gameID=63645

I too like a good ally (who doesn't) - and they *are* hard to come by. A suggestion: you (and the style of play you suggest) may be much better suited to playing points-per-supply-center rather than winner-takes-all... after all, in a winner-takes-all format, what is the reward for keeping the alliance when second place gets you nothing? I have my doubts beyond that, but I won't foist those on you.

King Atom.

you are playing the wrong game buddy. this game IS about stabbing and protecting yourself from stabs. that is one of the most basic principles of the game.

its like saying you like to play soccer, but you dont want anyone scoring a goal!

just saying, you seem to have quite a complete misconception about the essence of this game.

This is a funny thread!
Babak you are the second stupidest person on this site. Ghost Ratings proves this ;-)

lol wut

lol @ spyman ;) yup.

The only thing I hate more than being stabbed is someone who refuses to stab.

You're so stupid Babak. Now give me some of your twenty thousand points...
I don't mind Ghost-Rating points too xD

lol... but sharing some of the tenets of the argument.

People DO stab without need (for the pleasure of that, possibly), and are quite suicidal at times, and often stupidly refuse to stick to an alliance perfectly able to stop someone else's solo just to grab two or three more centers (even, and maybe especially, in PPSC games).

I've recently heard that this is no strategy game, but diplomacy. People who like the strategy aspect of it should play AncientMed instead (and I myself play a lot of it, and always get better results, but I keep with my purpose of learning diplomacy proper :)

"perfectly able to stop someone else's solo just to grab two or three more centers (even, and maybe especially, in PPSC games)."

I don't play PPSC myself; I much prefer WTA. I think only way to play PPSC and not get frustrated is accept that it is a different game from WTA. It has different goals - namely maximizing supply centres, even if this mean letting someone else take the win. If this bother you then play WTA instead.

I have to admit I am extremely interesting in how a game where stabbing is forbidden, permanent alliances are encouraged, and draws are not allowed would ever end.

@Babak: No, it's more like having a soccer game where you don't want everyone trying to score for themselves. Instead, scoring together. And I can't tell you how many times I've seen an alliance go out and dominate without having to worry about protection from the other.

@manganese: It's not that I refuse to stab, it's that I never have the chance to. I've never played a game where I haven't been stabbed on the first turn no matter what level of diplomacy I employ. And after the initial stab, everyone sees me as weak perhaps and decides to stab me as well.

@fabiobag: I agree. The only time I've ever come within a few of winning was in AncientMed. I of course lost the game due to stabbing.

@dexter morgan, spyman, and Octavious: I have made it WTA so that in the end, when the strongest alliance remains, it becomes a one-on-one. I know this kind of supports stabbing, but I don't think Europe is big enough for two super-powers. And it kind of lends itself to having fair relations from the beginning, where you both try to stay as equal as possible until the end.

@King Atom - Diplomacy is not a team game. Everyone is *supposed* to try and win. Read the front cover of the boardgame's rules and you'll see why you should go play Axis and Allies if you think stabbing isn't part of the game.

Two questions: Is anyone actually interested? Please let me know. Otherwise I'll just cancel it now.

And how did this post get a star, what are the requirements for that?

@Draugnar: I have no interest in that game. I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to understand. I don't have a problem with stabbing, I just don't see why the only time I see a strong alliance, they're accused of meta-gaming. Can't you all see that if people appreciated strong alliances like I do, this game would be a lot more fair and easy? I'm just tired of being stabbed by idiots who only bring themselves down as well. I'm a very strategic player and can outwit most of the people on this server, but it doesn't matter because no one respects my alliance. No one cares that it would be better in the end if they wouldn't stab me.

So instead of trying to change people's opinions, all I'm trying to do is make a game for those who do respect alliances. If I'm the only person on this site that does, then that's pretty sad.

The star means you have posted to it. Nothing more.

A star means you posted in it. It doesn't have one for me now, but will when I hit post.

Look, I hate to troll, but if you really could outwit everyone on the server, you wouldn't have lost seven of your 9 finishes.

You have to judge whether someone's coming for you or not, and that's the essence of outwitting. Being prepared when they come, and coming when they don't expect it,

Pure gold. Thank you King Atom.

I'll play King Atom. Let me know which country you are so my ally and I can eliminate you. I'm one of those that stabs for no reason except it brings me pleasure. That's right fabiobaq, I'm one of those. Bwaaahaaaahaaaa

@King Atom - I can respect that. But this is a game about being the ultimate victor and alliances are constantly shifting. I've had games with alliances that lasted until the end when I stabbed or was stabbed for the victory. I've played games where I have had alliances shift between two or three other nations, going back and forth to get the most out of it. One of those was my second League B1 victory this season where I worked with someone who wanted a draw or victory because he was so far down in the league, a loss got him demoted, draw kept him in B, and win moved him up to A. Other's in the game already had their points to avoid demotion and were looking to try and move up and kick me out of first. I worked with the first player until the very end when my alliance shifted to the other two who were just interedted in keeping the former from getting the win by the end and wanted a draw. I played them well enough that I stabbed all three in the end and took my victory.

This is not Axis & Allies where you have teams. You should only be dedicated to your alliance for as long as it serves your position. If you are having problems with premature and poor stabs, then you are playing lesser players and should try getting into the invite games formed here on the forums. But I don't think you will find anyone willing to abide by the "can't stab someone smaller than you" rule. If I have 17 SCs and the 3 SC guys is my "ally" but I see I can get 18 and the win, I *should* stab. To do elsewise is against the spirit of the game as created by Alan Calhammer.

Sorry, my mistake, eight of nine.

I am still laughing. Thank you again KA.

I mean, technically, a stab is a surprise attack, right? So if I'm at 17 and pulling along a little 3 SC France on the side, I can simply say, "Sucks to be you, our alliance is over" and bam.

I can vouch for The Czech's stabbiness. ;-)

@King Atom

Have you considered asking to join the School of War? Having a mentor behind you can greatly increase your understanding of the game. You'll walk away having a better feel for when stabs are going to happen and how to prevent them.

"I'm a very strategic player and can outwit most of the people on this server"

Damn. I wish you hadn't missed my invitationals.

Oh, and there are variants on our sister site for heads up pure straegy play. If you think you are so good, go try them out and see just how bad you actually are. It'll be an eye opener when one of the top 20 players on the site cleans your clock by 1906.

http://vdiplomacy.net/

I'll volunteer to be the 1v1 bait.