One does not simply CD into Mordor. It ruins the game for others.

You don't leave games, it's bad form.

The way you leave a game is with your head held high, either having gone out fighting or won.

That's the question we should all be asking. How does a player leave a game? Doesn't he know the lives he's ruining? Millions of his citizens killed by invading armies as his country collapses into anarchy? Good God, how does a player leave a game and still slee at night?

Just so there's an answer, though, if you don't put in orders for two turns or anything, you're considered to have resigned. Still, don't do it. It's better form and more fun to try to stop someone's win when you're on death's door.

If everyone left the game when they realized they couldn't win, the entire purpose of this game of diplomacy would be forfeit. It's your obligation to work with the other players of the board to stop the winner/winners.

@Stukus, I've never managed to Slee at night anyway...

The Order of Diplomacy

1. Win
2. If you can't win, draw.
3. If you can't win or draw, survive.
4. If you can't do any of those, screw the country that screwed you.

But this above all else, prevent anyone else from winning. Unless of course you are a vindictive asshole, then screw the others and help someone win who doesn't deserve to win. For those not aware, that last sentence was directed at the vindictive assholes who'd rather screw the people who beat them up than stop the solo and be part of the draw.

It is important to state that the above mentioned list of priorities is Draugnar's personal preference that is accepted by a lot of Diplomacy players - but it is not in the rules.

I believe that the list is only valid for anonymous games. When playing non-anonymous games, the preferences are different.

Why should there be a difference between anon and non anon. If you are worried about your reputation, the other players in the game will know who you are as soon as the game ends and the reputation will still be affected. Of course, that's for those who pay attention to things like reputation.

I think that list might be more a of webdiplomacy list than a Diplomacy list. IMO the Defeat/Survive distinction is only important because it shows up on your profile on this site.

I can think of many situations where it's preferable to hurl yourself at the eventual winner, get a "defeat" and prevent a solo than it is to run into a safe SC. Most (or all) of those depend on external factors to just playing on the site.

In WTA, I'd rather die trying to stop the solo than survive but lose, which was exactly the point of the overarching "always stop the solo" Order of the Diplomat.

@gram

I think you and Draug are saying the same thing. Perhaps you misunderstood his list?

Wrong. Baskineli has a point. Imagine you have a girl friend who has a "I-wanna-win-all-the-time!" mentality in life :D

<.< Wouldnt you just give the game to her for some other -whatever-it-is- personal gains? :P
You might even enjoy being defeated and winning the game becomes "not an option" and drawing the game is becomes your last resort *0*

I do have a different opinion. I will play for a survive rather than a defeat on this site even it entails throwing the solo in a WTA because that's what shows up on my profile, so I consider part of the way the site is scored. If there are external scoring structures imposed (like tournament, etc.) I'll take the defeat.

I agree w/ Draug on this one; especially w/ regards to the differentiation between anon and non-anon games (i.e. there is none). The only reputation I believe that matters is that you play your best from one game to the next and you don't CD w/o a solid reason. I think you just want others to enjoy playing with you, whether they groan as you win, share your joy in a draw, curse your name in a defeat or enjoy the imminence of your demise. Just let it be fun.

The same person that is your most true ally in one game could be the biggest back-stabbing bastard in another one. It's the nature of the game. If I were never to play w/ people that have stabbed (curse you Babak=), that would severely limit the pool of candidates and exclude most of the best players on this site. That being said, those same players obviously make for excellent allies on many occasions (bless you Babak=)

Each game is a completely fresh start. Do not limit your possibilities by stereotyping a player's nature based upon just one or even a few games - especially when the inherent nature of said game promotes treachery and deceit as much as loyalty and honor. A player can demonstrate both.

@LG - I will remember your recent continual stab and "loophole word game" for a long time to come. :-P

I know... I know... The only thing I don't like about this game is the inherent guilt when you war with people you'd prefer not to.

You should get that guilt complex removed, they have surgery for that now.