Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 347 of 355
FirstPreviousNextLast
Matticus13 (614 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Best way to learn code
I want to learn how to code, but am having trouble deciding where to start. Their are many free resources, online classes, boot camps, etc. I would prefer to teach myself, but lack the knowledge to know what language I should be learning first and so on. Any tips from the experienced code writers here on WebDip?
47 replies
Open
taos (279 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
what happens when to fleets convoy the same army to the same point?
?
3 replies
Open
snowy801 (415 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Stalemate Gaming
Is there a rule against holding a stalemate indefinitely even though the situation is clear? I think he's hoping the rest of us give up and leave, which if it isn't against the rules yet then it should be.

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=189100
2 replies
Open
CAPT Brad (1216 D (B))
01 Jan 17 UTC
The Captain Will See You Now
I am starting my first long term gameID=187773 PM me for the password. It is one day turns and requires an eighty for reliability.
17 replies
Open
zultar (3900 D Mod (P))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+5)
Removing Known World and Keeping World
See inside.
26 replies
Open
CommanderByron (423 D (S))
04 Jan 17 UTC
PPSC discussion thread:
I don't particularly care for PPSC. But saw that another thread was having this discussion as a sidebar and thought it fair to start a discussion thread. There is reasonable support for PPSC and regardless of the majority opinion the minority's should be heard.
136 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (80 D (B))
13 Jan 17 UTC
(+2)
Abolish Sum-Of-Squares scoring
Ok, so I understand some people don't like PPSC and don't want it back. I disagree. BUT let's talk about SOS instead. It's a terrible scoring system and is directly contrary to the rulebook.
45 replies
Open
CptMike (1754 D)
14 Jan 17 UTC
New varant porposal -> µVariant
I was wondering if the following Variant was not "easy" to develop and it brings a crazy number of exciting possibilities...
13 replies
Open
Sandman99 (100 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Where my Libertarians at?
Just wondering if I have any fellow Libertarians on this god-forsaken website
28 replies
Open
VashtaNeurotic (1044 D)
13 Jan 17 UTC
(+3)
New Scoring System Proposal
I don’t know if this has been suggested but:
1. In draws have everyone alive share the pot equally (As they should because SoS is garbage)
2. In a solo, the soloist gains a portion of the pot equal to 18* divided by the number of centers controlled by the soloist or survivors (but not neutral centers or those of resigned powers) and the survivors split the remainder proportionally based on their center count.
*Or however many
7 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
13 Jan 17 UTC
Known World Realistic Speed
gameID=188977

7 days/phase to imitate how long it used to take messengers to move around. Let's do this thing. Rulebook press just to speed it up a little, and because why not
3 replies
Open
LeonWalras (670 D Mod)
09 Jan 17 UTC
ADVERTISE YOUR 1v1 GAMES HERE!
Is that the kind of thing that you think you might be into?
7 replies
Open
David E. Cohen (100 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+10)
From the Creator of Known World 901
I guess I need to look in on this site more often!
8 replies
Open
Rabid Acid Badger (50 D X)
13 Jan 17 UTC
Really want to test new map
Excites about this new map
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188972 password 901109
4 replies
Open
leon1122 (183 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Trump News Conference Discussion Thread
https://youtu.be/SUyAk0bYps0
51 replies
Open
Randomizer (214 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
Trump wants US to pay to Build the Wall
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/politics/border-wall-house-republicans-donald-trump-taxpayers/?iid=ob_article_footer_expansion

Trump wants US to pay for his wall and then try to bill Mexico for it.
102 replies
Open
DammmmDaniel (103 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Obama's Farewell Speech
I am a Diehard Republican believe it or not WepDip. But Obama's speech tonight has helped me realize many things tonight......

29 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
06 Jan 17 UTC
Going Away Game for the World Map
I wasn't a huge fan of it, but we should do a going away game for the World Map, similar to the Inaugural Known World 901 game we're running. Same deal, we get a mod to make the game the last one before they officially shut it off.
53 replies
Open
slypups (768 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Bug in attempted Known World move
This game: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=187862
Attempted Daju to Makuran with Al-Qatta'i support. Somehow, the support is showing as cut, even though no unit attacked Al-Qatta'i. Also, the orders page is showing an error. Please help.
5 replies
Open
The Diplomancer (75 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Is it just me, or is it dumb that you can retreat into other people's territory?
I know it's the rules of the game and all, but I feel like it would make more sense if you could only retreat into your own territory or neutral territory.
13 replies
Open
slypups (768 D)
04 Jan 17 UTC
So Long World Diplomacy IX
As some of you may have heard, the flawed World Dip IX map is going away. I made a game if you're interested in taking a final swing at this sucker: http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188080
36 replies
Open
breaca (433 D (S))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Which is more balanced 1-1?
How are the two 1-1s shaping up in terms of balance? The consensus on AvF seems to be that Austria usually wins. What about IvG? Do we have any stats to suggest which is a more balanced match?
2 replies
Open
ssorenn (2535 D (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Press between two countries
Is there a way to pull past press between two countries without going through everyone's.
0 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
11 Jan 17 UTC
Concede button for 1v1
We need a concede button on the 1v1 games.
captainmeme (561 D Mod)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+5)
I wonder what brought that thought about :D
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+5)
Don't 1v1 the guy who's been admin of the 1v1 site for years, people :/
DammmmDaniel (103 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
Yes I do believe we need a concede button as well please and thank you.
Ezio (816 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
I'm gonna give my 2 cents on this game, as it looks like it'll be fun: gameID=188830
first year: pretty standard. Both sides played my favored openings. I disagree with Austria's fleet build in Trieste. With France doing a Northern opening, you need an army in BUD, so you can bullrush Scandinavia via StP. You already have a fleet in the South that can take TUN, and hold it with a couple good guesses for a fleet next year.
Spring 1902: a terrible sequence for France involving PIE. I prefer moving into Spain first with MAR, so you can guess to bounce PIE out of MAR, if he moves into PIE. It avoids a situation like this and still gives you the guess. In the meantime, Austria has completely abandoned Germany. France should have all of Germany by next year.
Fall 1902: This turn was completely expected. MUN-Kiel ensured France could not take both of them this turn, and taking Warsaw ensured the extra build. Now it will be interesting to see what Austria does with Warsaw. He could either try to stall France out in Germany, or head to the North.
Builds: Expected builds.
Spring 1903: interesting decision to move into North Africa rather than Western Med. If France had moved into Tyrr, it works out far worse I think. France's army in BOH is about to cause some serious damage. Austria can't handle it effectively. France will take BER, and hold onto Kiel and MUN. This game is looking bad for Austria now.
Fall 1903: France's moves were excellent. There was no way for Austria to take MUN, and he guaranteed capture of BER and Kiel. Furthermore, there was no chance for Austria to slip into the Mid Atlantic Ocean. I'm entirely unsure of what should have been done by Austria, even knowing 100% what France would do.
rdrivera2005 (2409 D (G))
11 Jan 17 UTC
Ezio, I am a completelly noob at 1 x 1 so I have a question to you as you stated the north opening is one of your favored openings: how do you win as France without having Tun? Or do you think that France can take Tun later with this opening?
captainmeme (561 D Mod)
11 Jan 17 UTC
It was actually gameID=188828 that made him make this thread, but that one was fun too (up until he had to leave and didn't vote pause =/).

I agree with pretty much all the analysis written there. Even after the Piedmont problem, I think I had that game after 03.
Ezio (816 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
@rd, usually Austria doesn't commit too heavily to having fleets, for the problems shown in this game, so you usually can retake Tun. If you can't, you should be able to break them in the North and just crush your opponent.
captainmeme (561 D Mod)
11 Jan 17 UTC
Convoying into Livonia is often a good way to pick up an 18th as France, if you can get there early enough.
Ezio (816 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
Gah I'm so frustrated. I really wanna have these conversations, but there's a tournament going on right now...
slypups (768 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
I concede that a concede button would be helpful.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
I don't think so. If you ready orders for a few turns you'll be done in bo time...

Yeah i admit the last few turns go pretty slow, if your opponent is entering 14-17 orders. But if you publically concede and just click ready with no orders, it will not take long at all.
I would actually be fine with not having a concede button. I think it might lead to players conceding too early. I think it's alright to have a game take a little bit longer just to ensure it's played properly to the end.
Ezio (816 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Falcon, in a 1v1 game does it matter if someone concedes early? I understand in a multiplayer game, but if someone concedes early they are just harming themselves. Also, in 1v1's the games tend to snowball quickly, so it is possible to see how the game is going to go a year or two before it actually ends.
bo_sox48 (4320 D Mod (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Personally, I think the victor should have the satisfaction of reaching 18 centers. The loser shouldn't have the option to bail early just because they're losing.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
^
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Yeah, it snowballs quickly, and you see it coming, but you should still do your best.

It sucks to win if our opponent rolls over and gives up... But also fighting to the bitter end can sometimes earn you a much greater victory. (Someone must have stories of a country down to 1 SC who managed a solo..) And while this may be rarer in 1v1s, it takes far less time investment to see what happens.
Ezio (816 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
What is a 1v1 game where resignation is forbidden? That's like saying you shouldn't be allowed to concede in chess when your opponent has mate in 3. Those last few moves are just a waste of everyone's time, as both players are double and triple checking to make certain they didn't miss anything. If it's not a live game, this can take weeks.
bo_sox48 (4320 D Mod (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
I hate it when people resign against me in chess. I don't do it to others. They deserve the satisfaction of a handshake when I'm actually in mate, not when it's coming.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Ezio, diplomacy is not chess.

I seriously doubt you will ever be able to predict more than 1/2 move victories. And the calculation will take linger than entering the orders would.

Also in Chess, players can make mistakes. I've forced many a stalemate against players who need to work on their end-game. (And if you just resign, they'd never have gotten a chance to work on their end game!)

1v1 diplomacy is actually a great way of working on the end-game of a normal dip game. It is often 1 player racing towards 18 while a fee opponents scramble together a defecne. But it can take months to get there, while 1v1 variants let you do that in mere minutes. (And months of game play to end in a bad stalemate or good draw isn't great...)

I'd argue that even if the last few moves are inevitable, the practice you get is never wasted.

As for double and triple checking, i've never played a 1v1 which takes weeks. Each player simply finalises their moves, and the turns procede much faster, even with a 24 hour phase you get several turns done each day. (One person goes to sleep and wakes up within the 24 hour time limit, so it is no problem - check and double check your moves, and you're still done in 10 minutes at most...)
Ezio (816 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Only if both players are choosing to ready asap will the game continue as quickly as you describe. Furthermore, there are games where the stalemate line has been reached, and with the extra units they have they just run around capturing the hard to reach supply centers. It can certainly take multiple years.
If you, as a player, would rather have your opponent play out the endgame, that is your choice. Why should you should force players to enter the moves when the game is over, and to make them sit in their loss for longer than is necessary?
bo_sox48 (4320 D Mod (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
At the very least, that option should be two-way.
Exactly. orathaic has the right idea.

I just don't want to see people resigning before their defeat is inevitable. It's possible for the leading player to make enough mistakes to let the game end in a draw. I've certainly let that happen.
LeonWalras (670 D Mod)
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+2)
I think I two-way concede is called a draw?
bo_sox48 (4320 D Mod (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Lol, I mean the person conceding should hit the button, and then the other person should have to vote to allow them to concede.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Ezio, players readying asap. That has been my experience of 1v1.

There is no waiting for messages to be sent back and forth between allies or enemies, no stalling because you want to think over what someone said, or make them think you're goong to nmr by only entering your mobes at the last minute. No chit-chat. You just enter your moves and ready them. It might be only twice or three times a day you look at a game in a bog-standrad classic 24 hours/phase. That would usually mean two or three phases in a 1v1.
Ezio (816 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
@orthanc, I've been in multiple where my opponent did not ready that quickly.
bo_sox48 (4320 D Mod (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
When you sign up for a certain phase length, your opponent is entitled to it, regardless of the circumstances.
chluke (12663 D (G))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Without a concede button, there will more more NMR's and CD's. The CD will serve as a "concede" but I don't think that NMR/CD'ing is a behavior that we want players to grow accustomed to.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
@bo, i do like that more... But then what happens when they concede, you refuse, they simply nmr.

You play on? Do you force them to protect their reliability rating by entering moves forever? Do you rush them and take 18 as fast as possible, or taunt them by moving away from stalemate lines??

@Ezio, most stalemate lines can't be held without 15-17 units. You may possibly have all your units tied up in the line and be unable to capture the rest... That would be a risk, or sending units back could let your opponent break the line. I'm not convinced at all.

I think we should foster a culture of players fighting to the bitter end, until they are really experienced and able to see it coming from a turn away. And even then one turn doesn't take days or weeks.

If you know you're about to win, then you're likely to enter your moves immediately after seeing the board (and just possibly double check them before readying)
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
@"
When you sign up for a certain phase length, your opponent is entitled to it, regardless of the circumstances."

Entirely true. And 1v1 games tend to be much faster. I don't think i'd ever want to play one which had more than 24 hour phases.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
@chluke: you have a legitimate position there.
reedeer1 (95 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
10 hour fazes. do it.
orathaic (1009 D (B))
12 Jan 17 UTC
I don't reedeer, sleep cycles are only ~3 hours long. So 4 hour phases seem ideal ;)


33 replies
DammmmDaniel (103 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
Call-Me-A-Dirty-So-N-So Legacy Edition!!!
Hey Kiddos someone has to carry Krellin's weight around here! Join up for the greatest So-N-So game yet!!!! No safe spaces,no bitching or crying allowed! Leave your feelings at the sign up button because they will get destroyed!!! We need to continue the legacy of helping bring people closer together via insults!!
14 replies
Open
lamson (123 D (B))
10 Jan 17 UTC
New game, no join button?
Hello, I have an issue setting up a game for those I work with and was wondering if any of you have experienced it also. Trying to use the KW901 map. More in reply.
14 replies
Open
Peregrine Falcon (1133 D (B))
10 Jan 17 UTC
Soloing with less than 18 SC?
I'm curious if the above is possible. More below.
14 replies
Open
CptMike (1754 D)
10 Jan 17 UTC
world IX
Hello guys. I have a question about this variant:
* http://www.variantbank.org/results/rules/w/world8-2.gif
2 replies
Open
CptMike (1754 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
Convoy to bypass
Hello. I have a technical question.
20 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
10 Jan 17 UTC
Known World Gunboat
gameID=188752

I've made a Gunboat game for the new map. Tried to make it be 901 point pot, but gotta go with 900, close enough. Let's play this thing.
1 reply
Open
Page 347 of 355
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top