I'm pretty sure you're wrong. I've been told previously that you can support hold any unit that doesn't end up moving (i.e. even if it was ordered to move and the move fails)

Diplomacy rules, 4th edition (2000), page 7, "Supporting a unit" clearly states with an example that if the unit which you're support-holding tries to move the support is invalid.

You can support hold any unit that does not ATTEMPT to move. This means the receiving unit must be ordered to hold or to support a hold.

Or it can be ordered to support a move or convoy a unit. Anything except a move is acceptable.

That might be the official Diplomacy rule but are you 100% sure that's how phpdiplomacy implements it? I definitely remember being told before (can't remember if it was on the forum or not) that if a moving unit's move fails, it acts as if it has been ordered to hold.
If this is wrong I'd like to find out for sure as I often build my supports with this assumption in mind!

it's how phpDiplomacy implements it. if you're unsure, download the code and read it yourself.

besides, if you were told that inside a game they were trying to trick you. technically that's metagaming and therefore cheating, but you should know better than to listen to them. ask on the forum if you're not sure. i usually offer valid advice to new players, but some people just take advantage of them.

Is it really cheating to deliberately tell someone false rules? Lying to someone about the moves you will submit is certainly an acceptable part of the game. The difference here is that one can protect oneself against misinformation regarding the rules by reading the rules for oneself; short of telepathy, it's impossible to read an opponent's true intent. Telling someone fake rules, then, seems less egregious than telling someone fake moves - it is a lie that can easily be uncovered and brought to light. With that in mind, I would say that telling someone fake rules is a rookie move, and while not cheating, is not something one will ever see a competitive player do, as it is an ineffective strategy.

actually, it's cheating to tell someone false rules because the rules are related to things out of the game, so lying about them is metagaming, similar to "if you don't give me serbia i'll come over to your house and beat you up" because it involves something outside of the game.

I'm glad we've managed to divert this thread to metagaming.

danomally - phpDiplomacy definitely implements this piece correctly.

aoe3rules -

You wrote "the rules are related to things out of the game." This is false - the rules only exist within the game; they neither stem from nor impact anything outside the game itself.

There's nothing in the game that says you can't threaten a player with physical violence should he fail to cede you a territory. Fortunately (at least in the US), we have rules about such things occurring outside of a game of Diplomacy. Since the threat would impinge on the "real world" it would then be subject to the rules of the real world. The situation you postulated, for example, would be a violation of law that we term assault.

Within Diplomacy, all sorts of misdirection and lying are acceptable and encouraged. See: http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/calhamer/militaryintelligence.htm
for a perspective from Allan Calhamer, who invented Diplomacy.

you idiot, read the first sentence! "Any tactic based on DECEPTION is legitimate in Diplomacy."

well, he does say that it would be okay to lie about the rules, so while it's not officially cheating we still consider it cheap.

aoe3rules, i really look at diplomacy differently than you. how can that be cheating? you're lame

Wait, are you calling yourself an idiot now? Or do you not know what "DECEPTION" means?

Wooble, tell me, are you capable of reading more than two sentences per day? if you are, read my next post.

Sigh. Please grow up everyone.