"Since we're phasing out SWS, I figured it wasn't necessary. Maybe it is?"
Well.... That's a whole other issue...

Thanks for your quick action and hard work!

If we bring back SWS, I'll definitely put in both the draw/win worth indicators. Taking inspiration from vDip - theirs is even colour coded to indicate whether you should be aiming for a solo or a draw.

Sounds great!

Slightly surprised by how much resistance the free CD takeover feature is getting. Let's be real here, the hopeless situation have generally been near free anyways and the cherry positions have always been picked up pretty fast. What this change is really going to do is encourage people to pick up those 'far from a slam dunk, but it's not horrible and ..well it's free so sure' type situations that get ignored enough times. It'll be nice to get a little consistency in these games.

Ok sure, it's not quite ideal yet since really you're attracting people who are more interested in webdip points then GR which generally aren't the most seasoned players. I'd be more concerned if it had no negative implications on GR or else you'd see a lot more players jumping into games wrecklessly with a nothing to lose attitude that can really muddy up a game. Suppose it's possible we may get that anyways, time will tell.

Probably the right solution here is to limit how often you can do this sort of thing. I know over on playdip they've got an incentive system for picking up CD's but you can only do it once and then you need to play a full game until you're able to do it again if you want the incentive. Helps avoid the exclusive CD backfillers.

But that's only RR-related, right? I guess you'd want the second takeover to cost points in this case, unless you finished a full game inbetween?

Ah sorry you said playdip, not vdip.

No clue then.

@ATC, will GR be calculated differently for Sum of Squares scoring as well, giving exponentially more GR points for more centers in draw outcomes?

Thank you for all the work and site improvements, ATC!

Let us ignore the fact that points actually don't matter and assume for a moment that they do. Let us furthermore assume that in a game all neutral SC will be taken by the players. In a draw the Scoring by Sum of Squares gives one the opportunity to reach a share of the pot of up to
86 % (in Classic),
80 % (in The Ancient Mediterranean),
90 % (in Modern Diplomacy II),
94 % (in World Diplomacy IX) respectively
94 % (in Fall of the American Empire IV) in the following way:
One player conquers SCs up to the amount of SCs required for a solo win minus 1. The remaining SC will be distributed as equally as possible among all the remaining players.
(If not all neutral SC have to be taken then trivially a >99% share of the pot is possible in a draw, e.g.: Only one player moves. This player takes over all other players' home SCs except one, i.e. all but one opponent will be eliminated. Then the player fills up his SC count with neutral SC up to the amount of SCs required for a solo win minus 1.)

So if the outcome of a game will be a draw, to optimize the share of the pot...
1.) ...under Draw-Size Scoring one should aim for the elimination of other players (while obviously ensuring to be part of the draw).
2.) ...under Sum-of-Squares Scoring one should aim for an equal distribution of centers among one's opponents (while obviously maximizing its own SC count).

Orath: yes, of course. Any ranking system will always reward players for doing well under the scoring system the game was played under. GR already does this with the other scoring systems.

^ That was a reply to chluke. Hadn't had my coffee yet.

There was no real reason for completely removing PPSC/SWS scoring except one: the self-righteous assholeness level of it's opponents was greater than the willingness of its supporters to speak out.

Is it now a site requirement to have a 3 inch diameter or larger dowel permanently implanted in one's rectum in order to "be a part of the webdip team?"

Do people remember when it was fun around here? Does anyone else miss those days?

You know what? Screw you guys. I'm going to play out my games and go to vdip.

There is less stench of smug over there.

bye

geez dirge. have fun, i guess.

@NoFog: Good analysis. The takeaway is that under Sum of Squares scoring, an N-SC draw has a variable value depending on the distribution of the SCs among the other players--the more evenly distributed, the larger your share.

For example, in SoS, a 17-3-3-3-3-3-2 draw earns 86% of the value while a 17-17 draw is worth 50%. This seems to imply that the smaller power have an even stronger incentive to not let a large power grow as the larger nation wants to see chaos among small powers.

dirge has a bronze badge. He deserves to be heard.

Heck, I don't know if the team/owners want to go there, but I wouldn't have a problem with giving those who have donated the option to start and join PPSC games.

When PPSC was changed to non-default, it was chosen by those who wished to play games with that scoring method. People who joined those games were people who wished to play games with that scoring method.

However, the dowel implanted intolerants around here, simply could not shut up and live and let live. No. It is somehow an impingement on them to know that someone out there somewhere is playing PPSC. And they have been waging jihad until everyone on webdip was forced to bow down with their asses in the air to their play style.

Ridiculous.

Differentiating between a donor and regular user is something that we are most definitely not interested in doing. Donating is entirely voluntary and we don't want to turn into a pay-for-play model.

I thought dirge left.

Attention Mods, someone is using dirge's account to post in the forum. I'm guessing it's someone with a dowel to grind.

Doesn't make sense to distinguish between donor and non-donor, agreed. When PPSC was changed to a non-default setting, the "problem" was solved. Newbies were not accidentally choosing PPSC. People were choosing PPSC because that is the scoring method they wanted to play. Removing PPSC as an option altogether is simply a fait accompli maneuver to appease the whiners.

I said I was going to play my games through, Czech off.

Why do some people continue to wage jihad against PPSC?

1) They believe that point mean something. Well, they don't. People who play hall monitor end up with massive points. So what. I can solo a game with a 5 point bet and be defeated in a game with a 500 point bet. The points do not add up to anything meaningful.

2) They repeat their jihadist mantra over and over that PPSC incentivizes "throwing" games by helping someone solo. Okay then, don't play PPSC. Duh. On the other hand, WTA (or whatever you choose to call it now) incentivizes CD'ing. When someone has no chance of winning, what is the incentive to keep posting moves turn after turn until you are eliminated? A sense of responsibility? Gee, you guys know this is on the internet, don't you?

3) PPSC is heretical, as in "My mint copy of the first printing of the Diplomacy boxed game doesn't say anything about points per supply center, you blasphemer." So, here's a question. If you are a militant Diplomacy fundamentalist, why are you playing on a website that uses points at all?

It seems like there's only one whiner in this thread at the moment.

I'd like there to be a non wta scoring option dirge
I started a separate thread about keeping a form of ppsc
So you could comment there, perhaps both you and czech should consider putting your views more diplomatically

I'm not seeing where Czech was expressing a view. Maybe I missed it.

dirge, if you acknowledge that points are meaningless, then what possible reason is there for a scoring system to exist that is predicated upon gathering more points at the expense of a win?

I'm also willing to try SoS scoring, but at least eight games that I've set up, or entered have failed to get going as not enough players have joined, so I'm trying to give the new scoring system a go, but either myself and / or SoS ain't that attractive to the punters

2nd, maybe you can explain why people playing PPSC on this site created any problem for people who don't like it.