Most draws I've seen in WTA are NOT on stalemate lines.

no

Yeah, I have found that WTA results in draws much more often than PPSC, which drives me crazy, I hate it when people are more focused on not play (forming stalemate lines and holding) than playing... Not really sure why I'm going to be in six WTA games shortly (two Ghost-Rating WTA, two League and two GFDT) and zero PPSC games, but PPSC games have their down side as well...

Eh, I just lost a WTA game where two countries clearly played for the draw from the beginning. It gave them a big advantage over everyone else who was playing it as a true WTA game. It would be nice if there were a way to limit draws to only when it is truly a case of stalemate lines. Of course, doing that is much easier said than done.

Even a stalemate line is questionable given the 'unlimited time' for internet play. You can always wear an opponent down and hope he messes or misses a move.

that's when we get back to the other thread - what's the point of playing - if you can't make any progress after like three turns, it gets pretty tedious, and the fun of the game is lost, in my opinion.

Sometimes it is a matter of waiting to se who blinks first and that can take many turns. My reference to the stalemate position above is an extreme case of not being willing to accept a draw even when the position is logically static.

:"that's when we get back to the other thread - what's the point of playing - if you can't make any progress after like three turns, it gets pretty tedious, and the fun of the game is lost, in my opinion."

I don't think thats the majority of the draws. If you've gotten to the point where you have stalemate lines and your opponent is competant, then there's no need to go on. But there are way too many draws that aren't any where near stalemate lines.

if you want to draw before stalemate, thats your business. But lets not assume that the majority of draws are stalemates.

oh i wasn't saying that most draws are stalemates, certainly not. just responding to flash's point about keeping trying.

Yes, eventually any draw will end either because someone goes on vacation or dies. I'm not sure thats the true spirit of the game. I'm sure reasonable people can recognize a stalemate line without having to resort to winning by attrition.

DbJ - in many cases, competent players will also see an inevitable draw coming... so it makes sens not to waste a bunch of game years getting to the actual stalemate line when all involved know of its existence and inevitability...

personally - I have a very different (and certainly minority opinion here on phpdip) take on the game of Dip in general... The 'true' form of the game - which is indeed face-to-face WTA (basically tournament rules) does end in draws about 65-70% of the time... that is indeed the 'normal' ending to a Dip game...

why you may ask? because the game tries to simulate European powers with the pre-WWI 'balance-of-power' dynamics in play... basically meaning, no one wants anyone else to win... another words, none of the countries want to 'lose' and become subjugated to any one of the other countries (ie. dont want to let anyone get to 18 dots in Europe)

So in fact - the game was designed to make soloing VERY difficult and indeed a tremendous achievement...

obviously with NMRs, CDs, and the points system, (and certainly with the ppsc variant) much of the incentives of the normal game design are altered to varying degrees...

in any case - my point is that draws are not 'bad'... in fact they are (or should be considered) a normal and indeed desirable result.

the most positive thing in WTA vs PPSC is that a 'survive' is equivalent to an 'elimination'

I would say the most positive aspect of WTA vs. PPSC is the drive to draw rather than become a vassal when winning seems out of the question.

I've never accepted a draw that was not a stalemate or I did not clearly profit from it. Most soft draws inherently have players losing out on an opportunity to play off their superior risk/reward odds of winning.

I agree with Chris. I have 17 draws on my record, but excluding those of failed real time games, I have benefited in every single one. I think there was only 1 game that I drew that wasn't me getting the better deal out of it (it was a 17/17 draw). I've had draws where I would have 1 center and people left me alive for no reason and such.

Draws are probably more likely at WTA because it is more risky which makes people take less risks. If you have a choice between a one in 3 chance of winning (but nothing if you lose) or a 3 way draw, which do you choose?

"I have benefited in every single one. " By definition, that means some else was made worse off by the draw.