We are currently looking for experienced players willing to mentor members looking to improve their Diplomacy game. At the end of December all mentors will be entered into a raffle for a prize. If you are interested please email webdipmod@gmail.com to volunteer.

Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 346 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Ezio (723 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
(+4)
aaron rodgers is a god
the title is a fact
23 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (100 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
God banned from Facebook
https://www.good.is/articles/facebook-bans-god

I hope webDip does not follow suit. I am always interested to hear what our almighty creator, the ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority, has to say.
15 replies
Open
slypups (1620 D)
09 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Separate stats on 1v1 games
The 1v1 games have pretty different dynamics from the other games. Would be interesting to see 1v1 stats separate from the rest. What do people think?
3 replies
Open
zultar (3900 D Mod (P))
01 Jan 17 UTC
(+3)
Invitational games by yours truly
Details inside.
67 replies
Open
OB_Gyn_Kenobi (100 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
1v1 practice
gameID=188460
Live
Anyone welcome.
You NMR and I'll send you a rotting fish in the mail.
2 replies
Open
Matticus13 (1159 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
Analysis Wanted: gameID=187236
Game summary follows from my perspective (as Russia) in this 7WD. Would enjoy some analysis and nitpicking on my play specifically.
12 replies
Open
Klaelman23 (100 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
Chat function apparently crashed...?
Playing this game. http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=187592

For some reason, I can't send messages anymore. Could before, can't now. I've never run into this before. Is this a bug or by design?
2 replies
Open
Kremmen (2597 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
New live game not full, but no way to join
There's a live game called "First <1 hour known world GB"
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188263
It has 11 players. Obviously needs 15 players, but there is no join button!
Anyone know what's up?
5 replies
Open
pastoralan (100 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
Forum rules question
So I have a philosophical question that game up because of a decision in a game that is ongoing. I can ask without revealing the game or having any conversation about the positions. Would that be forbidden conversation about an ongoing game?
12 replies
Open
WyattS14 (100 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
7 minute phase new world map?
Would anybody be interested in doing a gunboat game on the newest world map (15 player variant) with 7 minute phases?
15 replies
Open
Deinodon (251 D (B))
07 Jan 17 UTC
Spain NC
Does anyone ever move there?
10 replies
Open
WyattS14 (100 D)
05 Jan 17 UTC
Site addition?
There's a game mode in VDiplomacy that allows you to choose your country as long as no one else has picked it. I obviously don't know the first part of adding something to a site like this, but it'd be a cool add on, thoughts?
29 replies
Open
Adamious (632 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
Keeping up with the Yoyo - The ethics of Diplomacy
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=185657#gamePanel
My personal opinion - just draw guys
Discussion point - is there a right or wrong in Diplomacy (besides obvious rules etc etc
Adamious (632 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
In reference to the recent events in end game. See global press for drama...
Nikola Maric Eto (20462 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
A, we can't discuss games in progress on the forum. You can get banned for that.
captainmeme (849 D Mod)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+2)
You can't discuss ongoing *gunboat games on the forum. I believe it's fine to discuss FP ones (at least, it was when I was a mod).

To me, it looks like everything Russia is doing and posting in global is saying 'This wasn't my fault, I'm still in the right here - I'm just staying faithful to my alliance, so no blame can be placed on me for this'. That's honestly a really horrible thing to do to the other players in the game, especially when there was a very clear shot at stopping the solo.

If you are stabbed by an ally and they go for a solo, you should try to stop them from doing so. Throwing the game to them in an attempt not to have to admit that you were misled is playing against your win condition, denying other players a chance at a draw that you should be going for, and while it might make you feel a bit better it will make everyone else in that game think less of you.

You'll be mocked a fair amount either way for allowing the player to trick you like that (speaking from personal experience) but the least you can do is take responsibility for your actions and try to stop the solo from happening.
leon1122 (211 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
Russia is a douchebag. He seems to think that Germany deceiving him into postponing a build make his victory a "sham" and also has some preconceived notion that all his games should pan out according to his desired permanent alliance, and if one doesn't pan out that way, he'll stop putting any effort into it. He also puts less effort into games where he's assign countries he doesn't like, which is quite ludicrous. But worst of all, this player seems to have played hundreds of games, so God knows how many others he has ruined.

I'm assuming, Adamious, that you're Germany. You should definitely take the solo, or it would just give such trolls more power.
Oh, sorry, my bad.
Octavious (1716 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
I frankly wish Eto's views on game commentary was more widely held. Commentating on any games that don't invite it annoys me, especially when said games are anonymous. How do such comments add any value or enjoyment to a game, especially when the comments are insulting?

I hope that the players of the game have enough sense to ignore this crap.

Adamious (632 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
1 - if this thread is against site rules, my bad, delete it.
2 - I'm merely a spectator of the mentioned game
3 - my intention was not to mock any player, and as far as I can remember the initial thread about this game encouraged others to take part in speculations and comments about players and playing style etc, it is after all a special invite game to honour a newbecome mod....
4 - I honestly think the events and debate ingame is of general interest to all webdippers/diplomacy players, since it touches on the very objective and essence of the game, game ending, and for whatever different reasons we all take part in it all in the first place
Jamiet99uk (100 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
Germany's stab was well timed, good play.

Russia's response is pathetic and against his win condition. Very poor show from Russia.
zultar (3900 D Mod (P))
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
While it's not against the rules to discuss ongoing full press games, it's generally not done. I personally think it's bad form to do so as it might unduly influence the outcome of the game. Having said that, that wasn't the OP's intentions. So I think it will be fine to leave this thread as it is and we don't comment on the game until it's done.
Tom Bombadil (2917 D (G))
29 Dec 16 UTC
Game is done. I have a lot of thoughts on it, and will post when I have a longer break from work.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
@_Captain meme may I correct just one apparent misunderstanding, I was misled beautifully in that game at least twice, and happy to admit that. Yoyoyozo misled me wonderfully right at the start of the game in 01, & Tom later in the game
Tom Bombadil (2917 D (G))
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
So this is what I think about the situation, as well as some rationale behind why I decided to solo instead of draw.

First of all, I think how RUS played is in poor taste, and not really in the spirit of the game, but everybody has a right to play how they want as long as it is within the rules. I would never play like that, nor do I enjoy being put in a situation where one of the three final players is effectively just holding all of their units allowing someone else to solo.

To me, there were three ways the game could end:

1) A three way draw. I felt that a player who had given up entering orders or trying to stop a solo should not be included in draw. So this was immediately off the board for me.
2) A 17/17 split with Italy. I strongly considered this, and could still be convinced this was the proper route I should have taken. Italy was put on the wrong side of RUS’s inaction, while I was put on the right side. Had RUS participated as most players would, there is a very good chance I would have been stopped short and a three way draw would have occurred.
3) Solo. Obviously this is the route I took. And selfishly part of the reason I took it is because I felt it was the most fair to me (although the most unfair to Italy). My main reasoning was that I thought I had played well enough to have a chance at a solo. While I was not counting on the completely bizarre behavior of RUS, I knew that he was extremely loyal to his alliances in game. It took a huge amount of work and convincing to push him towards stabbing Austria. Part of the reason I stabbed late game and went for the solo is because I thought he could be manipulated and would not see it coming.


I guess I didn’t see a compelling enough reason not to solo. While it was unfair somewhat to Italy, I put myself in a better position than Italy did to benefit from Russia’s erratic behavior. I’m interested to see what others think though.
arj11 (254 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+2)
Glad to see that there was a forum thread discussing this game.

I was Italy in aforementioned game and I feel like I got the short end of the stick on this one. Granted, Germany's play had been great throughout the game and he executed a well timed stab there was still a very real shot at stopping the solo and forcing the draw if Russia and I had worked together.

To be honest, I did not see Russia's reasoning behind giving up on the game but I digress. As for the final outcome, Germany and I talked a good deal after Russia posted about walking away from the game. Germany offered me a 2wd which left me torn. On the one hand, I would have liked to get something out of the game as if Russia and I had worked together I am sure we could have stopped the solo and forced the draw. On the other hand, I felt that is was unfair to Germany to have to settle for a 2wd after putting in so much effort and having a solo so easily in sight.

I told Germany that the final decision was up to him and told him I was putting in moves for the 2wd. However, Germany decided to take the solo which I am not going to blame him for.

Though I was definitely disappointed with the resul of the game, I was more disappointed that we weren't able to duke it out and come to a fair conclusion.

Interested to hear what others would do in this situation and their opinions.

MajorMitchell (984 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
@ Leon, I've only finished 110 games so it's impossible for me to have ruined hundreds of games, and clearly you have made little effort, if any to study my NMR & reliability rating information available on my player page. Secondly I think it a most Pollyanna like view of the world to think.that I will always play my best game with equal interest and passion no matter what country I get or what game it is. For a start I'm a flawed player, I play badly at times, indifferently often, can be over cautious, make mistakes, and sometimes I play well, and occasionally but not often very well and rarely but now and again perhaps almost brilliantly.
Some of you may regard this as heresy, but although I understand this view that solo wins are the penultimate achievement, I do not agree with that view. Similarly I do not believe that a player must always defend with all his efforts equally against other players attacking him. Yoyoyozo and I shared this and another game, where a player with England started out as a virtual CD until Peregrine Falcon took over England. I'd suggest that shaped that game as much, maybe more than my partial CD in the second game.
I also make no claim that my actions in the way I played Russia at the end of the game being discussed was with great virtue, or in an exemplary manner, it's rare but not unknown for me to do it. Do not expect me to behave in predictable ways when you doublecross me, or to your expectations.
My advice is to try to figure out players who have an insane play style early in the game, and then conspire to eliminate these players or else take advantage of them.
Deinodon (251 D (B))
29 Dec 16 UTC
@swords, that's impossible in anon.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
29 Dec 16 UTC
Two of my previous games..both feature Russian German alliances, with draws where I might have gone for a solo...171669 & 182081 Ishirkmywork and Chef played in 171669 two of the rare games that I've played where the alliance has actually held without disunity.
For those who ask why I joined 182081, an anon game for newbies, simple, I was looking at new games saw it with six players and in last hours before cancelling, I let it run down to approx two hours. So I thought I'd give anonymous mentoring a go & have an exploration of how to play "ethically" in the situation into which I'd put myself.
I'll participate in this discussion. Thanks to Tom and arj11 for their posts. arj11 got the worst of the deal, that I agree with.
ssorenn (2662 D (G))
29 Dec 16 UTC
So, you decide to not enter orders because a person went for solo? Really?
ssorenn (2662 D (G))
29 Dec 16 UTC
(+5)
The game is about winning. When down to three people, the point of drawing is the whoever got screwed over has another player to stop the possible solo.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
No ssoren that is innacurate and simplistic, it wasn't simply because Tom went for a solo, imy actions were a response to the particular way to get his solo that Tom chose, if he'd gone about it differently there would have been a different reaction by me.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
Game 182081... Didn't end in a draw, I helped my ally win not me..I say I did the right thing
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
One of the most famous of the WW1 fighter aces, was successful partly because be tried to only enter a dogfight when it was on terms that were advantageous to him, and. if the situation disadvantaged him, would fly off to find a situation that advantaged him.
Does Tom know how I would fight him in Scandinavia, what tricks I might have ? Not really. So in a future game he hasn't an advantage he might have gained from me "giving it everything" in a hopeless cause this time.
What has he learnt ?, that I value loyalty, and that he had a most unenjoyable experience after betraying me....sounds like the perfect experience to give him.
He sets me up as a Patsy, betrays me, and what, you expect me to then give him exactly what he wants, a dogged fight that he will always win because of the way he's so cleverly set me up ? That rewards his behaviour towards me, if I am to discourage him I don't think rewarding him helps ME in the future.
leon1122 (211 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
"No ssoren that is innacurate and simplistic, it wasn't simply because Tom went for a solo, imy actions were a response to the particular way to get his solo that Tom chose"

Yeah, I'm sure you would have done differently if Germany had only told you about his stab beforehand and given you time to prepare yourself.
Peregrine Falcon (1581 D (B))
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
Hilarious that MajorMitchell mentioned the game where I took over a CD. That's my only experience playing with him, but he played just as emotionally and ruined his own position as a result, upsetting the balance of the game in a similar manner to this one.
I don't think throwing the game was a good way to go. It seems counter-intuitive to reward someone for betraying you. However, I would defend MajorMitchell's ability to do whatever he wants in the game, provided it's within the rules. Throwing solos is a very real part of the game. If Mitchell wanted to, that his prerogative.

I think Tom Bombadil did the right thing taking the solo. Taking a solo after an accidental CD could be construed as dirty. However, taking a solo that was thrown to you is totally fine in my opinion. It just shows that you did a good job reading the board and players.
arj11 (254 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
I don't think this was the traditional solo throwing though. Typically one throws a solo to spite someone else or if they don't have a shot in the game. However in this case there was a very real chance to draw and it wasn't even attempted which is what erked me.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
I raised that game PF because of the way the player with England played before you joined, but the timing of your joining didn't help me, it was the final bit to create an unwinnable position for me given my mediocre abilities with Italy.. Yet I kept fighting however you dissaprove of the way I did it and it got me nowhere but gave the blighter with France much amusement and a good look at my game
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
I think Tom was perfectly entitled to have the solo, he set me up like a perfect Patsy.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
No Leon there was a key build that I postponed just before Tom attacked me because he played me almost as well.as Yoyoyozo with Turkey played me at the start of the game over the Black Sea. Tom worked on me to postpone that build, so I had this choice give him the "security" he demanded by postponing the build, or not to. I realised it increased the risk of betrayal, and I half decided then if Tom did attack me then I probably wouldn't fight back,but I didn't tell Tom that, but made it clear that I did know that by postponing the build I was giving him a substantial advantage, and really disadvantaging Russia should he attack me. When it happened I was so disappointed that yet another attempt to get a Russian German alliance to a finish where both players are more or less equally rewarded had crashed that I failed to put in orders for a build phase where I had a disband. I did put in orders for the remaining moves promptly, mainly hold orders but some movement orders to allow Italy better opportunity to capture Bulgaria and Constantinople
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
If I'd made the build I would have felt obligated to fight it out, by not making the build to invest in alliance stability, to oblige Tom, I felt I had much less obligation to fight should Tom attack Russia
Octavious (1716 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
I think it's fair to say that our Major's style of play, whilst somewhat alien to many of us, has netted him a good number of solos. There is clearly something about it that works, regardless of the fact that at times such as this it seems like madness. The challenge for the Major is to patch the holes without losing whatever it is that makes him so effective.

As far as taking the solo goes, I don't see how Tom could do anything else. He'd spent the game establishing a good position to mount a solo challenge, and to not do so just because one of the players adopts the Obi-Wan Kenobi school of defence would be madness. Come back more powerful he does not. Dead, he is.
Valis2501 (1897 D (G))
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+3)
@Oct

Literally all his wins are PPSC and all but 1 are 2013 or earlier.
qoou (305 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
"One of the most famous of the WW1 fighter aces, was successful partly because be tried to only enter a dogfight when it was on terms that were advantageous to him, and. if the situation disadvantaged him, would fly off to find a situation that advantaged him."

That (playing in the context of your account on the site, instead of the context of the game) is meta-gaming and last I checked was punishable by banning.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
I don't see how giving up on a hypothetical draw & 70 odd points for a survived & no points helps my account at WebDiplomacy. If gaining a reputation as an emotional and erratic player helps my WebDiplomacy account, the way in which it does eludes me.
That's a good observation about my solo wins, not a high % and most in the first sixty games ( I think ) and far fewer since l 2013
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
I've got an outrageous win % over at VDiplomacy approx 70%
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
Oh and when the wonderful PPSC scoring was available probably 90% of my games were PPSC games
bo_sox48 (4293 D Mod (G))
30 Dec 16 UTC
You almost had a solo the other night because a couple of idiots were playing like it was PPSC lmao
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
Thanks Octavious for your post
MajorMitchell (984 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
Who almost had a solo Bo Sox ? & what does imao mean ?
Octavious (1716 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+1)
@ valis

Do them being PPSC really matter? At the end of the day most solos owe more to someone screwing up than the brilliance of the soloist, regardless of the scoring system. Sure, every now and then you'll get a solo that you're extremely proud of and you can genuinely put down to your plan outwitting quality opposition, but most of us can count them on the finger of one finger.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
03 Jan 17 UTC
I haven't received nearly enough kicks in the rear vestibule, bump from the previous page back to prominence
Ezio (723 D)
03 Jan 17 UTC
@falcon Do you think it's dirty to get a solo after someone CD's and that benefits you? What makes that so much different from someone getting emotional and throwing the game to you?
Peregrine Falcon (1581 D (B))
03 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
The difference is obviously quite subjective.
For me, if someone throws the game, it's done with intent. Either the solo'er succeeded to convince the thrower to throw, or the other powers failed in their press to keep them from throwing. Most often, it's a small power that throws when the other powers continue to try to eliminate them. That is a failure for the anti-solo powers.

A CD on the other hand, feels much less honourable. It feels much more like the soloing player simply solo'ed by accident, taking advantage of a situation that never should have happened. It's the lack of intent in a CD that ruins how honourable the solo is. For me, the options after a CD happens should be to find a replacement, cancel if it's early, or draw if a replacement can't be found. If none of those happens, and an important power is still missing, then it seems dishonourable for the board top to still go for the solo.
Tom Bombadil (2917 D (G))
03 Jan 17 UTC
^ I agree wholeheartedly with this. I think it is an important distinction when dealing with the difference in intention between CDing, and throwing a game.
Hapapop (525 D)
04 Jan 17 UTC
@Octavious. I think the knock against PPSC from certain quarters is the negotiation of win directly. I have, on many occasions, gotten a good lead and guaranteed a lesser power a very solid 2nd place (12 to 14 SC) for contributing to my solo. You can't get someone to work specifically for you solo in WTA.
@ Hapapop

Unless you're playing with MajorMitchell and stab him brutally like Bombadil did.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
04 Jan 17 UTC
PF you've seen me stabbed in another game & I fought on, usually that's what I do, but not always. I think any player can choose to walk away from a game, of course for all choices there are consequences. Carumba I get the rough end of the stick from CDs or illogical emotionally driven play from other players advantaging other players plenty of times, occasionally it'll advantage me, but rarely.
For me it was quite simple, Tom asked me not to make a key build, it wasn't an easy decision, so I thought, OK if I build, Tom can still beat me in the North but not easily, so if he does attack me then I'll fight it out against the odds; or I don't build and if Tom attacks me then there's no point fighting it out.
I was so disgusted with myself for trusting Tom when he attacked Russia I decided not only not to fight, but also to disband any unit forced to retreat, even if it had a retreat option to emphasise the level of disgust/disappointment I felt on this occasion, and to speed up the end of the game
Adamious (632 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
To me, honour in this game is to respect the rules, respect the other players (not CDing etc) and (maybe most importantly?) to play for the survival of your country - meaning: draw if necessary, win if collateral damage is affordable (^^) or take part in a winning alliance (in reference to the ongoing PPSC threads).

In a way though, I can understand the motives of MM not wanting to honour the backstab of himself. Why fight bravely against someone who just stabbed you? So they can enjoy the remaining (and uneven) fight? I believe the continued fighting makes the stabbing player feel less bad about a stab.
It's acually quite emotional to betray, stab and lie (or at least should be?). Sometimes your country is dependent upon you to do so in order to survive (ok megalomania), but it should be (at least in a press game) an action made with consideration and understanding that you ruin someone else's chances of surviving, possibly ruining their game (including gaming experience?)

Not wanting to honour another players stab is to me not dishonouring, it's just a part of the game, just as the stab itself. It's not an obligation for the stabbed player to judge if the stab was "rightful" or not, always having to accept righteous ones. A CD is always bad, but theres CDs for ingame reasons, other reasons, and CDs for no reason at all.
The stabber also must be aware of the seriosity of the action, maybe it is overly hopeful to think a stabbed player always should accept the betrayal? Why is it that we need the blessing of our stabbed mates to fully enjoy a win in Diplomacy?

Then again, even though I don't think it's necessarily dishonouring not to accept the stab, I think there's a great deal of honour in continued fighting, pursuing a draw or better. I guess what I'm after is, I am only responsible for my own gaming experience, not everybody elses. I can understand MMs reasoning, although I may not have acted the same way as he did. Or in a certain game maybe I would? As he says, he hasnt reacted the same way to every stab before..


47 replies
Balduran (119 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
Fleet transforming to Army or vice versa.
I'm in a Known World 901 game, and it allows fleets/armies to take a turn to transform to the other on a coastal SC. Maybe I'm blind, but I can't find the rules for this action mentioned anywhere, so I don't know how it works. Can I support an army transforming into a fleet successfully, or does the unit not count as holding? For that matter, I'm told that the unit being attacked cancels the transformation, is this true in all cases?
3 replies
Open
jmo1121109 (2532 D Mod)
07 Jan 17 UTC
(+6)
Hey Folks
I broke the site trying to make what I thought would be an easy feature addition. It's fixed now, but I recommend donating so Zultar doesn't have to rely on me as a dev. The mods are handling live impacted games and game time. Cheers.
16 replies
Open
slypups (1620 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
So Long World Diplomacy IX!
Here's a chance to say goodbye to this map before it's gone: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188324
0 replies
Open
Hellenic Riot (1574 D (G))
06 Jan 17 UTC
2016 Player of the Year Awards
After a 5 year absence; the Player of the Year Awards have been brought back to webDip by the Moderation Team. See inside for details.
29 replies
Open
Chaqa (3134 D (B))
07 Jan 17 UTC
(+7)
Locked out of site
Hey guys I was locked out and I made a second account (under the name ghug). If you could delete I'd be appreciative.
11 replies
Open
DammmmDaniel (104 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
BrainBomb Come Back
Where did BrainBomb go? It seems like he has disappeared from the Forums all together...
44 replies
Open
Mapu (372 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
Donation Idea
For $50, you can change your user name.
1 reply
Open
God's Lonely Man (100 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
new game right away
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188261
1 reply
Open
ssorenn (2662 D (G))
06 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
S vs Z
Oh how the mighty have fallen---
Sorry Big Z, had to share with your brood
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188203&msgCountryID=0
6 replies
Open
Jon65 (112 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
one player needed
Need one more player to fill out a game with friends.
1 reply
Open
WolfsBane626 (431 D)
06 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
15 more days until President Trump!!!!!
Who's excited for President Trump!!!!! He can undo all the idiotic stuff Obama did.
91 replies
Open
Peregrine Falcon (1581 D (B))
04 Jan 17 UTC
1v1 Series
Is anyone interested in playing a 1v1 series against me? I was thinking we do 3 FvA and 3 GvI, with additional tiebreakers if necessary.
5 replies
Open
brainbomb (474 D)
30 Dec 16 UTC
(+5)
Petition to bring back krellin
Add your name to the list. Fight fascism. Join the winning team. Fight for what is right like krellin probably in some convoluted way always tried to do.
265 replies
Open
brainbomb (474 D)
31 Dec 16 UTC
So... Agriculture
.
33 replies
Open
BurntAlmond (100 D)
05 Jan 17 UTC
The Infinite
Repost for http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188145

A serious game for experienced players. Classic, DSS, 100% RR. 2 day length phase. Please join :)
9 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (100 D)
05 Jan 17 UTC
Trump's Secretary of State to get $180m payout from Exxon...
.... to ensure sure he isn't biased toward Exxon.
You couldn't make this shit up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38512036
45 replies
Open
americaslacker (100 D)
04 Jan 17 UTC
Pacifist Dip
A while ago, I participated in a game titled: "UN II". It was a slow-paced world map that had the catch of being pacifist and acted like the UN. Does anyone know if there is another one? Or if there is enough people interested it would be great if we can start another.
14 replies
Open
Page 346 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top