I can't remember the exact reasons, but it has been replaced by Sum of Squares. It's like Points per SC, but it uses a formula that rewards bigger nations more.

Sum of Squares is not like PPSC, as the winner of a Sum of Squares-game still gets the whole pot. It is only in case of a draw that the Sum of Squares scoring comes into play.

PPSC got removed from the site because people thought that more interesting play would arise when players would not be rewarded for a survival. You can still win with your ally/allies in the current scoring systems. You just have to draw with them.

PPSC was backwards - it didn't count supply centers in the case of a draw, so it was often more rewarding for larger players to throw a solo than to draw, even in a 3-way draw. No other scoring system does that, because it provides really terrible conflicting objectives - C-Diplo is what PPSC should have been, scoring SC counts even in the case of a draw.

However, all scoring systems have been changed to WTA to reflect the original design of the game.

Let's not start this again.

The reason, imho.. Totalitarianism of the winner takes all brigade

Blame Al Swearengen

Okay i see the problematic with the draw. But this could have changed with the Sum o Sq rule for the draw while PPSC runs for the win. Even if the Sum o Sq would have been applied for the PPSC win case (so even more than 18/34 *pot).

But i do not really get why its completely vanished. ishirkmywork - i wanted to know why it has changed and not propose to get it back as i guess you guys know better.

Basically, there are still plenty of people here who support it, but not at the level of the moderation team or higher, so people have complained about its removal for years, but it will not be coming back.

@Ethanol every couple of months someone starts a PPSC thread and the rage builds for awhile before it goes away again. Your post is just another rotation in the crushing wheel of time.

PPSC also encouraged bad behavior by players to encourage a "strong second" as an alliance. Anyone could ally with a player who was approaching the victory condition and still get points for helping someone else solo. This is antithetical to everything Diplomacy is about. Allan Calhamer said as much in various articles.

Rubbish. Winner takes all.encouraged me to simply quit games rather than keep fighting. Of course if there was genuine freedom of choice a form of non wta would be a non default option. But those in control have decreed it to be how it is. Simple totalitarianism.

It was decided to remove it, i believe to push for a change in behaviour by forcing people to play the other (superior, imo) scoring systems.

I believe the intention was to bring it back later once a majority of players had gotten used to the new style of play, though don't quote me on this.

The decision that we can have a better culture within the site by cultivating desirable play-styles; it is hard to change attitudes, and i don't know if ppsc players feel excluded or forcing them is a good method for changing atitudes. But it is what it is.

It was removed because it turned out to be a variant of actual Diplomacy that added little to no interest to the game. It's still available on vdiplomacy.

and that's the truth, pfffffbb***

(This is not the view of the mod team)

Part of the reason was to bring webDiplomacy into line with the rest of the hobby. Rewarding players for allowing others to solo is a practise that has never appeared anywhere else than webDip (and by extension, vDip). Because of the lack of representation anywhere else, it actually often turned long standing diplomacy fans away. If we want to become the beat place to play online diplomacy, sacrificing SWS/PPSC seemed like a necessary step.

and that's the truth, pfffffbb***

I see. Its an interesting view.
To me its not allways allowing others to solo. For example if you are able to develop a trustfull relationship between Austria and Italy and one of them goes ahead the other - in WTA you grudge the solo and try to force your allied into a draw - or you loose it and the player wins anyway by taking your territories. For the case of PPSC it is not like handing a solo i think its more like to deign the Victory while the secondary partner worked well.

If this topic is comming up again and again why don't you put it to the FAQ page?

"Rubbish. Winner takes all.encouraged me to simply quit games rather than keep fighting."

Yeah, well if you feel encouraged to quit games, that's on you.

Now we have reliability ratings to rightfully discourage that sort of behavior.

That was one of my points about having an optional non wta scoring system Ethanol. Loyal kingmakers get a reward. WTA encourages distrust between two successful allies as it approaches endgame and encourages a backstab. Is the philosophy "success from cooperation shared" or "success from manipulation and exploitation, and rewards not shared but expropriated by the player prepared to be the most selfish" ?
Plus I see an inconsistency, totalitarianism on one side..It's only WTA, or non ranked, and on the other side " we could have WTA (DSS & SoS) non ranked, and a form of SoS that was not WTA " so one side, the WTA side is imposing "it's our preference or nothing" and the other side is suggesting " it's your preference and our preference as choices, and your preference can be the default setting"
Essentially it's been decided, perhaps unfairly in some members view, but there it is. It would be nice if some of the "winners" in the debate could refrain from indulging in occasional revisionism.

@JK what's with the "CD snobbery" ? Civil Disorder is part of the game, it's specifically catered for in the rules of the original board game, with no mention anywhere in those rules of any penalty against a player who puts his country into Civil Disorder.
And in real life, in WW1, one of the major participants, Russia effectively withdrew from the war as a result of the Communist revolution. Yet the remaining allies, Great Britain and France went on to win that war.
What's the next step ? Punishing incompetence or unconventional strategies ? I'd suggest that this "CD snobbery" is a form of political correctness.

In real life, you're a selfish jerk if you intentionally CD a game that is not going your way for whatever reason. If a hurricane destroys your home or you have a death in your family or if the Bolsheviks seize power in Petrograd, you get a free pass. Otherwise, live up to your responsibilities and be a reliable human being.