@KaptinKool

AP courses in my home state of Indiana are now being required to receive the Honors Diploma from the state, which is now essentially required to get into any decent college in the state, and they start offering AP courses to 10th grade but make you have 2 AP courses in order to receive the Honors Diploma by the time you graduate. So it's not a choice of taking them anymore, they are now becoming a requirement.

@`ZaZaMaRaNDaBo` - I think you misunderstood my point. TGM could have reversed the order it would have made no difference. The words mean basically the same thing, he was giving them his own definitions. He should have had two strategy sections rather than differentiating strategy/tactics.

@JEccles - interesting. That is totally different from the Canadian system, but it probably isn't a bad move. Although I am not necessarily for standardized curriculum, I went to a private school, and the tendency there is to strive for a better curriculum which I approve of... public schools should be allowed to do the same, without the help of standardized courses. But don't get me wrong, I took a few AP courses as well, they are very valuable.

Majoring in Economics with either a double major in finance, or a minor it math, statistics or even anthropology.
course i started out the same route as Kaptain Kool and the whole mechanical Engineering. Still ask myself how i ended up with Econ.

and Econ does nothing in this game.

@MadMarx - as a future Engineer, who has made fun of Civil Engineers in the past (I thought it seemed boring at first), I must say I have great respect for Architects and no longer make fun of the profession as I used to - pre university days.

You guys do a lot of the preliminary math needed, and as far as I am concerned Architecture is a very practical art form. Of course you will always need us engineers (ERTW), but you guys make life interesting and bring meaning to our math...

that being said, I'm right with you on the English courses, I absolutely despise the humanities courses.

Strategy and tactics in certain setting, such as military history (and the the armed forces I'm assuming), do have distinct meanings. With this in mind, TGM used them appropriately within the context of this game.

You are wise beyond your years, KaptinKool! ;-)

@KK

So, if architects design the buildings and construction workers build them, what do Civil Engineers do? : )

Oh, and I'm about to get a BS in Electrical Engineering and enter into a Masters in EE.

I have a BA in International Relations and just about to start an MA in Global Affairs...still deciding on which school I am going to go to though...

No BA or BSc. Five O'levels, 3 ONCs (Electronics, Avionic Systems, Computer Science) and an HND in Computer Science (all from 30+ years ago). Plus, currently, several units (Maths/Computing) towards a BSc with the OU.

For comparision, in the UK an HND is a Level 5 qualification and a BA/BSc is Level 6. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Qualifications_Framework.

I do not believe that university study will make you better at playing diplomacy. Maybe an understanding some basic pyschology would be useful but not of the academic kind, more experience and savy (mostly natural). The best way to get better at diplomacy is to play diplomacy with good players.
Also tactics and strategy have some differences. Tactics is about the mechanics of particular situation, such as cutting support to foil an attack; strategy is more far reaching and holistic: for example helping your ally to gain enough of a lead over the others players and you (early leader syndrome), so you may then turn the others against him and then go on to steal a solo victory for yourself.

For reference my highest qualification is a Master of Arts in International Relations from The University of St Andrews. Despite the subject I can't say we spent much time studying continental-level military strategy so I am not sure if it helps or not.

About tactics and strategy.. I disagree.

I think tactics is the ability to win a battle. Strategy is the ability to win a war.

So basically tactics are narrow plans, and strategy is a grander plan.

Ahhh Jamiet, a fellow IR major.

Yes I must say.... although it seems it would apply directly to dip... it actually only applies indirectly. Oh well.

@ Thucy: What were / are your main specialisms/interests within the subject?

Kaptin, I'm not sure where you're getting your definitions, but I'm pretty sure it's widely accepted that strategy refers to the larger systemic plans, while tactics refers to the specific manouevres required to accomplish the goal set by strategy. While they are similar, the two terms are definitely not interchangeable.

From answers.com
Tactics
"1. (used with a sing. verb) The military science that deals with securing objectives set by strategy, especially the technique of deploying and directing troops, ships, and aircraft in effective maneuvers against an enemy: Tactics is a required course at all military academies."

Strategy
"1.a. The science and art of using all the forces of a nation to execute approved plans as effectively as possible during peace or war.
b. The science and art of military command as applied to the overall planning and conduct of large-scale combat operations.
2. A plan of action resulting from strategy or intended to accomplish a specific goal. See synonyms at plan.
3. The art or skill of using stratagems in endeavors such as politics and business."

I strongly believe that logic plays a big part in telling lies. Logic allows you to convince people that your way is the right way, by carefully pointing out all the things they need to hear and conveniently forgetting the ones they don't. The only problem with Diplomacy comes in the fact that everyone is naturally skeptical, and a lot of times people won't believe you just for the sake of not believing you (the whole, "This is too good to be true, something must be wrong" mentality).

Though, in other board games, I've often been able to convince people to do some pretty silly things just because I presented a case that seemed so logical to them that they figured they couldn't lose. (Mind you, I don't have a degree in logic, but in the one logic course I took in college, I cruised through to an easy 4.0.)

I dunno, logic is just a hard thing to refuse. If you try to convince people to do things with just your winning smile and some friendly gestures, they might be on the fence. But when you lay out an argument that seemingly has no holes, it's hard for them to disagree.

Unless, of course, they have a greater grasp of logic than you do, and they can see those things you conveniently left out. =P

"I dunno, logic is just a hard thing to refuse. If you try to convince people to do things with just your winning smile and some friendly gestures, they might be on the fence. But when you lay out an argument that seemingly has no holes, it's hard for them to disagree"

Better yet, lay out an argument using friendly gestures.

The key for me has been to always ignore the other person's arguments. Work out what they are offering and then decide what I want to do. The only other person who I am sure does this is Polar Bear. He doesn't like my "Ghostmaker logic" that I've used to try to persuade him with.

BA (Hons) Philosophy and History, BSc (Hons) Social Policy and Criminology, which i finish this June and when im ready ill be doing an MSc in Forensic Psychology and Criminology. That doesn't make me a tactical or strategic genius by any stretch and it contains nothing that even looks like Math or engineering.

However, i like puzzles and strategy and added with some philosophical flair, when i have the time, i find that i enjoy the game and the conversations that come from it. I am liking the 'Ghost Logic' idea though i might have to inject that into my game.

So MM despises the Humanities does he? And to think i even talk to you :)

Tactics and strategy are not the same, although they blur more in Diplomacy than a lot of games. Strategy is a broad plan...England decides to focus on Scandinavia and then shift fleets south to move against France. Tactics is getting through a specific situation: England has an army in Norway and a fleet in the North Sea, and wants to take Sweden.

I'm in 12th grade . . .

I think the best set of skills for a diplomat are those imparted not by formal schooling, but by a hard life on the mean streets culminating in a career in rap music and drug dealing. Once you have the rap flow down, nobody can resist savvy communiqué that rhymes. Add that to your bargaining prowess you have gained through extensive haggling with distributors and skillful fleecing of white boys, and you have an unstoppable set of skills. And when all else fails, you know full well how to bust a cap in your opponents' asses.

I have a Bachelor in Fine Arts. Of course, I also write about history and politics.

I only hate the humanities because the humanities hated me first and I'm unable to resist stooping to their level.

Well, I have a BS on Computer Science, a MS on Computer Sciente another BS in Economics and another Bs on Law, so I guess I am just a computer nerd who can suit you.....
And don´t know if any of this help me in Diplomacy, but from my later result, probably not, lol.

Show off.

To each his own, but I don't want more than a masters degree in my field. Perhaps someday a Ph.D. but I just want to get to work.

PhD, Inorganic Chemistry, far too long ago. About all I can remember is the title, and I've not found a way to to apply it to Dip