As a side note, I ran across an awesome article at
http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/strategy/articles/art_of_negotiation.htm
which goes into what I was saying in my original post in this thread about different people and their differing motivations; what they consider success in different situations.

However, Ukla, success is measured on this site by how well you are paid by the points system, that is the purpose of the points system. Your aims are defined by the point system (unless your like Edi, in which case you shouldn't really care what the system is, apart from its effect on others), and so we should pick the best system for "win, draw, survive" or "win, second, third..." depending on what we think.

PPSC is pure win, second, third
WTA is pure win, draw.
WTA/PPSC hybrid is win, draw, survive.
Ivo_'s system in either a zero-sum or non-sero sum is win, draw, survive.

I suggest that we make WTA/PPSC hybrid the standard type, with WTA allowed up to 50% of your points, and possibly with PPSC.

Yeah, I hear you. I think, although I am a complex and unique entity, that I do lean toward Edi's philosophy. I only care about the points insofar as they determine how many games/what games I can play in. Other than that, it's all about the game itself. I know I'm the greatest thing to ever hit this little blue planet; I don't need a ranking system to affirm it. :)
Also, I think that all the systems should be allowed. Just because you or I don't like a particular variant doesn't mean it should be banned, as other people may enjoy it immensely.
Just for the record, and above philosophy, I'm a WTA'er at heart. Winning is the goal. Drawing is an acceptable compromise. There is no such thing as a survival. I agree with the rules in that either there is a winner and everyone else lost, or there is a draw and everyone left on the board gets full credit for the draw.
I would back your suggestion, though, if it ever came down to something as arcane as a vote: to make the hybrid the default, with WTA up to 50%, and PPSC as an additional option.

DD - what Gong said. if you are not in it to win it - then you are playing the wrong game and yes, you are playing 'wrong'. no one (not me at least) is telling you NOT to play. its as if you are playing soccer and always dribbling and never passing - thats not the way the game is 'supposed' to be played - it is a 'wrong' way to play the game (ok maybe not the best analogy but you get my perspective at least).

My overall fear and concern about this site is exactly what Chris said - that internet play (maybe phpdip) will overwhelm tournaments/ftf/pbem etc over time (?inevitable?) - and what I would hate to see is a ppsc (or even hybrid) system being perpetuated that encourages 'wrong' play... b/c in a PPSC game it is very rational and 'right' to shoot for a 17/17...

the other reality is that whenever you have a 'community' with so many games and without complete anonymity during play, there will inevitably be a level of meta-gaming that is to be expected... the PPSC system (and WTM as well - though less so) exacerbates that meta-gaming or meta-allying problem.


so - though I recognize I may hold the minority opinion (although based on the comments in this thread WTA does seem to be preferred) I will continue to believe and hold the opinion that WTA is the 'correct' form of the game and that WTA should be the default game type.


basically what I'm saying is that

Diplomacy(tm) = WTA

anything else is a variant. so WTA should be the default (if you want to put a 50%, 33% or 10% points cap thats fine).

sorry if i come across as harsh in my posts - i'm trying to type a lot of info and condense as much as I can - and I'm not editing at all...

but let me ask this - what explicit purpose does PPSC or even WTM (hybrid) serve that is so useful that it should be the default game type? this is a serious question to those who have put thought into this...

i know the claim is that newbies will stick around more - but what is the logic behind that?

Babak, he first thing you should keep in mind is that there're thousands of people here - so the idea that the site creators/moderators have to respond to each of those users in detail about what they were thinking, why and how they did something, etc. is absurd. You're not the center of the universe dude :)

The logic has been explained many times - in short:
1. We have a point system - if you have no points you cannot play
2. Newcomers to the site are mostly people who have not playe the game much (if at all) - they will be losing a lot in the beginning - a good survival is all they can hope to realistically achive - if there's no reward for it they'll lose any motivation to stay and learn. PPSC simply lowers the barrier to entry.

the correct way to play diplomacy is in person. so all other forms are variants. postal play, pbem, php whatever, so you're already starting from a place of variance.

so babak and xgon maybe yall should just stick to face to face, if you're such traditionalists? otherwise just play WTA and try to convince others to play WTA, rather than trying to change the site to what you perceive as right.

I play a lot of PPSC. Tell me if my philosophy is contrary to how diplomacy is supposed to be played:

I always try to win. Winning is my goal, I don't like to plan 2 way draws or anything like that. In fact, as a result I often get early leader syndrom and then get knocked down a peg.

Then, if someone else is looking like they are going to win I try to form coalitions against them and force draws, or force concessions from the leader. My goal is still to win, so I still negotiate and try to put myself in a good position against a potential victim, but I will try my best not to let anyone else win. I will never throw a game to attack someone for an extra centre.

Here's the thing though, I've also played with alot of idiots. When I try to form the coalition, they fail, they drop the ball and if it was WTA I would get zero because someone else is an idiot. I've played the best game I possibly good and I got the same amount of points as the guy who CDed in 1901.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the way I play, so you should let me play with the payout system I like. Which, if we make the necessary change, will be hybrid.

well said

Cent - Very well put - this is one of the best reasons I've heard yet about why PPSC might be worth it...

ivo and dj - I apologize that I seem to have been unclear to the point where you misconstrued my purpose... (more specific responses next - but first...)

1) I no longer wish to change this site or its rules (I did a month or so back, but got flamed enough to learn to stay in my place)

2) I am and will remain unapologetic in being anti-ppsc and pro-wta. consider me a WTA evangelist if you like (just as pugnacious and with full fervor in purpose)

3) ftf IS the best form of dip - and I play once a month in the DC area - usually 2 games a month of ftf - since I cant physically do more - phpdip WTA games are a great alternative



to repeat - I do hope to change minds - and most importantly to open the eyes of the hundreds of newbies that learn about this game only through this site that ppsc is an aberration... and that what they/you are learning is not 'pure' dip as it was meant to be played.

meanwhile - live and let live...

ivo - I dont expect kestas to respond - but i did expect you or someone else in this thread respond (which you/others did)

1) so the logic is that the ppsc system was created because of the points system? thats not a good reason for why ppsc exists... many other systems (including wta) could be used in conjunction wit a points system - so that is not a valid response I think
2) ahhhh - the newcomers theory - ie, newbies wont keep playing if they lose too many points... this is what I really wanted to respond to =P

a. in both wta and ppsc, by 1903 two playes are eliminated... most often, these are the newest players or those who CD... in both ppsc and wta, when you are eliminated you get zero points. so in both 'types' your theoretical newbie will suffer the "damn I lost" attitude...

b. in ppsc, if a newbie survives with 1-5 dots, they are losing net points on the game - so often, getting a few points back is not going to give them any wholesome feeling... whereas - in my opinion - in a WTA game, even with 1-2 dots they can learn to maneuver into a draw and get 1/3rd or 1/4th or even 1/5th of the points and actually GAIN points.


my biggest beef with ppsc is not even an issue of points - its an issue of 'culture'. we, as a community, are developing a set of cultural traits (meta gaming, game long alliances, wrong incentives etc) that are teaching newbies to the hobbey the 'wrong' set of skills because 95%+ of our games are ppsc.


in fact - I agree with Cent - PPSC is more beneficial to vet players than to newbie players... b/c vet players can take advantage of newbies by manipulating them into thinking a few extra points are valuable when in truth it is the win/draw/loss ratio that is relevant... AND b/c vets can take advantage of NMRs and CDs far more than newbs can.

but cent - one point I do concede - at least in a ppsc, you wont lose all bc some lame person went into CD... whereas in WTA, what SHOULD end in a draw might end in a loss just b/c some kid got grounded and went into CD... that is a very good point.


@dj - i do play ftf. i only play wta on this site now. and I'm not trying to change the site - but even if I have changed the menality of ONE person who reads my drivel, then I'm happy with what I've written. c'est tous.

95+% PPSC is not true. It's 94% from last month, where there were relatively few GFDT or League games, which are a significant number of games.

First, haha at ghost
Thanks for conceding a point Babak. I feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

So you accept that in the culture of the internet game there is really nothing tieing someone to the game like in Ftf, hence the CDs. Internet is thus a different animal, with a reward system that tries to accurately reflect skill but also tries to mitigate the distortions that are a result of internet gameplay: not just civil disorder, but more difficult communication, lack of proper introdcution the rules, even language barriers. Thus PPSC.

So in keeping with these mitigating factors, but reducing the perverse incentives to let people win, and introducing incenetivs for players to "shoot for the stars" so to speak we can bring the gameplay closer to how it was meant to be while still not being naive about the realities of the internet environment.

Thus Hybrid :P