Old Forum - webDiplomacy

Start a new discussion in the public forum

Post a new thread

If your post relates to a particular game please include the URL or ID# of the game.
We get a lot of feature requests. If your feature request isn't already on our issue tracker, then the best place to ask is the forum. This will help us gauge support for your ideas, before we add it to the todo list.
If you are posting a question please check the FAQ before posting.
If your message is long you may need to write a summary message, and add the full message as a reply.

Ivo_ivanov (7545

)
10 Feb 09 UTC

Game Variant: Declaration of war

I wanted to check the opinions (and maybe gather people interested) to try out something. Haven't check if such variants are already out there and have been tested - would appreciate all feedback.

Page 1 of 3

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

1. 48h turns, by the 24h mark all players must submit (in the global chat) declarations of war or offers for peace.

2. If you are at peace with someone you cannot attack him or support an attack against him (defined as a move against a center or a territory where the player has a unit, valid for retreats also). Support-holds are always ok.

3. A war declaration works both ways. A peace treaty works only if both players have stated it.

4. Once a player has declared a war, or offered a peace treaty he cannot revert this decision until the next game turn.

Effectively, this eliminates the concept of backstabbing on the battlefield but provides an additional semi-round of diplomacy which, I'm hoping, will be quite fun?

For example you can ask another player to submit a peace offer to you and declare war on another player very early - and then delay your decision util the last moment, or not do it at all.

In situations like TRI-VEN this will have a major influence on both IT and AUS. And, respectively, everyone else will also be watching - so I'm hoping this will lead to an overall increase in negotiations and less 'spur-of-the-moment' stabs?

Anyone interested to try this out?

Katsarephat (100 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

What happens if a player violates a peace treaty?

trim101 (363 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

so what happens if you dont submit either? also what happens if your at war with someone and offer peace which is rejected im assuming its still war

trim101 (363 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

im interested

jman777 (407 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

I think it'll just have to rely on the honor system, like usual. btw, I think that sounds like an extremely fun idea, and if you do it and it's within my price range, I'm definitely in.

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Yes, clearly it will be honor-based - and there'll always be the public record in the global chat. I don't expect this to be a problem?

jman - It does not neet to be a high-pot game. Let's see some other comments/suggestions and if there's interest we can try it out :)

Centurian (3257 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

We played a UN variant that was similar to this and ended up having to draw it due to bad blood. We ran into some honour system confusions, including planned bounces and then if people missed there moves they violated UN agreements etc.

A grand coalition was formed against me and all the players made treaties against me. It is all well and good to attack me, but it was enormously frustrating not being able to talk any of them out of it.

Essentially this sort of variant handicaps the players for no real benefit.

trim101 (363 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

that could have happened in any game centurian

Centurian (3257 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

I'm not sure what you mean Trim. Also I believe you played that game with me.

fortknox (2059 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Sounds like fun... no backstabbing... though I have a feeling that it will end in a draw eventually. I'm up for a game, let me know.

Onar (131 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

This seems interesting enough for me to give it a try.... No backstabbing, either, you say?

Chrispminis (916 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Well this is a little different from that UN variant but it might suffer from the same overall problem. That is, a super cartel of peace treaties forms with them ganging up on the other players until it is slowly peeled back, as they continue to gang up on single countries, to reveal who the real power players of the cartel are...

Onar (131 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Is it Global-only? I think that'd help things out a lot.

jman777 (407 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

I think that you should be able to use the normal message system, however you do need to publically declare all your treaties. so like for instance, if I were france I could talk to germany about how we will devide up england and the netherlands, but the iin the public chat I would have to announce a peace treaty between france and myself. and a decleration of war against england.

Chrispminis (916 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Well the declarations would be global, but I imagine the diplomacy would still be private press.

Onar (131 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

That works well, more or less what I was thinking. No discussions between non-allied parties?

Xapi (194 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Why?

How do you ally with someone if you can't talk to them in the first place?

Onar (131 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Well, the alliances would come up over global chat.

Thucydides (864 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

It sounds fun I'm down.

wooooo (926 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

the first 24 hour are alliance discussions. You negotiate to try to get someone to send you a peace treaty or declare war against your enemy.

Onar (131 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

How does the peace treaty work? That bit is on global chat, right? After that, you work things out?

Thucydides (864 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

So... if you aren't on at the exact 24 hours mark can you submit peace/war earlier, sort of like how you can finalize early?
Also, can you rescind these before the 24 hour also sort of like un-finalizing?

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

My idea was:
1. You have the normal press (private and global) just as usual. But WAR/PEACE is declared in public. Otherwise you can discuss anything whenever you want with whoever you want.
2. Once the 24h mark has passed (and this will be strictly followed) you cannot declare war or peace.
3. If you declared a war, or agreed to peace, you cannot change this anymore in this turn.
4. There is no 'finilizing' really - these are just messages (e.g. "GER declares war on FRA"). Each message changes your 'status' with regard to another country. Sort of like the /pause or /unpause commands.

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Ok, good to see other people think it might turn out to be fun, let's try it. If I've seen correctly we have
trim101
jman777
fortknox
Onar
Thucydides
me

and we need one more?

Also, any other preferences? I was thinking 48h PPSC low-pot (10 points or something)? It's an experiment to a large extent :)

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Point 3 above should be better formulated: "ONCE you declared a war, or agreed to peace, you cannot change this anymore in this turn.

jman777 (407 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

I think that PPSC would be a good version for this game, because WTA would discourage alliances a bit.

and I think that it's a great idea, obviously one or two kinks will be worked out in-game. but I think it will go well.

fortknox (2059 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

it'd be interesting to add a law that extends a declaration or war or peace... once you declare peace, you can't break it for 3 years, same with war... though I guess that's for a variation of this variation ;)

stratagos (3269 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

I'll give it a whirl, what the heck

jman777 (407 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

ok, so now that we have 7 people how do we join? will it be a password game? if so, how will we get the password?

Ivo_ivanov (7545 )
10 Feb 09 UTC

Game created - here's the link:
http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=8672
password is "variant" (the game is called Variant Game - no creativity at all here :)

I hope other people will refrain from joining - you can always make a second game :)

Page 1 of 3

86 replies

dlerfald (146

)
16 Feb 09 UTC

friends from Northern VA

I'm looking to see if anybody knows Pat Collins from NOVA. We started playing this game back in Dale City and Ferrum College.

0 replies