Old Forum - webDiplomacy

Forum

A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.

Page 141 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last

)
21 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Chat records

I'm currently involved in a game with a handful of new players, VERY fast paced. As a result, I'm getting messages flying at me, especially over the global chat, between strategizing and asking how certain features work. As a result, some of my transcripts are getting lost in the chatlog. Is there any way to expand the viewable window of press?

2 replies

NevilleChamberlain (729

)
21 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New WTA game 50pt bet - Points per Supply Centre is for Wimps!

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5775

2 replies

)
21 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Is There Any Way To Have The Spellchecker Accept "Rumania" As Correct?

I mean, it's so irritating. I can't be alone on this.

5 replies

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Why don't Sardinia and Crete change colour?

Just wondered !

11 replies

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

WW23

Hello guys

I have created a new game. Come join and have fun. It's called WW23. It takes 12h per round, so pleaseonly join when you are serious!!

Thanks

pumpanickel

1 reply

Churchill (2280

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Adjudicator in League game

http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5665

5 replies

TheMasterGamer (3491

)
19 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Old threads

Where do the old threads go to? I wanted to check something I recall having read.

3 replies

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty)

Just wanted to see what you guys think of this.
Iran wants peaceful nuclear energy which is allowed under the NPT
US and much of the west wont allow this and break the treaty by refusing to let Iran have it. So whose wrong the US for breaking the treaty or Iran for pursuing it (or are they lying)?

6 replies

DeliciousWolf (112

)
14 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Some Questions for Mr. Birsan

Which is your favorite country to play and why?

In your opinion, which country is best for first-time players? (thinking of my girlfriend here...)

What differences have you noticed in styles of play among countries/nationalities/age groups/gender, etc?

14 replies

GrizzlySurprise! (256

)
16 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Teh Leagues?

What exactly are these leagues?

10 replies

Blackheath Wanderer (0

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Moscow Mule 4

215 points to join... PPSC. 24 hours play.

0 replies

EdiBirsan (1469

(B)

)
19 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Do draws include all survivors?

On this site, do all draws include all survivors?
For example England has 16 and Turkey has 16 and Germany has two. Can the Germans elect to agree to a two way draw between England and Turkey.
Or is it that the draw must include all survivors and then England and Turkey would have to wipe out the Germans in order to get to a two way draw?

As background, numerous Face to Face tournaments have different rules on how votes are take (some are open like here or secret)
some votes require that 30 or 29 centers be in the majority others require a unanimous vote to pass anything,
some say you can vote yourself out of a draw
some say that there is a minimum number of centers or time past before a game can be voted to an end.
some have no concept of a draw at all but only have the vote to end the game.

What are the exact details here?

kestasjk (95 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

In a draw the points are split evenly amongst all survivors, which must all agree to a draw, regardless of how many SCs each one has

If it's getting silly with someone not agreeing and the board in a deadlock for a long time it may get drawn despite the objections of one player

sean (3490 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

All surviving parties must agree to the draw. Also points are divided equally...or that was meant to be the case but maybe points are divided based on SC totals.
all parties get a "draw" in their profile page.

alamothe (3367 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

> but maybe points are divided based on SC totals.

stop spreading misinformation please

sean (3490 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

that was why i put the "maybe " in there

Centurian (3257 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

Really? That seems really unfair. I'm currently trying to force a draw but I need to maintain a Russian armies hold in St.Petersburg. Even if he gets the same draw he surely shouldn't get the same points as the other two players.

Caviare (123 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

There is another philosophy Centurian: the number of supply centers a player holds in a draw is irrelevant. If one player doesn't think another player deserves to share equally in a draw, then the option is open to the first player to continue the game and defeat that second player. If the second player can't be defeated then he deserves to share equally in the draw.
Personally I don't think this philosophy is consistent with PPSC, only with WTA. It means in PPSC the player in second place may stand to gain more points by allowing the player in first place to win rather than agreeing to a draw.

Churchill (2280 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

It is true that in PPSC, the players have all agreed to join a game where the goal is to win, and if that is not possible, to maximize SC's. In WTA, the 1st place winner gets all the pot, which is shared in a draw as many players tie for 1st place.

Centurian (3257 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

In my scenario I will indeed get more points by letting the other player win. Thats not an incentive i like

EdiBirsan (1469 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

The issue with draws include all survivors is that it may cause people to drag out games to kill off the smaller powers. Thus you go from a draw system to really a Kill system. If people can vote themselves out of a draw it would allow for the games to move quicker and reduce the deadly boring aspect of hunting down the last center piece of someone.
So is the game and the site better served by having Draws include all survivors or is it better to have a situation where little powers are pounded down to nothingness?
I guess it is a style question for Kestas and who ever is the deciding issue on the philosophy herein.

Katsarephat (100 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

I'd say it's best to include all survivors. Suppose two powers want to kill a third off. If there is a stalemate, then that means the game should be drawn with three and the other two had no chance to break it down anyway. If three powers agree to a draw, there should be no obligation to break it down to two. And if the two powers want to kill the smaller power, and they actually do it, then the smaller power probably had no chance of surviving anyway, let alone drawing.

It just makes the most sense to me. A draw should result if nobody can (or wants to) do a proper win. Two countries beating up a third is a step towards a win that should occur unless it cannot occur (or people don't want it to).

Sure, games might drag out, but a game is likely to be dragging out once you've hit endgame and you haven't got a good chance of seeing a clear winner anyway. I don't think it makes much difference.

Caviare (123 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

Just to take care of the case where you've got a drawn position, no one can make head way but a stubborn player who refuses to accept the draw, I wonder whether there should be a rule like one of the draw rules in chess: if there are three consecutive fall moves with no changes in supply center ownership, any player can claim a draw.

EdiBirsan (1469 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

"if there are three consecutive fall moves with no changes in supply center ownership, any player can claim a draw."
This was a common rule in the postal days, however it was amended to generally read no change in supply ownership between the rival alliances
so that two allies could not switch centers just to drag the game out.

However none of the comments really address the situation of say three major powers who are 11-8-7 are in agreement to end the game as a three way draw but the remaining players of 1-4-2-1 are still alive. To me a social end to the game would be to allow the players to vote themselves OUT of the draw rather than be forced to face the elimination process by the dominant alliance.

alamothe (3367 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

yes they can have that kind of agreement but it is not binding. one could decide he doesn't like the agreement any more. voting out of the draw serves no useful purpose

Churchill (2280 )
19 Sep 08 UTC

Edi: Aren't all players rivals of others? I'd be very troubled to see a system that recognizes an alliance as a permanent thing in a game of Diplomacy.

EdiBirsan (1469 )
20 Sep 08 UTC

All Diplomacy players should be united in one aspect:
That the purpose of playing the game is to have fun and make it fun for others.
There can be rivalry and competition and still there could be social endings to game that do not include having to kill everyone to the last boring unit. Sometimes it happens, I am in a game now where one player wants to hold out for his 'one point' and does not want to end a game in a draw that excludes him. Which I can understand and respect. Does not mean that he does not die, but the game will go on an extra few turns to accomplish that.

Think of the rivalry and competition like an oral discussion: you can be rivals and disagree, but you can still be civil and expedient in securing an end to the discussion in either a resolution on a mutual agreement or even an agreement to simply disagree.

15 replies

Blackheath Wanderer (0

)
16 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Who thinks a nuclear Iran is a good thing?

Or a nuclear anywhere?

80 replies

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Hey guys, just wanted to try this out.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5763

Newbie here.

1 reply

)
20 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

new game

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5758

I've played Diplomacy a few times before, but this is my first time on the site.

1 reply

Chrispminis (916

)
19 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Hit the Jackpot

It's a neat game I've been playing for the last half hour, and I've been most pleased with my results. =D

I've won a world cup, and have scored 2078. I've yet to break through to the master's board and represent Canada however...

See if you can beat my score!

5 replies

JesterJoker (174

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Draw in Game -6

Germany, Turkey and Russia want a draw in game -6.

I'm Germany and I say sure.

3 replies

Blackheath Wanderer (0

)
17 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Meta-gaming: Good, bad or inevitable?

This is what Maniac has to say on meta-gaming

"what i was trying to acheive is letting my opponents and allies know that building partnerships spans games and if you stab me in one, watch out for me in another. Once that's clear, i think i would be stabbed less - it's the meta-game - not cheating!"

15 replies

)
19 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Please draw this game -6

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5407&msgCountry=Global
I am russia, and turkey and germany will be posting their agreement shortly.

1 reply

)
19 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Play this! http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5743 "Dolchstoß"

It's called Dolchstoß, which means "dagger stab" in German. It was used to describe the idea that communists and other domestic subversives were the real reason Germany lost the First World War. Lots a fun, people.

4 replies

DingleberryJones (4469

(B)

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Diplomacy for sale at Barnes & Noble

I was surprised to see this, but in the small games section at my local B&N in NJ (a mega bookstore for those outside the US), right next to chess and Scattegories was Diplomacy. I never would have thought to find it there.

8 replies

Centurian (3257

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Convoying: What Would Happen?

I'm curious what would happen if two powers tried to convoy the same unit and both orders would work.

6 replies

EdiBirsan (1469

(B)

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Game starts at other than 1901...how? Why?

I was looking at some games in progress or ended (forgot which) and I noticed that some games were started at dates other than 1901. What is that all about?

9 replies

)
17 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Draw request for "Fun time at the beach"

The surviving powers in Fun time at the beach - Fra, Eng, Rus, Ita, Tur -would like to request a draw for the following game. Confirmations below.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5375

6 replies

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Uncreation

Is there a way to un-create one's accout?

1 reply

Anna.Turnipseed (100

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Scurry

I've started a fast paced game more intended for new players. so if you're really experienced, please give us a chance to learn!

New players, feel free to join!

3 replies

MickFlanagen (100

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New Game

Hi, I have a new game at:
http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5732
25 points to enter. 24 hour phases

0 replies

(S)

)
18 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New Game - The Storm

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5728

PPSC, 95 point buy-in. I'm the second player to join; we still need 5 more.

0 replies

EdiBirsan (1469

(B)

)
16 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

End Of Game (EOG) statements

Do you all do End of Game Statements?

20 replies

(S)

)
17 Sep 08 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Question re the cost of taking over a country in civil disorder

Each player puts an equal number of points into the pot to join a game. Thus each supply centre has a point value.

When, during the game, a player abandons play and a country goes into civil disorder, the abandoned country is offered to another player at a 'cost'.

How is this cost to take over a country in civil disorder determined?
--
If the cost to take over a country in civil disorder is the average value per supply centre times the number of supply centres 'controled' by the country in civil disorder, since the SC counts are only adjusted after the fall retreat, the number of supply centres reflected as belonging to the country in civil disorder is often extremely inaccurate.

If the acquisition cost for a country in civil disorder is based upon the value of supply centres in its possession, does that take into account the actual SC count, as opposed to what the SC count might have been prior to the most recent spring season?

11 replies

Page 141 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last