the entire map via the mini-map in such a way it blankets all the land.
(Also a key way for infantry to counter mass siege spamming towards the edges of incoming siege and attacking once the siege is surrounded by well divided infantry similar to hell-zone grenade by piccolo)

Your poll is not quite clear. Do YOU think you still have a chance of winning if the opponent keeps playing? That’s what matters.


We just have different opinion on grieving. It is not my fault when you cannot afford spy. If you cannot afford the key technology or unit then you don’t deserve to win.
Banning will not happen. The devs don’t check our games all the time. I have never seen the

I couldn’t find any rule that describes grieving. Banning will not happen. The devs dont check our games all the time.
in my opinion, any behavior that will lead to victory is not grieving. You cannot afford spy is not my fault. You don’t deserve to win if you cannot afford the key technology or units.

I don’t want to give up easily means i dont think the game is over. You cannot read my mind so don’t speak for me. Getting bored or drops shouldnt be the excuses of losing. One guy cannot play a game for more than 3 hours doesn’t mean his enemy should resign within 3 hours.

Spies is not a key technology. It’s a tech implemented to try and stop people griefing the way you are. Running on the pretense that it’s ok to wait for people to drop because they can’t afford spies is not something that should be acceptable. I feel strongly about this, as you can tell. Partly because I don’t like griefers, partly because I’ve lost a ranked game I could have won because my internet went down for the first time in 6 months while I was part way through a ranked game. What you do to win ruins the experience for others.


What you’re saying he does doesn’t match up with what he says he does nor what the initial post points to.

You’re assuming he’s hiding/walling vills to simply hide with no come-back plan -

It’s certainly not what is being said.

I would have said partly yes, but after an argument on this thread, and losing hours of work on a scenario I’d been making due to an incredibly frustrating and stupid bug, I’m now in a position where I would say no.

I think the main key here is whether or not both players believe if the game has ended or not. If one player still thinks there’s A chance of victory regardless of how slim, I see no reason to even begin considering labeling it as grieving as long as it’s an honest effort.

What you’re aiming for is assuming both players agree that it’s over yet the losing player keeps playing anyways beyond a certain point.

That being said, that second example is also fine since it’s like playing chess until check-mate or ‘go’ until all possible moves have been made - it’s valuable experience for the losing player.

Sorry about the scenario, I understand losing hours of work for one reason or another - all that setup just to start over again or do a different project all together