If it's reason enough for you, then you can do it. But it's not part of the game that I'm playing.

(In other words, it goes in my next-to-last paragraph of other things that I might feel like bragging about, even though they're not about the outcome of the game that I played.)

((And no, I wouldn't try to go from 4 to 3 just so that I could brag about eliminating a good player. Even though I might brag about it afterwards, in a less sane moment.))

(((OK, I'm done now.)))

noone talked about bragging about anything except you or did I miss anything?

I hope I know the meaning of bragging (i'm serious)

playing to win is as a morale requirement seems a little unfair in my mind.

I mean, fine, as someone who has entered a game of dip it is done under the understanding that all players are interested in winning (and none are merely multi's or friends of other players who want to help them to win) But what if i change my definition of winning to getting as large a draw as possible. (because that requires convincing the most players to submit to not attacking each other and hence is the biggest challenge, and only wiping out those who don't go along with the plan, but i don't think this ruins the game for anyone because they still have the option of playing normally and winning if i fail. also i could be lying, but it's a rather difficult thing to win while pulling those crazy shenanigans...)

I do see the definition of winning as something which affects game-play. The difference between WTA and PPSC is really important for stopping a solo. So defining what you consider to be 'winning' is something which everyone should consider before they play a game, but what they will accept as a result may vary with time, so since a player can vary their goals mid-game i don't know how you can tell whether someone is playing 'wrong' (though my example of playing wrong can be found here: http://game.xbsd.kr/endip/board.php?gameID=436&msgCountry=Global&rand=49457#chatboxanchor where i tried and failed to win the hearts and minds of my opponents...)

@ Troodonte: While I introduced the phrase "bragging rights" to this discussion, I think it was implied in many of the posts that preceded mine.

I don't think it was implied, but I'll speak for me...
I don't win a game to brag about it, as I don't try to eliminate a player to get a 3way draw instead of a 4way to brag about it...
For me it is the same...
There is a order of "scoring": win > 2way draw > 3waydraw > 4way draw ...
And I try to get the best possible score for me.
Doesn't have anything to do with bragging about.

Again, this is only my opinion.

It's just a word that made it easyer to say something.

When you say "The best possible score" I say "the score that gives the most bragging rights", it changes nothing in this conversation.

I read a great quote here sometime back...

I play to win.
If I can't win, I play for a draw.
If I can't get a draw, I play to survive.
If I can't survive, I play to influence the game.

I've always liked that approach to diplomacy.

it seems like the real question is whether or not draw size should be considered for points?

@draugnar
If you play for a draw is it the same to play for a 4way or 3way draw?

i'd prefer influence to survival.

Usually if it's to stop (the guy who's about to win) or even slow him down. Especially when the jerk just stabbed me.

@aneumann: if draw size isn't considered do you just give the drawing players what the bet back, and let the other points dissappear?

I mean that seems unusual in the extreme. Though i'd say that playing for points doesn't really do much for me.

Draugnar +1

I don't subscribe to the belief system that if you don't win then you lose in Diplomacy. I believe if you can get to a 2-way draw, then you've done better than 5 other players. Similarly, a 3-way draw isn't quite as good as a 2-way draw, but it is better than a 3-way draw.

I do believe that the number of centers you have if someone else gets a solo win is irrelevant. If 1 person wins, then 6 people lose.

I also think that this discussion is not about points...

orathaic, that makes sense to me. or you could do a system like they use in f2f tournaments where any non solo is scored with biggest power in 1st, and they receive 7000 pts, 2nd biggest 6000 etc. just figure out % to multiply by the pot for each place.

@Troodonte - I always play for the optimal draw, if I have to play for a draw. The optimal draw is a 3-way draw. That provides a system of checks and balances as you work towards it. The other two players may not even be your allies, but they have as much of a vested interest in keeping the balance until the draw occurs because they'd rather draw than be strong second or third. Two ways draws are artificial in that they only wokr if you are two very trustde allies or the game just happens to fall on a 17-17 stalemate line. I already said my piece on 4-7 way draws being premature in most cases.