Santa Barbara

I'm tired of this Santa Barabara soap opera shit 'Troll and admin abuse'.
Where is that people who write CoC fo Zero K or who is responsible for define it?
I want to knowsome things.
Whick is trolling casees from bellow situations in game? To be clear i think that is my startegy to win and i don't do it becasue i want to hurt my team. Theoretical player is highest or second highest elo player in team. And i resign becasue i think that game is lost and my team isnt any chances to win.
1) I make start push with my commander in enemy base, then loose it and resign.
2) I make singu rush at start.
3) I make roach and blastwing canon from start.
4) I make scorcer rush, then it fails and i resign.
5) I make scallop warrior drop and after failed drop i resign.
6) I start rush bertha or strider.
7) I just go wild trollcom in 16x16 map and when i loose then i resign.
8) I rush at start nuke.

I want to know if this is legit startegy who works in CoC or not. Without any insult on anyone or something like that.

Its very revelant for me as i want try new tactic in game. But if others players start say that its agains CoC then i feel too bad.
And in image was 'slightly relevant' then this theme then my thread why there is many disscussions about that all?

i think all tactics are legit.

We all know, Firemen go high-risk-tactics.
And when its will work its good, and a faster victory for team.

And then the fast resign...
A game should:
-->Victory
-->Fun

And when i think, this round i will go troll Com and then i lost my Commander, (Best yet if it's not my fault ( 2 Swifts ) - Lack of coverage from the air Players ) then is the fun destroyed and i will resign.

I think its all legit.

plz stop it
can you just play the game
geez

For many tactics their reasonableness is based on communication and respect. You can do basically any tactic if you tell your team and they agree to it. The amount of communication and agreement required for a tactic should increase with the risk of the tactic. This is because you should respect your teammate's wishes to play a reasonable game. Also many tactics are more effective if the rest of your team knows and can play around it. The rest of your team can tell you not to rush something large if they don't want to play around you missing from the game for several minutes.

For example imagine you are rushing a nuke. You don't tell anyone. 30 seconds into the game a teammate notices and tell you to stop and do something more immediately useful. They are expressing a desire to not have the team do a nuke-rush strategy with involves them picking up your slack. As a nuke rush has long payoff time you should probably switch to something more standard.

On the other hand if you tell everyone to plan to nuke rush and they agree to play around that then you are free to nuke rush.

Resigning after a failed rush is often disrespectful. Failed rushes are generally salvageable and you owe it to your team to help them out for the rest of the game. Resigning after a failed rush tends to be selfish because you replace the usual "win or lose" options of a game with "win or spectate". The issue here is that the "spectate" option hinders one team. If you don't want to play a full game then spectate from the start, then you don't screw up half the players in the game.

Sure, that approach can work. It's just some politeness and respecting that people can oppose you doing something crazy.