I have always viewed online ports of Diplomacy as an immensely more convenient way to play e-mail games, but never have I thought that playing diplomacy online should be more like playing face-to-face. Because it simply cannot be. The closest that an online diplomacy can get to a F2F game is when played live, and we’ve all experienced how terrible that can be.

When playing an e-mail game, the other players are not notified when you have a draft saved in your inbox. When playing a postal game, the other players are not notified when you have mail in transit to them. And even in F2F, which this change seems to emulate, no one can distinguish between a press note or a set of orders until it leaves your hand.

Even though it was only meant to speed up games, the finalise feature had some effect on the actual gameplay. If you were trying to persuade someone to work with you, yet they were already finalised, you probably knew your chances were slim. If two people in a game were finalised near the same time, you might think they were working together. And if you were lucky enough to see someone that was finalised, undid their orders and then re-finalised, speculation would run wild, especially in live games.

The effects of this feature go on and on, but the important thing to remember was that the player had a choice to finalise, or they could ignore the feature all-together. Now we have no choice.

Have other life responsibilities ever forced you to miss a set of orders in an online game? Have you ever sighed in relief when you notice you got lucky and that no one took advantage of all your units simply holding? With this new change, if you are unable to log on during a complete phase, the other six players will know well in advance that all your units are holding. Missing one turn and still being able to play without being crippled will most likely never happen again.

I mentioned that the most important reason why this feature should be removed is that it removed much of the secrecy involved with playing diplomacy. Even if you skipped everything until now or simply weren’t persuaded by my arguments, the change must be removed for one reason:

The simple knowledge that one or more of your opponents has a tentative plan in place, whether it be by themselves or with others, combined with the ability to see which players were online and when means too much transparency in the game. The features on this website should only make playing Diplomacy easier and more convenient, they should not help players with strategy in any shape or fashion.

i agree with geofram

i have to admit, at first i disagreed with Geofram. but the more i thought about it, the more i agreed with him. so unless someone else has a good argument for it, i would say to scrap the "grey" checks.

I also agree with Geofram. I've been thinking about it all day, and it is definitely problematic.

1. First, change the grey check mark to a hollow green one (like the green one, but an outline).
2. Then disallow others from seeing whether or not I've submitted moves, and only allow them to see if/when I've finalised.

By disallowing others from seeing the grey check mark, you remove it's purpose. There would be no need to change it or its colour, only simply bin it all-together. I have never been a fan of the finalise feature, but even I'm guilty of using it to affect game strategy.

No, the "moves submitted but not finalised" check mark is very useful for seeing when you haven't submitted moves. I agree that it should be private so that nobody else could tell, but it definitely serves a purpose.

well now, that's crazy talk!!

i think it is helpful to remind you when you haven't put in even conditional orders. that will help reduce accidental NMRs, i believe.

and i think the finalize feature is fine. no one has to use. yet those who like to, and those who agree to specific games for finalizing more quickly, can and do. it's win-win!!

Ah, I see what you mean. That was probably the intended purpose of it. In that case, making it private and only viewable to the player owning the check mark would suffice.

The finalise feature works because it is completely optional. The only way to avoid this feature would be to only submit orders right before the phase is to end. And that just ruins the player's ability to negotiate effectively.

i'm glad you've put your radical days behind you, geofram. hopefully you won't be judged like that professor dude in chicago for your past words and actions, and appreciated for going mainstream! change from within, man, change from within. don't fight the system, *be* the system!!!

I only suggested total elimination because if the others can't see it, I didn't notice any useful purpose of it until Dunecat mentioned that it can serve as a convenient/lazy way to see if you've got any orders in at all.

That and it's most likely easier for kestas to remove it rather than change its functionality.

I was coming here to make a similar thread. Thank you Geofram, I fully agree.

I agree as well. I don't like the idea that some players will watch the phase clock and know that an NMR is going to happen and change their orders at the last minute.

Or that some players might make it look like they are going to NMR to trick their enemies into doing so and then also turning in moves at the last minute.

But I do like it for my own orders as long as only I can see it.

I'm glad to see others share my sentiment! Perhaps a developer will shed some light on this discussion soon enough, I imagine they're quite busy at the moment.

I've posted my thoughts on the 0.9 thread to try to get Kestas' attention.

Thanks, I was going to mention it in that thread, but you'll notice that I had a lot to say about the matter and didn't want to lengthen that thread any longer than it already is.

One could argue that this is the most significant issue facing 0.9, so I'm glad it has its own thread.

Actually, the check marks are deceiving and we had this capability before... The check box appears in grey the moment you log into the game. Even if you submit no orders (everything is left on hold) the grey checkmark appears. so how did we have this capability before? By looking at the last login time and seeing if it was since the turn ran. It really is no different, except to make you use less brain power to see that your ally/enemy has logged in at least once since the turn started.

@Draugnar: no, it's not the same. The grey checkmark's alternate text explicitly reads "Moves submitted, but not ready for the next turn." That's too transparent, and goes against the spirit of the game. Secrecy, deception, trust and manipulation are all fundamental to the game, and seeing that others have submitted moves goes against all of those.

My initial reaction was to wholeheartedly agree with Geofram. On second thought, I'm less sure, but still undecided. I think Draugnar makes a good point, and while this grey checkmark is different, ask yourself if it is so different that it radically changes the game dynamic. That said, I don't mind if the grey checkmark is removed. It's not as big of an issue to me as it is to some of the people in this thread.

Actually, Chrisp, Geofram already outlined the reasons why this radically changes gameplay. It is a problem.

Draugnar, the grey check mark only appears if and after you press "update"
You can view a game and not have the the grey check appear, instead you'll see the two exclamation points (!!) until you do enter orders or at least press update. Currently, this is the only way to not let other players know you've entered orders.

Yes, Dunecat, I noticed and read all of the posts in this thread. Draugnar's point is that many of his arguments apply to a feature that existed before the update, and that nobody complained about. I recognize that it's not exactly the same, but many similarities still remain and greatly reduce the number of applicable arguments that have been put out. The real question is if it's still much of an issue...