If I have an opportunity to, I might.

However, I have a feeling it isn't for me.

Two of the things I really like about Diplomacy are 1) Simple Rules, but complex strategy 2) Unbalanced Countries

So, 1900 seems to throw both of those out the window. : )

The 1900 rules are hardly complex.

I like positions with roughly equal chances and options. Italy does about only half as well as Russia, according to big statistical samples I've seen. That's not good, imo.

I like those rules alot. So, under the 1900 rule book I move Venice to Wales.

I was thinking about this on the way to work, and I would describe this site as a missionary city. There are some sweet things going on in the city, but there are also barbarians knocking at the gate who have no idea what's going on. But sites like this are the online vangaurds converting people to seriously good Diplomacy!

Well, the players are intelligent...there are a few cheaters, don't ask me who (and you don't have to--the hunt for multi-gamers on the site sometimes gets so feverish it's like a Salem Witch Hunt or a McCarthysim Trial) and there are some folks who just post to get under your skin (not me...I'll pust a HELL of a lot and bargue but at least I generally give a shit about what I'm debating instead of just dicking around with folks) and in a live game there's a fair chance someoe might decide to up and leave in the middle when the going gets tough, or even just never move, and that screws things (or immensely helps them, depending on which side of the fence you are on) but...

Pretty cool, on the whole...

Just NEVER even DARE criticize Lady Gaga!

EVER!

Trust me on this one... ;)

Madame Gaga is basically a public welfare whore.

"But the ease in which you can play a quick and very easily organised game on this site, is of course also a big plus. And makes our hobby more accessible."

- One of the major advantages of this site is that you can sit down and introduce a new paler to it with little overhead/teaching time.

the dropdown menus make it much easier to learn, while taking little away from the advanced player.

@1900:

"1. First, to improve play balance by strengthening those countries whose performance in standard Diplomacy is sub-par (i.e. Austria and Italy), while hampering those that are typically the top performers (France and Russia)."

simply put - unbalanced countries forces player to compromise in their diplomacy (even when they don't want to, and change their midns later) - successful diplomacy allows player overcome geographic inbalances (best example, russia starts with 4, yet doesn't do better than all other countries ever)

" 2. To encourage diplomatic interaction between all the Great Powers from the very first turn, principally by opening up new possibilities for each of them."

While this may be useful, there is no reason to assume everyone interacting is better than some people interacting. According to most theories of friendship, you can/will only have 3-5 closest friends.

I think most diplomacy players will tell you they only have 0-3 closest allies. I believe, It is actually too much to ask for a player to develop diplomatic relations with 7 seperate players and to expect all to have the same immediacy and important as their 2-3 immediate neighbours in standard/classic game (ie 2/3 neighbours is enough to handle, humans find it harder to handle more - 'standard neighbours' are either north/sotuh OR east/west powers, depending on russia/italy)

3. To make the game more historically accurate, both by changing the map to reflect the actual borders of Europe in 1900, and by making the character of each country more closely resemble that of its real-life counterpart (though only insofar as balance too could be maintained). "

- this is fair enough, but i think the 'classic' map has now far more momentum behind it and thus trumps historic accuracy.

Lastly adding two new special rules (russian emergency measures and suez canal rules) hurts th game and adds complexity where it was before simple and beaufitul.

The advantage of foricng england and western powrs deal with turkey does not neccesarily help. I've seen ample examples of england talking to turkey about invasions of russia and the requirement of the suez canal seems unnecesary for the initiation of diplomatic relaitons between the two.

lastly i'd like to apologize for typos and runken stupidity... for i'm considerably less than sober right now...

i like the 1900 variant, but i don't think i like it enough to help create the variant... neither on the classic map nor using standard rules... it's not close enough to dip for me to generate... :'(

Despite his inebriation, I think orathaic makes some very good points. He pretty much mentioned all the issues I have with 1900.

Oh, and there are waaaaay more solos on this site than you would expect coming from your background, you'll be at 16 as Turkey and people will be still fighting over Edi or Holland.

@gram

If you play WTA instead of PPSC this won't happen.

It will still happen a ton more than in FTF, which I just chalk up to FTF players being crazy experienced.

All of your WTA games have been gunboat, and mostly live. They are a very bad indicator of the skill of some of the players on this site.

True, true, I guess I play this site as a tactical brush up.

@gramilaj:

+1,000,000! FINALLY someone agrees! lol.....

Join the tournaments and you'll find a lot less solos.

In any case, if there is a large group of PBEM players that play a particular variant, then it might be a good variant to have to draw them into the fold. Just a thought.

I mean...what a dumb concept, inviting quality players playing full diplomacy for a quality game. Ludicrous!!

I think i would agree taht there is a wide variation in skill on this site. Some of the ebst players are fantastic, some of the league games i've played have been really high quality (though a league is a meta-game aswell) getting to know new players in leagues, or schools, or from reputation on the forum along with random password'd games is i think a strenght and good way to get higher standard games (apart from playing high pot/stakes games...)

@alderan: i'd be more than happy to try 1900, or several other variants.

Once a big enough population of players are playing a single variant the level of gameplay on that variant is likely to increase (look at the expierence of the 2 player versus games France vs Austria, it seemed very unbalanced at first and then after tactics were learned on both sides the game became very hard to call... and that is without any diplomacy as two player games are pure tactics.)

How well other players know the map and different approaches to winning has a massive effect on what you can convince them to do with diplomacy. So taking a variant outside and playtesting it into the ground is worthwhile to get a really good idea of how it plays, but then you need to introduce it 'into the wild' and hope it has enough popularity to really take off...

i've played ancient med, because my ftf group sometimes only has 5 people. I've neer played the world map here because i don't think it looks like it's worth the effort of figuring out. Compared with Chaos or Crowded on the standard map which are much easier to get into... anything on the standard map infact...

That 1900 variant looks cool. I might have to dust off my php hat. (Once I finish up these other side projects...<sigh/>)

Welcome Charles!

I think we've got a great community here. I've been a part of many a forum, but this is the one that keeps bringing me back.

That 1900 variant looks great. I was a little skeptical of the new extra rules at first, but I realize they're a lot simpler than they sound, it's just that they probably pose a small issue in terms of how easily they can be integrated into this site. I've always been interested in orphan supply centres, and the variant seems like it entangles all the countries more such that you really do need to talk to everyone.

Welcome to the site.

I like the look of the 1900 variant too. Yeah the classic variant is much simpler and I certainly wouldn't say replace the Classic variant with 1900 but in response to it being too complicated I don't think the extra rules are very complicated. Also, I still think that game would be much simpler than the World variant, as the World is both huge and you have to watch about 3 different areas. The extra rules are basically give Russia an extra unit if its almost dead and let units go from MAO to the Canal.

I like the historically accurate aspect too, as well as making tactics more important. Realistically, even the best diplomat has to be fairly good at tactics to win a war, whereas on here you can theoretically win through luck and diplomacy without having good plans.

I reckon that if someone has done the Classic variant enough to know how to play they could play that variant just as well as they could play the World variant, so I hope if its possible to be put up here that it gets done.

Well, I joined a regular game here. I'm frankly quite exasperated with it. Two powers NMRed right off the bat. That's no way to play Diplomacy and unless I see clear signs of this being a one-off mishap and players are actually willing to play the game properly, I'm not inclined to have other people waste my time. Not a promising first experience... :(

@charles

If there are 2 NMR, you can vote to cancel the game.

Did you listen to our advice about posting/looking in the forum to start new games rather than just joining a random one?

Make a post like "First time webber, long time dipper looking for a game" and you won't have any more CDs. Also, don't join 5 point games.

Yeah, there are a lot of games with people just starting out at diplomacy, where they just need experience, not quality, but if you are looking for better, look to the forum!

wait...

5 point
10point
10 POINT

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

wait...

5

OK

Everyone can calm down.

Disaster narrowly avoided.

As you were.

what abgemacht said...

Better to get 7 players to make a game via forum... you will get more quality and more reliable players for sure.

I saw some players in this thread showing interest in joining a game with you.
I am available too as long as it has phases longer than 48h.

Don't join random games... some people just join the site for curiosity, start games and end up forgetting about it.
Play with people that really want to play :D

Good luck and hope you get better games than that 1st one.

Okay, I've submitted a vote to cancel. What happens next?

Lesson learnt. Joining any game here might get you into a game of abysmal quality.

Now, how do I vet players otherwise? What's this ghost rating?