![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
As this game matured we see Egypt, France, Britain, Poland, and Ukraine fighting for dominance. Britain is on the receiving end of a lot of punishment and sadly CDs in 2001, throwing the balance slightly and no doubt causing a lot of irritation in those unable to take advantage of the situation. Through a combination of good play and good fortune the alliance of France and Egypt are well placed to press home their advantage, and do so.PRINCE WILLIAM wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 9:39 amhttps://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=232095
The game above is my best game to the day. I took over France and made it to a two-way draw. I worked with Egypt in all the game and was a faithful ally. I reached 32 SCs and he had 31. I could have stabbed him at the time he got the 32nd so to be soloing, but what would be the point? For me, the achievement was already great and I was also rewarding my fellow who helped me get there.
For the next five years or so Poland and Ukraine invest a considerable amount of time and effort fighting on. There is zero chance that they can triumph against superior numbers, but their hope is that inevitably France or Egypt must turn on each other to have any chance of winning, and at this point they may be able to force themselves into a draw. In the dying moments of the game Poland realises his efforts have failed, and settles back to watch the final moves and congratulate which of his opponents will turn out to be the worthy winning, stating:
"Autumn, 2007: I officially give up gg well played may the better man win"
Sadly, there isn't a better man. The Polish and Ukrainian players have both been deceived. They have not been playing against fellow Diplomacy players, but Carebears, and as such the entirety of their efforts over the last half decade of play have been a complete waste of time. They have been betrayed. There is no winner to congratulate, but there are losers. It is a thoroughly gutting experience.
PRINCE WILLIAM wrote: ↑Fri Feb 18, 2022 9:39 amhttps://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=370235
Ιn the above game when we got down to 4 players the two major powers said that they'd accept a 3-way draw so the two smaller powers had to fight each other for the third place. Should I betray my ally and kill him (I was a little stronger)? Wasn't it better to fight the proposition until the two powers changed their mind?
And here we see a similar situation but in this scenario to dominant players are not Carebears. In this scenario the smaller defending alliance have realistic hope, a genuine reason to continue. The game for them remains enjoyable because there is a point to them playing on. There is something to fight for.
Unfortunately the real world interferes and Turkey is placed in a position where he'd be forced to retire. Poland, being a Diplomacy player of exemplary honour, agrees to draw rather than taking what would be a tarnished easy victory. This is an attitude to be saluted.
As for your question, I see zero evidence to assume that killing your ally would result in you being offered a 3-way. The draw should be earned, and you earn it by forcing it. You can, of course, only force a draw if you are playing against real Diplomacy players. If you are playing against Carebears you have no agency, no influence, no enjoyment, and no reason to come back and play the game in the future.