I agree with your points Edi, but I couldn't really think how to write it - How would you put it? The most common issue is people playing who ally due to friendships off-site, but the traditional definition still holds.

As for this specific case, I'm looking into it Centurian, and if someone in this game could ask them to reply to my email I would be grateful.

I always find it amusing when people complain about unbreakable alliances between friends. Granted, it is extremely frustrating and should be announced that the beginning of a game, but it adds a measure of reality to the game.

Kaiser Wilhelm I, for example, relied heavily on personal alliances and connections between himself and other monarchs. He did not believe the Russian czar would fight him because of their friendship. In that sense, metagaming with the intent of an unbreakable alliance did not work for him. But it has worked for others throughout history (political marriages are metagaming).

Even though it is frustrating, it is ultimately impossible to prevent and realistic.

If metagaming/multiaccounting is played out eveidently in a game. It should (it IS) be easy to ally the rest against them. Thus turning it into a disadvantage... Bonus this cn be applied to most alliances where people REALLY trust eachother.
Accusing people - wromngfully- of metagaming inside a game is tactics, bringing it to the forum is not OK... unless they actually are metagaming. In which case the y get banned and your game, and Anti-Metagaming alliance disolves. :-(

That's all very well Jenspo, but not if you're stuck between them, such as being Russia to their Turkey-Austria.
youradhere - Does that mean that in 1917 whoever is playing Russia should be overthrown, or that the British leader dies in 1901? Surely diplomacy is a game based on the idea - not the details!
Oh, and whilst it might be impossible to stop (which i disagree anyway) it can certainly be controlled. We'll get there.

"should also be declared as unethical"

um......aren't we playing Diplomacy?

Just for the record, these two are in this game as well:

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=8084

And it's really irritating. Italy has brought fleets all the way north to protect France. My thoughts, pretty bluntly, are that if this is the same person, he/she is just a terribly poor player. I suspect they at least had some pre-arranged agreement coming into this game, and it's pretty irritating. This past phase Italy passed up a free SC in order to move into the NAO.

figlesquidge:
I wouldn't support metagaming in the same way I wouldn't support going CD. If the British leader declares a need for a sitter Spring 1901, fortunately finding one in his immediate family, that would be very amusing indeed. If whoever is playing Russia goes CD in 1917, at which point Germany takes Warsaw and Livonia, until Germany realized that he must to go on vacation soon, and would thus go CD by 1919, agreed to cede Ruhr, leave Belgium, and stop building fleets and armies, I would think that was very interesting.

Of course the game is based on the ideas, and not the details. That doesn't make it less interesting when the game contains events and themes that reflect historical fact. It shows how realistic the game is, and how human historical figures are.

@paulg - your full of shit man. I screwed you out of the centers, yes. But I never received any compensation in any other game for this. At least not knowingly. The fact that I have allied with that same player in another game was purely coincidence and base don our board postions. I give up SCs all the time to allies for one reason or another. That one time was because you were an ass and got what you had coming. The only other time I played with startagos was in a 1-hour live game that was drawn before completion. He had an abysmal run as France, and when he knew he was about to die, gave me Brest because I hadn't violated our DMZ and NAP. Both cases were individually decided upon and had NOTHING to due with metagaming.

Before you accuse me of that again, I suggest you look at my record and see when and where any games were played. Then go fuck yourself.

@Canaris
The website has a FAQ, these are guidlines, not rules. The rules are for the game and are not part of the FAQ. That is where the confusion came in. The FAQ does need to be updated though to clarify that joining a game with a friend and an agreed upon unbreakable alliance is metagaming and against the spirit of the game.

@youradhere - The difference between internet Diplomacy and historical examples is huge. In the real world there are ways of getting information. Most of the other European leaders probably knew or at least could have figured out who Wilhelm was probably friends with personally. Here at phpDip, other players have zero way of finding this information out.

Not to mention the fact that Diplomacy is a game and the expectation is that everyone has an equal chance of victory (not quite true here of course - re: Italy).

@Canaris - If that's really what the rules here at phpDip say then they definitely need to be changed/expanded on.

dangermouse:
Right, which is why one should announce if one knows someone else in the game.

whoa whoa whoa. Now im a suspect? Seriously, can i talk to a mod to clear things up and make sure these guys dont get me banned for something im not doing? Who are mods around here anyway?

You certainly can. I sent you an email this morning (UK), and would be very grateful if you'd reply.

o ok. Thnx. Ill read it right now.

I sent you an email. If you have time id like you to read it and please respond. Thank you.

I've replied

Ive sent you another email

what is happening in this thread??

this exchange is rather comical.

Metagaming screws the diplomacy part of Diplomacy.

It kind of funny that you keep telling eachother you have sent eachothers emails. It seems kind of redundant

It kind of funny that you keep telling eachother you have sent eachothers emails. It seems kind of redundant

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.)

It kind of funny that you keep telling eachother you have sent eachothers emails. It seems kind of redundant

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.)

(ditto)

It kind of funny that you keep telling eachother you have sent eachothers emails. It seems kind of redundant

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.)

(ditto)

(It's growing!)

No. I will not allow my post to create such evil.

Sorry, I didn't like his suggestion that it was unfair and the mods can't be contacted when I'd already emailed him. After that I was rushing to try and finish the conversation last night (UK).
Right, well I've looked into the situation, and as people have said ThisIsntRISK and Czar94 are definitely the same person. Sorry for taking so long, but obviously I didn't want to ban two different people by not checking!

SrgtSilver64 was the same person as well? Just wondering. It's ok if we leave him one account. Someone just took over for cd'ed Italy in the game I posted above and confirmed my suspicion as Italy and France hadn't talked once the entire game.

How can you find out someones number ID?
How did you get the numbers of the users?
What are the numbers?

1) idk
2) idk
3) its in what order they join i believe. Like when they joined based on how many people joined.