Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 1299 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Sago (101 D)
25 Jan 16 UTC
Seeking player for Argentina in UN roleplaying game!!
You want a different dip? You like the diplomatic part of diplomacy? Argentina's president is sleeping, and if he/she doesn't wake up there'll be a spot open. Then maybe this game is or you. The main thing is to be active in he global forum in a very slow world game.

2 replies
Open
spyman (424 D(G))
24 Jan 16 UTC
JDip on Windows 10
I tried to install JDip the other day but I couldn't get it to work on Windows 10. It used to work on Windows 7 I think (unless I am thinking of XP).
Anybody had any luck getting JDip to work on Windows 10?
7 replies
Open
JimTheGrey (968 D(S))
24 Jan 16 UTC
(+4)
2016 World Diplomacy Championship
The 2016 World Diplomacy Championship at Weasel Moot X kicks off exactly five months from today, and we in Chicago can’t wait.
7 replies
Open
spyman (424 D(G))
23 Jan 16 UTC
vDiplomacy Features
I have just started playing Diplomacy at vDiplomacy, and I must say I have been pleasantly surprised by a number of vDiplomacy innovations that don't appear to be available on webdiplomacy. Are there plans to introduce some of the same features here?
13 replies
Open
VashtaNeurotic (2394 D)
19 Jan 16 UTC
(+1)
Best Musical Act Tournament Redux
See inside for details.
58 replies
Open
brainbomb (290 D)
20 Jan 16 UTC
How do I get webdip points @ Zultar and Point peoples
I keep playing and losing. Can I get like 300 D since this is sort of like texas holdem anyway? the points dont matter...
112 replies
Open
yoak (1734 D)
23 Jan 16 UTC
Points in play calculation
All,

I have read the FAQ, but it seems to state that your points in play are the sum of point that you *bet*. Mine seem to exceed that, but may be correct if they are the "current value" rather than the "bet." I could do some tedious counting, but I imagine that most of the people here know, so please pardon the "lazy ask" of someone new to this site, but a long-term Dip player.
10 replies
Open
Hastati (100 D)
24 Jan 16 UTC
Anyone here tried Subterfuge?
Its an iOS/Droid game similar to Neptune's Pride somewhat. Slow Realtime where movement takes hours to days to resolve, no RNG, and based on the Diplomacy tradition of deception and alliances. The key difference to Pride is a toroidal map and a different win condition. Anyone else given it a go?
6 replies
Open
2ndWhiteLine (2591 D(B))
23 Jan 16 UTC
Snowpocalypse Redux
How's life south of the Masspike? Only a dusting here in Boston but looks like NYC and DC are getting nailed.
19 replies
Open
brainbomb (290 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
I just got back from Azerbaijian
And boy are my _____________ Tired.
18 replies
Open
jarrodlombardo (100 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
Simple rule question I'm unsure of.
Country 1: A sup B move C; B move C;
Country 2: C sup D move A; D move A;
My thinking is everyone bounces because both supports are broken. Is that right?
8 replies
Open
Al Swearengen (0 DX)
23 Jan 16 UTC
Not a Live Game Thread
This thread is not intended to promote any particular game! Please discuss!
1 reply
Open
Al Swearengen (0 DX)
23 Jan 16 UTC
Press Celtic Britain Game?
Anyone up for a FP Live Celtic Britain Game tonight on VDip?
2 replies
Open
flash2015 (1447 D(G))
22 Jan 16 UTC
When Does A Draw Occur?
When does a draw occur? As soon as all players vote for draw...or when all players have voted for draw and the next turn is adjudicated? I ask because I am in a game where the draw votes are hidden.
1 reply
Open
Gocki (50 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
How to join
Dear Diplomaten,
I´m form Germany and I am wondering about why by many games I can look at but not join them. By games with a Password I understood but not by the others. Ist it because im unknown on this side, or why. Thanks for an Information. BR Gocki
4 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (758 D)
20 Jan 16 UTC
Sarah Fucking Palin
http://newsthump.com/2016/01/20/raving-lunatic-receives-republican-endorsement-from-pouting-simpleton/
33 replies
Open
GOD (389 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
RL Diplomacy Runde in Hamburg morgen
Does anyone here live around Hamburg and would like to play a live round of Diplomacy? We have the location and six people, but the seventh jumped off today :/
8 replies
Open
MonsieurJavert (214 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
Sum-of-Squares
I can't find the descriptor for Sum-of-Squares Scoring. Could someone link to it or describe it here? Thanks.
1 reply
Open
c0dyz (100 D)
22 Jan 16 UTC
Question about centers
If a nation has two territories, one with a center and one without, and they lose the one with the center, are they defeated? or do they get more chances to gain it back?
6 replies
Open
jmdingess (1034 D)
21 Jan 16 UTC
Rules question I couldn't find on FAQ.
I know support is cut when the supporting unit is dislodged, but what would happen in the following scenario:
Country 1: A->D; B Support A->D
Country 2: C->B; D Support C->B
12 replies
Open
Captain Tomorrow (438 D)
19 Jan 16 UTC
(+2)
My suggestion for a major addition to the game mechanics - something to reflect upon.
What if the game had a concept o fortification?
10 replies
Open
EvilKanevil (0 DX)
20 Jan 16 UTC
Spectate?
I'm sorry I am new here. When I click on a game to spectate it have i joined the game? Or is there another step I have to do?
6 replies
Open
reedeer1 (100 D)
20 Jan 16 UTC
spectating games
Is there a way to see the global chat in a game your not in? it wouldn't make it so that you could tell someone something they wouldn't have known otherwise like showing private messages would do. I'm just wondering if there is a specific reason why you can't.
6 replies
Open
KingCyrus (511 D)
21 Jan 16 UTC
Removing from game?
I joined a special game, but it quickly lost any sort of extra rules. I wouldn't mind, but it is a 10 day phase world map. Is it possible for a mod to remove me without taking a hit to my record?
18 replies
Open
ssorenn (0 DX)
21 Jan 16 UTC
Anyone have a WSJ acccount?
If so, could you get this whole article and post it here?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trouble-brews-for-imported-beers-madein-america-1435188835
11 replies
Open
CommanderByron (801 D(S))
20 Jan 16 UTC
Curiosity.
Mods can cancel games but can mods force draw? for example 3 players have played for weeks and a one player breaks a site rule implying the game should be cancelled but if the 2 remaining players agree to draw then can the mods force draw?
19 replies
Open
Chaqa (3971 D(B))
24 Dec 15 UTC
(+2)
SRG: On the Offensive
I had an idea for an SRG, and with unraked games I think it's time to try it out.
29 replies
Open
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jan 14 UTC
(+34)
Daily Bible Verses
"You have the words that lead to eternal life." This thread includes selected excerpts from the Bible.
5001 replies
Open
A_Tin_Can (2234 D)
23 Dec 15 UTC
(+21)
Major site scoring announcement!
See inside
Page 17 of 22
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+3)
I'm just explaining what's going on with SoS, not disagreeing with your preference. I prefer DSS and Carnage to SoS personally myself!

But somewhat related:

PPSC was a shit show bullshit system that did two things that DSS did not:
Gave more points for more centers (if you lost)
Let you get points for losing (i.e. a bullshit make believe scoring system)

If you want the "more points for more centers" aspect, SoS offers this
If you want the "bullshit make believe scoring system", unranked offers this
If you want neither, DSS offers this

(not you in particular Gobble, using "you" in the general sense)

It's not an EQUIVALENT, which some people seem to be idiotically inferring should be the case, to PPSC, but rather removes an embarrassing blight and if people want to retain some aspects of it, they exist. All this "but it's not PPSC!" misses a basic fundamental point and should really warrant introspection on one's reasoning capabilities.

The point isn't to RECREATE PPSC with the new options, otherwise it'd be redundant (and stupid). The point is to remove a shit show bullshit system while also offering other options, some of which happen to incorporate partial elements of PPSC.

I'm all for clarity, so maybe I'm not being clear enough, PPSC was made on the back of a napkin by a subpar casual player one day, who was repeatedly told it doesn't make sense by others but didn't care and then eventually left it behind. It has not, is not, and never will be thought up by or used by anyone else anywhere. If you want "Split points by draw-based for a draw but randomly give 1/2 D to winner and to the losers based on centre count" for some reason, go play it unranked and assign yourself your arbitrary, odd, mentally deficient, unofficial scoring system, along with any other imaginary non-sanctioned scoring system you wish to play with. That's what unranked games can do, allow you to do, part of the reason they exist.

I'm very afraid the clamoring stuttered in this thread who are circling around this issue think that somehow they're actually now in the majority because the decent have left the thread mostly alone hoping they'd tucker out (except ATC up until recently, bless his abused heart). This is not the case, and is quite simple to see from earlier threads where it was fought for removal of PPSC, or at the trend of WTA play.

Jeff Kuta (2066 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
I haven't yet joined an SoS game. Do the "live" scores reflect the SoS scores if the game were immediately ended, or are they DSS scores?
Lethologica (203 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
The former.
Jeff Kuta (2066 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
Thanks.
Chumbles (791 D(S))
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+2)
@Valis: I get that you feel passionately about removing PPSC and applaud the clarity. I don't agree with you at all and find the idea that I'm somehow mentally deficient for liking PPSC extremely insulting. I have said my piece on the reasons why I prefer it. Those like you that think that any kind of foul debating trick or language can be used in defence of their point of view are precisely the reason I am that I am (honourably) playing out what looks like being my last game here. Your post has made this much more likely. That's a shame, because I respect the work you've done, the experience you have and your intelligence. It's even more of a shame that you have not respected those of us who, albeit elsewhere, have an arguably similar track record.
Chumbles (791 D(S))
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+1)
Sorry for the grammatical errors; it's 3.40 am here/ And yes, I'm angry enough to now have to get up, make a cup of tea and hopefully calm down enough to get back to sleep.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
Funny, PPSC, and it's prevalence, actively held be back from recommending the site to many many people. I'm sure we'll make up for it, but I rather see you stay.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
We need people who shook hands with greats!
JimTheGrey (968 D(S))
09 Jan 16 UTC
I once peed next to Senator Alan Simpson, so there's that.
wpfieps (442 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
And for the record, Senator Simpson tried to pass a bill mandating that only WTA/DSS games be played on Capitol Hill, so that should settle things.

WTA/DSS for the win!
Lethologica (203 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
The question is, did Senator Alan Simpson have a wide stance?
thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
@Chumbles :-/ Sad, isn't it. Do you still play elsewhere, BTW? I'm thinking of dipping my toes back into the PBEM side of things.

@Valis: I think the argument that other systems are preferred is one you can have. But the moment you get into declaring that people should somehow prefer those other systems and that they are a valid replacement for PPSC is where the logic fail is, not the other way around.

There are perfectly good reasons to decide to retire a scoring system - I even agree with that way back at the start of this thread somewhere. If you want to say that it is inconsistent with the majority of the hobby and wish to have this site stick with the majority of the hobby, that's perfectly reasonable.

But declaring that those who like it are somehow wrong or mentally deficient in, is just straight up bullying rubbish, no better than those on the other side of the argument slinging abuse. Get off the high horse.

There are decent arguments to be had, use them, not this bullshit.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
I think the *system* is mentally deficient. Not thought through. Made without enough intelligence.

People have used plenty and plenty of good arguments, they were ignored. I'm just trying to reword them to get through. Also my last paragraph because it was becoming an echo chamber. This whole charade you have that value judgements cannot be made about PPSC and it must/should be removed because of some reasoning complete a priori the actual system is absurd.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
People should prefer DSS, SoS, or unranked to PPSC, and if they don't they should not play here (guess what? You won't find PPSC, or something like it, ANYWHERE you leave to!). That's two declarative statements for the price of one!

I would no more want or expect someone to prefer PPSC than to prefer a variant of chess where you get points even if you lost based on how many pieces you took! How ridiculous would that be! We would not teach that to even the smallest of children.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
If you don't see how my post addresses things like this:
"I am really at a loss to understand why anyone who wants to play PPSC would set up an unranked game to play "PPSC". An unranked game is an unranked game, not PPSC. Unranked games are cool, I like that they now exist, but I really really cannot see any logic that connects the two."

then you are beyond help. It's not the first time you make this argument either. Also where were you when abuse was thrown all the time at ATC? I had the thread muted because of the ugly insides, that's why I did not speak up, but I have decided to because it was too much to bear silently. Instead you continue to call him a liar with backhanded complisults.
thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
It's *just a damn scoring system*. There are all sorts of crazy chess variants that I've played in my time, they're quite fun. Not for serious competition, perhaps. But fun.

As to where I was - on holidays, not reading the forum. Except way back at the start of the thread (or was it the other thread on the subject, not sure) where I defended his argument about Facebook deleting features when people were arguing.

thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
And seriously, people have put together coherent defenses of how the system works here. That you (and a lot of others, obviously), don't like how it works is clear. That doesn't mean it's wrong, or self-inconsistent, or mentally deficient.
Chumbles (791 D(S))
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+1)
*sigh* Last words from me... "You won't find PPSC, or something like it, ANYWHERE you leave to!" I don't have to; believe it or not I can find other things to do. But your statement is factually incorrect: vDip runs PPSC.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
We could explain for a Nth time how it is wrong, is self-inconsistent, etc

ACTUALLY let's do one of them right now!

PPSC
in a DRAW, gives out points based on amount of remaining player regardless of center count

in a WIN, give out points based on amount of centres for surviving players and 1/2 the pot to the winner.

Explain to me how that's self-consistent. With each part or even just it's name. Explain to me. You can't. It's so absurdly self-evident.

And, relatedly, you know what one of the things that REALLY gets the goat of the people like me? That it's clear the people who want PPSC *don't* want it for it's points-per-supply-centre aspect, they want it just for it's "get points when I lose" aspect. Because even when ATC offered/inquired about it was there no clamoring for a scoring system that *CONSISTENTLY* gave points per supply center (i.e. for DRAW *and* WIN outcomes). No, it's ALWAYS been about getting points when you lose, *that's* what people care about.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
Vdip has PPSC as a legacy of webDip. It's the same source. But sure, I retract, anywhere but the sister offshoot of the same site.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
I think my favorite stupid defense of PPSC was that it "encouraged" playing to win because it would lead to more solos. It leads to more solos because people are OK with losing! Holy shit, how is that not obvious. They aren't actually deserved solos! Yeah, create a system that incentives NOT stopping a solos and you'll get more solos whoopdie fucking doo talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

What coherent defenses?
Jeff Kuta (2066 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+1)
Some PPSC numbers:

PPSC with Winner
Winner: 18 SCs = 18 D
Loser1: 15 SCs = 15 D
Loser2: 1 SC = 1 point

PPSC with DrawA
DrawA-1: 17 SCs = 34/3 ~11.33 D
DrawA-2: 16 SCs = 34/3 ~11.33 D
DrawA-3: 1 SC = 34/3 ~11.33 D

PPSC with DrawB
DrawB-1: 12 SCs = 34/3 ~11.33 D
DrawB-2: 11 SCs = 34/3 ~11.33 D
DrawB-3: 11 SCs = 34/3 ~11.33 D

How does such a scoring system make any sense at all?
thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
Eh? I am pretty sure I argued for game options which did allow draws to have per-supply-centre scoring at some point. But I believe the counter argument (perfectly valid one) was "too many game options". Seriously. Get. Off. The. Straw. Man. Attacks.

The argument that PPSC is out of step with the rest of the hobby? Perfectly valid. I said so. This isn't a Dip game, I am actually saying what I mean.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
oh, and I'm not?
or you could answer Jeff's questions and explain how that's consistent.
VillageIdiot (7813 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
(+1)
Is Jeff's math on PPSC for real?
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
Yes.
Examples of case 1:
gameID=13355
gameID=45995

Examples of case 2:
gameID=79865
gameID=10733

Examples of case 3:
gameID=121558
gameID=125509
thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
@Valis: I don't think anyone who supports PPSC is under any illusions that it's "consistent". That's rather the point. And no, you clearly are saying what you mean - but you seem to be interpreting my comments as if I'm not.

As to @JK's question - well, the draw scoring is exactly as per rulebook, the solo scoring is not.

SoS is the reverse - solo scoring is as per rulebook, draw scoring is not.

thorfi (1023 D)
09 Jan 16 UTC
As for why I reposted that - ATC specifically said he was interested in why people hadn't created unranked games to play PPSC.

But, really - please explain using logical reason why someone who wants to play PPSC, which has the characteristics JK outlines above, and involves winning or losing points, would want to play either SoS (which has a very different scoring table), or unranked (which has no scoring table at all)?

I meant what I said - unranked games are cool, and SoS is too, and I look forward to getting in a game once I have spare time, but they aren't PPSC.

You are welcome to argue that PPSC is weird. It is, I'll even agree - you'll find threads where I've said it had some funny incentives, if you go look. That doesn't mean it's "wrong", any more than SoS is "wrong".

It may not be what you like, and it may not even be what in the end is good for this site to have. Fine. But arguing that people who do like it are just wrong is, well, wrong.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
Is this a joke?

You keep asking "Show that you can have equivalent of X" when I've already explained that is neither the goal nor possible.

Congratulation, it's technically consistent to say "That you (and a lot of others, obviously), don't like how it works is clear. That doesn't mean it's wrong, or self-inconsistent, or mentally deficient." and that PPSC is inconsistent.

Yeah, it's not inconsistent because I don't like it, it's inconsistent because it's not consistent with itself as you admit.

People can't be wrong about things? What the shit?

Well, I tried. Hopefully everyone else is willing to listen.
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
09 Jan 16 UTC
No matter what I post, unless it **IS** PPSC, you'll point out it's not equivalent to PPSC.

Give me ANYTHING, ANYTHING AT ALL, that would satisfy as a scoring system for
"someone who wants to play PPSC, which has the characteristics JK outlines above, and involves winning or losing points, would want to play" that isn't PPSC itself. It's a stupid and meaningless questions because there's no answer, and there doesn't need to be.

Go ahead. Use "strawman, ad hominen", all the terms you learned in freshman debate. I don't care.

Page 17 of 22
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

660 replies
Valis2501 (2850 D(G))
20 Jan 16 UTC
Anyone else follow BTC?
https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7#.o1wuxqbqg

Very interesting article, been watching the XT/blocksize debacle for some time now.
4 replies
Open
Page 1299 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top