I would hope they'd feel cheap and unimpressed with themselves for trying to fight the system.

I don't think I would consider that cheating, although I don't know if there are specific rules on this website about that - I would doubt it though.

However, what I want to say is that, in the games that I have played here - I have disproportionately been allocated Italy more than any other country and still haven't been allocated England, Germany or Turkey.

I would call it smart. it would give said person a chance to experiment with Austria, while not risking too much

Not that I'm complaining, just saying that I don't think the allocation system is an exact science - it feels very luck-based.

It's the equivalent of counting cards I suppose, but since the site counts them for you, I see no problem in placing bets accordingly.

Who does it hurt anyway?

and even if it were considered cheating, how could one set a direct rule for it?
I personally did not even know of this "semi"-random setup, and ive been on this site for 3 years. the person could argue "I felt like playing a low-bet game" or so. you cannot argue against that...

Absolutely not cheating. How could this possibly be considered as cheating?

(Plus it's not "very likely" because the allocation system is more random than the OP suggests)

The site operates in a specific way that is pretty easy to get a basic understanding of. Managing the intricacies is in no way cheating.

no i would not consider it cheating.

If you place a bet before a random assignment, I believe the intent is clearly opposed to such speculation.

But I wouldnt lose any sleep over it.

Also, for the 'who does it hurt' question, I think looking at an inverse example may help.

Hypothetically say a player believes he has an advantage if he plays a corner nation rather than a central power. He then plays and finishes three games in a row as Italy, Austria and Germany. He feels that he has a better-than-average chance of a getting his favored nation selection on his next game. He then posts in the forums an open challenge to the highest GR players for a match with an ultra-high pot. Some opponents look at his game log and suspect as much. Some challengers suspect nothing and don't bother to check their own logs let alone his.

But it isn't just what he has had least that contributes to his assignment. It is also affected by his opponents. So even if he got lucky and reduced his odds of getting his less preferred nation, he could well get stuck with it anyhow if his opponents have had them even more than he has relatively speaking.

I think that goes back to someone else's reference of counting cards. It's not that it ensures a particular outcome, it's that there is change of the odds. Moreover, there is an intent to come into a situation either differently than the others or than is expected by the others.

who cares that much about points?

Points as a system is so easy to work if you care about them rather than the game, I wouldn't overly concern myself with that. The purpose is not to rate people, but to punish them for playing badly- the first thing you need to do to improve points is to complete your games, and that is what it encourages.

This does give a good example of why Ghost-Rating doesn't allow game weights to be customised, however :)

I forgot I posted this, or I would have responded sooner.

I would consider it metagaming and cheating. Metagaming is allowing anything outside the game to affect anything inside the game, which this clearly is. The bet is inside the game, and your country history is outside the game.

That being said, it's obviously not enforceable, I just wanted people's opinions on whether or not they agreed with me in principle.

And it obviously isn't certain. But if one consciously made decisions like that, they would be, on the average, better off than someone who didn't.

As a side note, is there anyone who has thought of this before I did? XD

I don't consider the beting as "inside the game".

Not all metagaming is cheating and this is most definitely not cheating.

i disagree, i don't consider the bet as part of the game of diplomacy.

when playing WTA the bet represents the goals (ie win > draw > loss) though not very well as i don't think a 3-way draw is any better than a 6-way draw - thus playing for points is not good for your game of diplomacy...

Come on diplomacy is not poker, the bet is just not part of the game to me.

"Not all metagaming is cheating and this is most definitely not cheating."

I disagree. All metagaming is cheating, in my book. I consider looking up the histories of who you're playing to be cheating. :-P

And why isn't the bet part of the game? I see no reason it wouldn't be.

Well your opinion is not the opinion of the mods on this site. Using past experience and researching your opponent is not considered cheating by the mods and theirs is the only opinion that counts.

@☺: so looking up past histories is cheating according to you, what about remembering what someone did in a previous game which you played?

Say you've allied with somebody numerous times, and every single time they've stabbed you on the opening move. You now find yourself in a game with them; you as Austria, the stabber as Italy. Don't tell me your past experience with the player wouldn't affect how you play.

I only play anonymous games.

And for the love of god, I'm not suggesting we start banning people. I just wanted people's opinions...

@smile totaly agree with you about metagaming, not about the bet. The game does not include betting, betting is part just of this site. I know other dip page wich hasn't bets. Just a record of win/draw/lose.
Draug and ora, i consider metagame cheating, looking at other profile and logs, cheating, and remembering what other player did in oder game, an unavoidable cheating (Actually you could avoid it by making games annon, and make annon be kept annon even when the game's over.). When people have acces to other player's games and records, they can see if he's more a stabber or a carebear, if he keeps alliances, etc, that is metagame. Also, it causes that pleople tend not to stab (even when they could win with the stab) becuase if they stab, next time his/her co-gamers won't ally him.

I would love to make my logs, games, victories and so on, private, so that people can't peek at what kind of player i'm.

Not cheating, but anyone caught doing this should banned anyway, starting with smiley face. Me thinks this whole thread is here for him to gloat about his brilliant strategy.

Well I can't do it. If you look at my games, I'm 2/3/2/2/2/2/3, A/E/G/F/R/T/I. About as even as you get. But touche spyman. :-)

I would look at your games smiley but as we both know that would be cheating and I have to immediately file a report about myself with the mods and have my account banned.