Is suggesting a trade through chat team playing/king making?

[Shinobu-shi]

So the situation is BLUE has excellent city building and is one road away from getting the road bonus. It's ORANGE's turn and I chat them saying I can trade them 2 wood for 2 wheat (just so they don't maritime trade their wheat away). This way ORANGE can take the road bonus instead of BLUE.

Further context:
ORANGE and I are at 4 points. BLUE is at 6 points so BLUE would be at 8 if they get the road bonus.

I notice that ORANGE can take the road building bonus by building 2 roads. I know they have 2 bricks and they can maritime trade for 1 wood but then they won't have enough for 2 roads. I was also alerting them to the possibility of the trade because if BLUE gets 8 points with their city building speed, we would be too far behind to catch up.

They didn't actually accept my trade because they maritime traded 4 wheat for 1 wood to make a road. But as I thought, they were going for it anyway and I wanted to chat to suggest a trade because I also needed wheat.

But BLUE suggested that trade chats are not allowed and that this is team playing. I was trying to look for the rule on this but the only thing I found is something saying it's technically okay for anyone to talk to anyone at any time and therefore suggest future trades. At the time, it was mainly a suggestion to avert disaster for that turn. There was zero intent to manufacture unfair trades or king-make. Doing so wouldn't really guarantee that either of us would be "king" but it was to stop someone else from winning too easily.

Also, this seems like something that has got to be common IRL over the board gameplay but is hard to communicate online.

Just asking for future reference if this is something I can do or if I should avoid suggesting trades through chat entirely.

[detlefchef11]

I honestly think this is fine, especially given the fact that what I asked about is apparently fine. I was in a game where one player, who had just rolled 7, told the other player that he'd rob from me if he would trade him something he needed. So, that's what you're talking about with a little something extra.

Obviously this would not be cool if the trade offer was sent via pm.

The player in the lead HAS to assume the others will gang up on them, after all.

[Shinobu-shi]

I honestly think this is fine, especially given the fact that what I asked about is apparently fine. I was in a game where one player, who had just rolled 7, told the other player that he'd rob from me if he would trade him something he needed. So, that's what you're talking about with a little something extra.

Obviously this would not be cool if the trade offer was sent via pm.

The player in the lead HAS to assume the others will gang up on them, after all.

Aha! It was actually your post that I saw that seemed like a close enough situation. But I wasn't sure if it completely applied because BLUE went out of their way to say that trade chats aren't allowed.

[Cos-]

The way I think about it is, it's like if you were playing the board game in person. When you play Catan in person, there isn't such a constrained user interface for offering trades, people just say what they want and then others may agree or suggest changes to the offer. Chat is a good way to get around the bad user interface for trades on BGA, and say what you are interested in. It's unfortunate that chat on BGA doesn't work very well - people often don't see that there's a new message - but when it works, it can be a useful to way to arrange trades.

[Confettier]

This is completely acceptable in both real game play and during Catan competitions. I've seen similar situations in rounds I've played where players are overtly upset when others try tactics like this, or when two parties are fighting each other for second place.

It seems like something that just doesn't translate well here on BGA. There is not as much game time communication as there is in real life.

Definitely not something that is report worthy, or red thumbed yet I see it happen every day.

[player60523]

So the situation is BLUE has excellent city building and is one road away from getting the road bonus. It's ORANGE's turn and I chat them saying I can trade them 2 wood for 2 wheat (just so they don't maritime trade their wheat away). This way ORANGE can take the road bonus instead of BLUE.

Further context:
ORANGE and I are at 4 points. BLUE is at 6 points so BLUE would be at 8 if they get the road bonus.

I notice that ORANGE can take the road building bonus by building 2 roads. I know they have 2 bricks and they can maritime trade for 1 wood but then they won't have enough for 2 roads. I was also alerting them to the possibility of the trade because if BLUE gets 8 points with their city building speed, we would be too far behind to catch up.

They didn't actually accept my trade because they maritime traded 4 wheat for 1 wood to make a road. But as I thought, they were going for it anyway and I wanted to chat to suggest a trade because I also needed wheat.

But BLUE suggested that trade chats are not allowed and that this is team playing. I was trying to look for the rule on this but the only thing I found is something saying it's technically okay for anyone to talk to anyone at any time and therefore suggest future trades. At the time, it was mainly a suggestion to avert disaster for that turn. There was zero intent to manufacture unfair trades or king-make. Doing so wouldn't really guarantee that either of us would be "king" but it was to stop someone else from winning too easily.

Also, this seems like something that has got to be common IRL over the board gameplay but is hard to communicate online.

Just asking for future reference if this is something I can do or if I should avoid suggesting trades through chat entirely.

I also agree that this is acceptable. It's actually the way the game is meant to be played.

Trust me, if you ever come across a nefarious group of people who are only interested in ganging up on you, it will become fairly obvious what is going on. I made a post about my own experience of this to warn people that this type of behavior exists for this BGA version of the game. I think it is particularly bad for this version of the game given how easy it is to network with your friends in comparison to other platforms (sending invites, knowing where others are playing, etc). Which by the way is a good thing to have for any platform, but others will use it for the wrong reasons.

It is my hope that changes will eventually be made that can hinder this type of activity.

[GoddessJen]

If you could not discuss trades in chat, then trades would be much more difficult. It makes no sense. Maybe the person getting rid of the wheat was worried about having too many cards and that's why they didn't take the trade. More likely though, the that of being reported scared them and that was the goal of the person threatening.

[LightKnight]

The way I think about it is, it's like if you were playing the board game in person. When you play Catan in person, there isn't such a constrained user interface for offering trades, people just say what they want and then others may agree or suggest changes to the offer. Chat is a good way to get around the bad user interface for trades on BGA, and say what you are interested in. It's unfortunate that chat on BGA doesn't work very well - people often don't see that there's a new message - but when it works, it can be a useful to way to arrange trades.

+1

[dralkyr]

We often discuss trades in chat when we're all on. It's so much more efficient and actually gets to the desired outcome for everyone faster.

Now if you DIRECTLY messaged them, no, don't do that. Using chat is circumventing the interface in favor of efficiency, but making exclusive trade discussion isn't cool

[sopadequinoa]

What you did is totally allowed. Blue was just whining, but that is something that happens with a lot of players... In general, players should try to keep the player(s) in the lead from winning and they may collaborate to so do. It keeps the game as balanced as possible.

But also the other way around, if a player that is not in the lead decides to not steal from a player with the highest amount of points, it's not necessarily king making. A player could have various motives to do so (stealing a specific card that he/she needs from another player, trying to win a strategic spot, wanting to end in second place instead of third). All valid reasons.

Please continue to play like you do