A couple more thoughts...

Babak, if gamelong alliances are so pervasive on this site, you should be able to point to a bunch of players with far more draws than draws. Can you? I doubt it. Look through the HoF, and find even one player with many more draws. You can't.

So, how about the community at large? Name five players who's records support your contention that game-long alliances ending in 17-17 draws are very common. Can you?

Your complaint that there are a huge number of gamelong alliances and 17-17 draws is just a huge fabrication. And if you manage to continue moving up into larger pot games, you'll be even less likely to find players who take part in such alliances. And those you do see, will be quickly stopped by experienced players who recognize what's happening and coordinate a common defense.

The bottom line is that this entire thread is a big attempt to excuse your own poor play in the larger pot games. If you want to drop tail between your legs and quit your games, as you've said, then go ahead. But blaming your performance on everyone else for not playing the game the "right" way is just childish.

above should read "you should be able to point to a bunch of players with far more draws than wins". So, can you find some in the HoF?

Babak you have written to me that "there is no rule for draws including all survivors... there is a DIAS option, but in most ftf games, draws exclude the weaker players that would be eliminated..."

This is just absolutely wrong, and demonstrates that you do not have an accurate understanding of the rules for draws.

Go to this website: http://www.diplom.org/~diparch/diplomacy_rules.htm

Actually READ the rules, instead of making them up or assuming that your college "house" rules were correct.

If players agree to end the game before a winner is determined, "all players who still have pieces on the board share equally in a draw".

It's probably a good idea to know the rules of the game, before starting a thread to throw hand grenades and complain that no one is playing it the "right" way.

Ok, well I realize that this thread was set up in a very hostile tone, but I think it would be extremely constructive if we took it down a notch.

Babak, you seem to be under the impression that I'm a developer. This is not the case. There are only really two developers, Kestas and figlesquidge, with Kestas being the owner and having done most of the work. Both are busy with their own lives and are developing out of interest and charity to the hobby. If you really want your ideas to get noticed you should post at forum.phpdiplomacy.net which is the developer's forum, which Kestas checks and replies to more often than this forum.

That said, your ideas have not been ignored. I read and responded to your suggestion that new players, albeit very curtly, to throw my support behind you. In addition, figlesquidge, a mod and developer responded in that thread three times to your idea. Be aware, your ideas are indeed being noticed. Just like this one.

It's been pointed out, but if you look at the Hall of Fame you'll find that most of the top players prefer WTA and do not have nearly as many draws as you lament. The PPSC mentality just doesn't really cut it in the big leagues. I can see your point and I agree that new players should be allowed to start low pot WTA games and I'm sure that this can be programmed. What probably will not happen is that the PPSC system will probably not be entirely scrapped. This site has a mandate to be friendly to new users and PPSC is much more forgiving than WTA. It encourages players to stick to the games they're playing because they still have the opportunity to profit, rather than abandoning a game and CDing because they feel they have no shot at winning the whole game.

Understand that there is very little "official" presence here. Kestas has the ultimate say but you should not discount the responses from the community. You've received some helpful and constructive responses both here and in your other thread... and it's unlikely that change will happen if the community is against it.

That said, I'm behind your idea on not letting new players join CD's immediately and I'm behind the idea of letting new players create WTA games, albeit low staked. I do bring up ideas of importance to Kestas, and so do the other mods. If you REALLY want more official response, I would try the developers forum that I suggested earlier, or you could e-mail Kestas.

I'd also point out that Kestas actually did respond to you in the promote php thread. You've hijacked several threads for your cause now, so you might have missed it. I'll post it here:

Kestas:
As you can see from the article below by Calhamer himself the PPSC vs WTA debate is hardly a phpDip assault on the traditional hobby, it's a long debate which is more or less a matter of opinion, and that's why we offer both

http://www.diplom.org/~diparch/resources/calhamer/objectives.htm

I just signed up here having moved from the Facebook app. Before finding the app I'd only ever played face to face.

As can be seen from my games, I've joined a bunch of CDs in fairly good positions and am already negotiating.

For a player that knows Dip but not this system, taking on a CD is a good way to get to grips with the system. Put some advice in the signup saying that novices should avoid doing it, but preventing it completely would mean CDs don't get taken over half as much.

I LIKE ppsc, a lot. It allows for fluid negotiations and people can aim to survive into the endgame and still get something out of it.

For online play where people can just stop playing, especially for simple fun stuff, that's good.

Games adapt and evolve to suit new environments. This app could do with some more facilities for variants, but meh, that's a long term objective for an open source project.

The complaint that the "hobby" will be taken over by players that found the game through the FB app and PPSC is also a bit strange. It appears to argue it's better those players never find the game at all instead of learning a variant that is disliked.

Meh, I'll stick to having fun and watching the number of people playing Dip overall rise myself.

I havn't read all of this since it was way too much. But certain things should not be allowed. People who for instance, get to 17 and then try to get someone else up to 16 before they win or even 17 and draw. The point of this game is to win at all costs. There is no other way it should be played (in my oppinion). Alliances are meant to get you your goal, but once you get to the point where you can get to your goal on your own, then screw it. Just win.
I can think of one exception, and that would be if someone is very rude all game and you just want them to lose and get 0 points (a problem you only have to worry about in PPSC because they get 0 anway in a WTA). Links to games that I feel are a mockery coming up.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=7867

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=7594
This one raises other suspicious seeing as how France could have won like 8 turns before but instead fed England the win.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=7623

Those are not examples of how diplomacy should be played. You are meant to win the game when you can. Why dilly daddle with it just because you feel like it.

Hi everyone, I didn't read carefully all the thread but I have a global idea about the topic after a quickly read. I will try to explain my opinion about the questions that Babak asked for.

1) what is the purpose of the ppsc system?
What's the problem with the PPSC anyway? I don't undertand what are you talking about, you don't have to draw your games if you don't want... and in that case the WTA doesn't resolve the problem and probably increase it (as Centurian explained). It's true that many players are more interested in points than wins, but that could be another face to play with, you can offer to other players to let them survive in exchange of they help for example, and a lot more examples.

2) what benefits does it offer over a wta-only system?
For me is a different way of play and that is allways wellcome if the base of the game is respected.

I want to say two things. First of all, the point system is a nice way to filter the games that you are going to play (higher pot -> experienced players -> less civil disorders), it's also a condiment for the game and finally it's some other way to see the level of a player. I think the win record is perhaps more important, but you can't consider a good player to some who has a good win record but not a good points one, because he probably has played low pots games (lower pot -> less experienced players -> more civil disorders).

And the second one, is that I have the same feeling that Babak to draw games. The draw is not a natural ending for this game, this should happen only when an stalemate appear (my 3 draws are like that) but you have not the obligation to draw if you don't want and at this point the discussion is over. It would be wonderful to hear Edi's opinion about that, it always calls my attention why he has so many draws =S

Sorry to "shout"; I don't usually do this, but...

DID YOU SKIP OVER MY POST* IN THE PREVIOUS THREAD?

My apologies for repeating anything something said (although technically I wrote it first), but I think it answered the questions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

*I think it was my second post. I know it wasn't the first.

I remember you starting a few games with below 20 hours. I don't remember if those were your wta games, but I wanted to join them, but I don't have the time anymore. I have been looking for a 36ish hour wta game for a week or so, but whenever I see one on the forum its already too late. They seem to fill up fast, sometimes. So I'll end up creating my own if I want one from now on.

This may not mean much, but I also remember playing a ppsc game with you where you tried to motivate me to ally along side you, the dominant player, to get second place, because as you said its a "ppsc isn't it." I said that "I intended to win", and we ended up drawing. (we also never had that eog statement you said you were going to post). I was new at the time, but I still believe in one winner, maybe its just because I've played so much risk and I'm tired of my friends ending with "world peace."

Don't let this get to you. I don't think all new players are influenced so easily to believe that this is a pure version of the game. Personally, I don't think you'd ever be able to find a pure version of this game online, since Face to Face negotiations and filling out orders are so different.

It's just a different style of play.

Personally, I think WTA games are clearly the way to go and are clearly the way the game was intended to be played.

The rulebook clearly states that draws and solos are wins and that eliminations and survivals are losses.

PPSC seems strange to me and the point system as a whole does not appear to do a good job of accurately ranking players according to skill.

However, it doesn't bother me if people want to play PPSC.

What DOES bother me is that it's VERY difficult to get a WTA game started. People seem to like the 'safe' PPSC games better which is really just a neutered version of Diplomacy if you ask me.

But, that's just my opinion =)

PPSC is just another variant. It has a perverse affect in that it encourages meta-gaming. Once I finish my existing games here, I won't be returning. I don't have the time to generate enough points playing strange variants to get to the point where I can play WTA which is closer to what I think Diplomacy should be like.
While Edi doesn't like the judges, I actually prefer them as there are many fewer instances of multi-accounts, and I find email much easier to use than the odd chat interface here.
Overall, phpDiplomacy is a good start, but the interface and community still need to mature.
Perhaps I'll stop by in a year or so and see how it all has improved.

You prefer email??? That's strange to me - I think this messaging system is far better. It's much easier to keep your messages straight and it doesn't clutter up your email account.

You know Babak- I created you a perfectly fine WTA game, which you didn't join and I am now Russia attacked on 4 fronts- so stop whining.

@Jacob: I mostly prefer the message system because moderators can look at what we say and find cheaters. But if your inbox gets cluttered, why not just create a separate email account for diplomacy?

I did create a second email account because I am playing one game on dip2000.com - I still don't like it. And I also can't imagine trying to keep up multiple games via email...what a chore that would be!

@usal
Dude, isn't it a bit pretentious to say you'll check back in a year to see if this place has matured enough for you? :)

You might want to play Diplomacy as you think "it should be" - but I would never join a high pot WTA game with you.

I don't know you and you've finished only 3 games here, losing them all - so you simply do not qualify as a reliable player - and there're too many people here who have just joined and don't know the rules.

If you're any good at this game you should not find it so problematic to get enough points and have the option to pick your games. If you can't get there don't blame others.

And isn't it a bit too immature to pass judgement after just 3 noob games? :)

I find it way easier. My email client sorts each game into its own folder. I also use Chistian Hagenah's "DipTool" program which will keep games separate and it provides much cleaner maps than this site.
It's all in what you are used to.

Babak-
Here, here. Forgive me if I'm repeating other (as I didn't not actually read through the entire thread), but I'd suggest just playing strictly WTA. I've also gotten rather fed up with PPSC, mostly due to the general attitude I received when trying to engineer a 'stop the leader' coalition. Most players in these games will sooner give up a solo and grab as many centers as they can, and I am quite sick of this type of play; it most definitely is an insult to the game.

I'd also encourage you to accept TheGhostmaker's invitation to the leagues. All games are WTA and the play is very high quality (maybe not quite as good as our face to face games, but still thoroughly enjoyable), although maybe my experience has been better since I've found myself in the elite group.

Meh, the three games finished are all takeover of CD positions. I thought I would help out.
I didn't claim to be particularly good at the game.

It's not so much the points/rank - but the number of games you've played actually.

Someone published a statistic with something like 90% of all people playng up to 5 games and then quitting or something.

I've played FTF before and needed some time to adjust - but it takes a bit of time.

As for the general WTA vs PPSC discussion - my personal best-case would be to play PPSC games, but with a WTA mind-set. Very competitive, yet not so brutal in the end. Does not happen often unfortunately - too few people thinking this way :(

Yes, exactly, and there are plenty of forums for diplomacy. Why play a variant with a warped victory condition when I don't need to.
More power to all who like it here. It's not for me. At least I'm not so classless as to ruin the games I'm in by abandoning.

If everyone left and waited until this site's interface and community matured we wouldn't have a community... You are the community.

That said, I'm sorry you didn't find a home here. I'm sure that if you stayed a little longer, maybe played some low stakes WTA games you'd change your mind. It's not your PBEM, but it will grow on you and maybe you'll see some of the advantages. =)

i'm glad we are getting so many varied view points expressed here... a few specific responses

@ Chris - apologies for directing my ire your way - and I appreciate you backing me up on the CD suggestion and the low-point wta point. maybe I'm being a bit melodramatic - but the frustration I expressed is certainly not mine alone (as others have pointed out upthread). one can always improve on the way they communicate - and I am no different - but I appreciate you looking past that and responding to the argument itself.

@ Churchill - I know - that game is called "Babak's WTA game" right? and it was 29 pts - I suggested it on the forum - the problem was that by the time I logged on and saw it -it was already fulll ;( that is exactly the problem for those of us with under 100 pts - its very hit-and-miss and almost searching for a needle in a haystack... others have said the same above.

I had 280pts from my first 5 game finishes - then I could not get wta games started so I signed up for a bunch of ppsc games... thats whats on offer.

@ xgong - 'an insult to the game' is dead-on

@ those who LOVE ppsc - fine. it is a variant. the problem i find is that many of you are used to ppsc - the 'comfort' of a 2nd place finish or 3rd place survive... and you are my #1 case for why I think this site is detrimental to the hobby as a whole. it has created a ton of players who play this 'variant' and think its the real thing... so php has become a variant site with a few Diplomacy games thrown in.

@DipperDon - I'm sorry that you think my world revolves around you or the one game you are in. your reaction and DEMAND for a game-long ally was indeed a spark... but hardly the only example of the 'warped' logic this ppsc-model creates...

in fact - the problem is that the 'logical' thing to do is in-fact to find a game-long ally in a ppsc game. that way, when you and he both reach 9 - you have already won... when you and your ally have reached 18 together - you have a majority of the units on the board, and the rest cant really stop you... it becomes nearly impossible. so yeah -start off the game going through all the player's profiles - find the ones that seem to enjoy that 'style' if you want to call it that - ask them for a game-long alliance - and volia - you win. well done. be proud of yourself for all those points ... but then its no longer a strategy game - its a waste of time for the other 5 players in the game.


and to those that say - "stop whining and just be a better player" - I say go ***** yourself ;) I dont need a few extra points to validate myself - but I dont like playing when others are cheating... or when the odds are stacked against me... thats just a waste of time... and my point (whining if you want to call it that) is that the ppsc-model has created a framework that encourages 'cheating' and it encourages stacking the odds in the way DipperDon for example likes. I dont mind losing to a good player or being hit with a good stab (check out my 707 pt game with AH - Russia/Otto made a great stab - really well done) but I do mind this mindset that "i've found my ally for the game and diplomacy is irrelevant"... then its just a gunboat game (like someone said)... its no longer 'Diplomacy'.



anyways - i'm sure this is not a debate that will die down wether I stay or leave... for the time being - I agree with usal that there is no reason for me to waste my time here if I dont like ppsc when there are so many other dip communities to choose from. for now - I'm not going to just quit and go CD... and maybe I'll stick around for Ghost's tournament since that does interest me... but I do think this is a real question... why should the ppsc vairant even exist? it should at the very least be noted as an aberration / variant and not the 'standard' game choice for new players... they should KNOW they are playing a variant and not playing Diplomacy.

Chris - I really do appreciate your responses on this thread... you have been a model of civility and community organizing ;) just wanted to say that.