I support DO's renaming proposal.

Another thing,

Survive made sense when PPSC was an option - but if it is going to be removed then so should this stat.

You'd probably have different ordering of results based on game type. I dont care how many people are a tie if the game SOS, just how many SC I've got.

DO is wise

^

I like "eliminated" instead of "survived".

Erm, "eliminated" instead of "defeated". I'm awesome.

What if we did something that appeases both parties? What if we had a defeated stat which was a combination of both the Eliminated and Survive stats; but beneath the defeated stat we listed a break down of "what percentage of defeats were survives or eliminations" in other words: if you were defeated in 76% of your matches your defeat stat would say "76%" then below that it would say 51% survives and 49% eliminations. This now would imply that a survive is a defeat while maintaining the stat in order to motivate people not to late game CD.

@CommanderByron
Isnt that what we have now? I can do the math and add up defeats and survives and know how many times (or percentage)I got my ass kicked. I don't need another stat to save me the simple arithmetic.

I would support keeping "Defeated" but renaming it "Eliminated." However, is it really worth the effort to change, simply for the sake of it?

A rose by any other name... Or in this case something much less pleasant.

I like the differentiation between survive and defeated (which should be renamed eliminated). A survive is better than an elimination. I think it gives a player who has no chance of winning something to shoot for. And if the only way to survive is to help another player get to 18, then I don't think that is a bad thing because there are too many draws in Diplomacy anyway. IMHO.

I too like the four-way win/draw/survive/eliminated. (Actually, as you could see in the other thread, I actually thought those were already the names.)

There should never be any gamemechanic that makes you help someone to a solo. Its just verry bad.

if someone solos all other results are the same, defeat. If your eliminated 02 or survive on 1-16 sc dosent matter to me, you lost.

And that's why only one of them is called "win".

Was in response to spymans.
"And if the only to survive is to help another player get 18" above

"And if the only way to survive is to help another player get to 18, then I don't think that is a bad thing because there are too many draws in Diplomacy anyway."

This is called kingmaking. It is bad and you should feel bad.

Who is king making bad? I think it is a viable tactic when faced with elimination. A player threatened with sure elimination chooses to help the soloing player unless the others include him in the draw. That seems like the rational thing to do.

If I get a sure loss, I'm taking everyone with me.. If you get a draw, I get a draw.

I'm certainly not doing any favors for the group trying to eliminate me.

I play for my best result, and preventing a solo isn't always my best result. If I'm to be eliminated because others think they can force a draw with out me, I'm going to show them that they can't.

There is a significant difference between "helping someone get to 18" and what I would term "making others understand I am indispensable to a draw".

I would support changing "defeated" to "eliminated".

My two cents.

I don't mean to hijack this thread but on the other hand I don't want to start yet another one. I think all of these threads about RR, PPSC, and the like are really about "how" to play the game. While I consider myself more old school in thought and I certainly lean towards the Diplomacy orthodoxy side of thing, who am I to tell people how to play the game? It's fundamentally about having fun. The trend seems to be forcing people to play the game the "right" way but there seems to be a sizable group of people that don't want to play that way. Is it fair to them to make them conform?

Personally, I thing the most bullshit stat on the site is the Draw stat. I've seen that stat manipulated so much more than survived. The implication that survived means you failed to prevent someone from soloing seems kind of lame. I've had survives I don't deserve. I've also had survives because I fought tooth and nail to prevent Player A from winning. The survived is bullshit because Player B took advantage of that and soloed? Nothing I can do about that if I have other concerns.

On the other I've seen people deliberately not solo for some weird draw alliance or 50/50 split (those people are the worst - full disclosure I did it once and I still feel dirty about it). To me the people who don't go for a solo when they can easily do so are so much more worse than the people playing for a survive. That boils down to Draw = good plus Yay! I got points. I'd love to see the points disappear entirely because I think that is the number one reason you get people "not playing the game the right way".

I don't know. It seems that a lot of these debates as of late are more about philosophical differences in how to play the game. Online dating sites have personality profiles, maybe we need something like that here. Get on it mods! Who cares about your free time? : ) I'm less concerned with someones survival rate than whether or not they believe in 50/50 splits or unbreakable alliances or will they whine endlessly if I stab them. The stats won't help me weed out those players.

Playing for a survive can be a valuable diplomacy tactic. I have been in situations where the game has turned into two versus two., whereupon my ally has stabbed me after agreeing to a three-way draw. What do I do? Cut a deal with the largest power (not my ally) offering to push him over the line to a solo. Two turns later, stab my new ally, and voila I am back in the game. Is this unethical? I don't think so.

No, not I, I will survive
Long as I know how to love
I know I'll stay alive
I've got all my life to live
And all my love to give and I'll survive
I, I, I will survive

There's nothing wrong with offering to help someone to a solo.

If he actually solos, you probably fked up, but then, balancing between a big power determined to solo and one or more smaller powers determined to cut you out of the draw is one of the tougher challenges in this game, so it's not unexpected.