1) C-K
2) Le_Roi
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

Le_Roi is playing? Hells yeah I'm in. One of my first games four years ago was with him. Can we get Friendly Sword in on this too?

I prefer 36-48 hours and a pause for Christmas. Preferred non-anon also, but I will play anon.

1) C-K
2) Le_Roi
3) dubmdell
4)
5)
6)
7)

Hey dubmdell :) Maybe we can go for a game without stabbing the other this time? ;D

lol somehow I doubt it. Apparently we played three games together, I had Russia twice, Turkey once; you had Turkey, Russia, and England. I stabbed you twice in the jug colors, we squabbled all the game as England. Until Austria ate me. -_-

This is going to be fun! :D

I would like some clarification. Let's say England and France team up and Austria and Turkey team up and the other three are eliminated. E/F have more centers overall, but A/T have stopped them with a stalemate line: Sev/Rum S Ukr, Bud/Tri S Vie, Apu/Adr S Ven, Nap S Rom, Aeg S Ion with one unit left over.

E and F could turn on each other. A and T could turn on each other. Who is obligated to turn on each other? A and T would be crazy to turn on each other in this scenario while E and F would have more leeway. So how does this scenario get dealt with?

36 hours is fine with me. 48 hours is too long though. I would prefer Semi-Anon since we'll know who is in the game and I like anon because I don't want past experiences or knowledge of what a player likes to do interfering with in-game decisions.

So I'd like to make this 36hrs, semi-anon and of course WTA. The bet is irrelevant to me as the whole premise of this game is play to win it and to hell if I lose.

Would that be alright with you?

I'm down for that.

@Alderian
Once a legitimate stalemate line has been met then players are allowed to vote Draw. If, after the stalemate line has been set, one or more of the players wants to continue then it's their choice. All players are free to react however they choose. The point is that the game can only be drawn for legitimate reasons, such as a stalemate has occurred and no player is willing to stab his partner(s). Once a stalemate line has been set and all players vote draw except for one, then that player must have a legitimate move to make and make it. I think one year to try to negotiate something else to happen at this point would be acceptable but after the year is up, if the remaining player can't move and none of the drawing players have moved then the remaining player must vote draw at that point.

Does that make sense?

Those terms are highly agreeable to me, C-K.

@C-K, the established standard is two years to break the line/get someone to stab.

And what's the buyin?

Great.

@Alderian
Interested?

If this game goes well and proves to be as much fun as I think it will be then I'll make more games with these stipulations. If we can get more players involved in such games I'll even try to set up a special ratings system that counts games played by these rules only. We'll be the ECW of Diplomacy. Only hardcore games count and no Carebears will be included as they won't play this type of game. We could be the best of the hardcore diplomats. (I can just imagine all the threads and arguments that will pop up in the forum if this idea grows. Hehe)

If this idea works and grows we could probably increase the number of players willing to do it and perhaps have a site for of really great players who only play to win and not to draw as I'd try to come up with a formula that makes a draw only slightly better than a defeat.

Anyway, those are just thoughts running through my mind as this point. For now I'd just like to play a game with these rules and then speak with everyone to get their opinions about the final result.

@Draugnar
Oh? Ok. 2 years is fine with me. That sounds fair. The extra year will give a player more time to consider so I'll agree with that.

As to buy in, since I want this game to be about one thing only and that's winning the buy matters nothing to me. I say let's make it 5 just to make that point clear.

So, 36hrs, semi-anon WTA, 2 years to negotiate after a stalemate before a draw must be voted for and 5 buy in.

How does that sound to everyone?

And if a group of players plays a game in the "stalemate draw" series and break the primary rule by drawing without a stalemate line, I assume they would then be black listed from future "stalemate draw" games.

Count me in!

1) C-K
2) Le_Roi
3) dubmdell
4) Alderian
5)
6)
7)

Exactly. They would be blacklisted. There names would be posted as such so that no other players who started their own games of this format would except them and their ratings and name will cease to exist. Any rep they would have had would disappear.

I don't mind playing other games and may continue to do so but I'd definitely like to play games in this format too. I kinda like the idea of a "hardcore" league. If it works and players are interested then I'm willing to try to make this something "more".

I have lots of ideas based on this concept but I'm not a control freak and will discuss ideas with all players involved and try to create something that is fun and acceptable for all but as any such project does need a manager I will assume that role if it comes to that. I will also look for players to help me as much as possible in different aspects as I am by no means a know-it-all. I always listen to what others have to say and will often ask for agreement by everyone. The same as I've done for this first, experimental game.

I consider this a work in progress that may bring another level of play to this already incredible site.

I will also post a link of the stalemate lines so that there is no confusion. If anyone knows the perfect link (IYO) for this then feel free to post it. If not I'll use the ones I know.

http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/strategy/articles/stalemate_lines.htm

I always like this one as it links to pages for all different sides...

http://devel.diplom.org/Online/StalematesAtoY/visual.htm

What happens in the case of a 11x11x10 3 way where everyone is afraid to move on someone else because it will weaken their other line?

Sounds interesting... count me in

I'm going to laugh when a Western Triple forces a seven-way draw in 1903 because neither they nor the responding eastern alliance wants to stab each other.

I'm happy to play if still space. Need a pause from Jan 20-27 if we get that far.

Holy shit, Le_Roi is back. I'd be interested in playing, but I know him personally, so it's up to you guys.

Seems to me that you'd have to build a line, Draug. It could be coordinated… I'd say we bypass it in situations like that.

I think that part of the fun is not drawing t the instant the game gets down to tree powers.

"What happens in the case of a 11x11x10 3 way where everyone is afraid to move on someone else because it will weaken their other line?"

Tough doodoo. Negotiate your way out of it. In this format, 2 players will have to attack the other. Talk to your opponents, form an alliance and hope you're not the one getting the run around. If you are, do your best to flip unto some one else. That's the whole point! Let's challenge ourselves to become the truly best players we can be. Most games around here never actually finish. Let's start finishing them. We'll lose most of them but we'll also know that we played the game out to it's end.

1) C-K
2) Le_Roi
3) dubmdell
4) Alderian
5) bo_sox48
6) ghug
7)

We need one more.

^^ i agree with that. it's not as fun when that happens. i'm in as well if there's room. or if C-K starts up a second game..?

oops. i meant to have the "^^ i agree with that" right under ghug's "I think that part of the fun is not drawing t the instant the game gets down to tree powers."