Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 958 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
King Atom (100 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
My Little Tournament
Await for description if you still withhold misplaced grudges against me...
103 replies
Open
BobbyMcGee (100 D)
17 Sep 12 UTC
Austria's Poor Performance
I'll admit, I'm pretty new to playing Diplomacy online. I never thought of Austria as a poor draw, but it seems to get eliminated first in almost every game I've seen on this site, crushed between its three neighbors. I always thought Italy and Austria were a sure thing as allies, but Italy almost always seems to turn on Austria in 1901 here. Anybody got an good theories?
28 replies
Open
mapleleaf (0 DX)
15 Sep 12 UTC
new game: HADRIAN
2 day phases, WTA anon gunboat, 117 buy in, gameID=99604

2 replies
Open
Baldur (342 D)
17 Sep 12 UTC
U.S. Election Game
This is not Diplomacy, but for those looking to expand their campaign talents to the electoral arena should check this out.
http://www.your-election-game.com
It is a game I created about four years ago partly inspired by webDiplomacy.
0 replies
Open
teufelhunden83 (100 D)
17 Sep 12 UTC
Join "All my marbles"
101 point buy in
anonymous
1 reply
Open
Wow SplitDiplomat, you're so cool.
Well done bro. So proud of you. gameID=99657

(F-G had draw votes up in 1908)
74 replies
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
17 Sep 12 UTC
EoG: Live (Gunboat) and Let Die
So much was wrong with this game.
19 replies
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
16 Sep 12 UTC
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side."
The Republicans are just shooting themselves in the foot left and right. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n5oa55EsmI
25 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
13 Sep 12 UTC
NFL Pick 'em Week 2
The Bears and Packers renew their ancient rivalry...
Harbaugh and Schwartz meet again as the Niners and Lions battle on Sunday Night Football...
Cam's Panthers and Brees' Saints go up against one another, each looking to rebound from last week...
That and, yeah, the AFC, too, so, yes--PICK 'EM!
52 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
15 Sep 12 UTC
Good To See US Students Living Up to Our (Ever-Sinking) Image!
http://www.ocregister.com/news/students-371409-writing-graders.html
We lag behind other nations in scientific education, now...but lead in education on the Science of Goddiditolution...
We have ever-worsening health, math, and public awareness scores...
And now we can't even pass kids that can write a competent, non-Ob-esque (ha, beat you ALL to the joke!) professional paragraph? What happened to us, USA?
51 replies
Open
EOG Live (Gunboat) And Let Die
Goddammit Russia.
4 replies
Open
alex99 (100 D)
16 Sep 12 UTC
nuovo giocatore
ohi sono alessandro quello con cui avete giocato oggi
11 replies
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
16 Sep 12 UTC
EoG: Sick of Austria
Cool game...
5 replies
Open
achillies27 (100 D)
13 Sep 12 UTC
Hm... Games anyone?
one of my 5 game tournies got canceled.. and 1 game ended.. so i now need 6 More games total to achieve my goal.
Of course, i dont expct you guys to participate in all six, this thread is Asking for players for 3 games, 2 gunboats and 1 Full press... post if interested, you dont have to join all three.
64 replies
Open
cspieker (18223 D)
16 Sep 12 UTC
New idea for live gunboat group
To keep out those who have a rep of CDing
24 replies
Open
BreathOfVega (597 D)
16 Sep 12 UTC
EOG: No Mice Please
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=99730

I'm beginning to be sick of drawing because players CD when something goes wrong. And I'm beginning to be sick of seeing my good games ruined (or forced to draw) for this reason.
21 replies
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
16 Sep 12 UTC
EoG: Live Gunboat-251
The silliest E-G combo I've ever seen.
3 replies
Open
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
15 Sep 12 UTC
A message from the mods
On behalf of the mods, I apologize for the delay. I've been called out of retirement and am going through as many emails as I can right now. Please remember, even in lieu of active mods, making public cheating accusations is not acceptable.
Thanks,
abge
webDip Admin
53 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
16 Sep 12 UTC
Anti-Putin sentinments...
... What next for Russia? https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=473436639344019&id=367116489976035&set=a.456449604376056.98921.367116489976035&refid=52&ref=stream&_ft_=fbid.358461704239194
4 replies
Open
HITLER69 (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
"anti-US" sentiment amongst Islamists
So for the past few days the main stream media has been reporting a number of incidents (Libya, Sudan, Egyptian KFC(?)) where "radicals" have been "protesting" and burning things down in the name of their prophet.
68 replies
Open
Sbyvl36 (439 D)
15 Sep 12 UTC
Best Sci-Fi Authors
Jules Verne? HG Wells? Who is the best Sci Fi Author of all time?
50 replies
Open
Tru Ninja (1016 D(S))
15 Sep 12 UTC
Full Disclosure Game 2.2
Currently I have press from myself, France and Italy. I still need press from the other 4 players remaining if I am to begin setting this up. Thanks.
3 replies
Open
MichiganMan (5126 D)
16 Sep 12 UTC
EoG live gunboat -250
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=99657

No way, SplitDiplomat wouldn't vote to end a game in which there was a game-changing CD! Pretty lame dude, pretty lame. But, it should be expected from Split. I knew it was him.
1 reply
Open
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
16 Sep 12 UTC
In lieu of an Ombudsman
Now that things have settled down, I want to address the 2nd issue that was raised today. Please see inside:

1 reply
Open
Puddle (413 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
Face to Face Game
I was wondering if anyone knew of any Diplomacy players in Tallahassee Florida?
11 replies
Open
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
The method for multis - idea for the Admins
I tried to register on the developers forum but I could not.

I have 2 good ideas to get rid of multiaccounting and I would like to share them with you. Feel free to comment.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
NOT PERFECT BUT EASY TO IMPLEMENT

1. Get rid of the ranking based on points, number of won games -- the large part of multis that try to cure their inferiority complex by winning the game with unfair means will quit immediately. They simply loose their motivation as their motivation is not a fun play - just gathering points. It is not a perfect solution, but I think it is quite easily to open the new no-ranking diplomacy games working along with the current system. I bet you multis will keep the old one and fair players will use the new one.


PERFECT BUT REQUIRE SOME WORK

2. Set up an engine that will be creating the games with different but standarized parameters, several at one time. All players join the game anonymously and in random order. Player may choose type of the map and period of the game turn "not shorter than..." or "not longer than" then player will be randomly transfered to lets say one of dozens currently running games. In trial period system can start with some fixed standard - lets say only standard diplomacy map and only 2days per turn. Games are not named, names of the players are not revealed (they may be revealed at the end of the game) - so people who want to try multi they will have hard way to do (especialy in the games with no chat). Even they will produce 10 accounts it will be difficult for them to recognize if they are in the same game with their multiaccounts. If there will be many active players the game slots will be filled up quickly so it will be almost imposible to find yourself in the same game with 2 multiaccounts (some games on FB work this way)

with my best regards to the Admins and all the Fair Players

Wyludniacz
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
+5

I think the first one would be pretty close to perfect too if there are some other small things implemented.
Tantris (2456 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
Why are multis trying to get points? Can you sell them someplace?
I think the second idea is pretty cool.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Is this really that big of a problem...the multis will get bored or banned in due time.

#1 are you saying just get rid of the title/ x out of x players part? So you would still have points to differentiate players it would be the same, imo.

#2 I think this would severely limit the amount of games that will actually start. And in the live game arena, which I believe is where multis are most prevalent, there is usually only one live game at a time on this site - and those are difficult to come by some times.
Tantris (2456 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
The easy solutions for multis are generally:
a) password protect games but put them in the forum. Multis generally don't look in the forum for some reason.
b) start games worth more than 100 D.
c) join the league or a tournament.

I don't like either of the two ideas above. Generally, I have less problems with multis than I do with people leaving games. In a full negotiation game, if two people are cheating...just rally the players against them and defeat them.
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
It doesn't have to be a big problem to try and fix it...
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
it does when it changes the game as it is. I agree with Tantris, I have had little to no issues with multis and would rather not see these specific changes.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
specifically #2, I don't really care much about #1 but I do plan to de-throne splitdiplomat one day. ;)
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
yep, CDRers are also a problem but I have another idea for that:
one of the game setting is: allowed for players with at least 100games finished and only 1% of quitted. Of course it is easy to attend 100 games but not easy to patiently finish all of them - especialy if you like to play only when you are winning.

Re: cheaters - when I have strong suspicions I call other players to run for unfair player - but it also is kind of metagaming and not really fun.
2ndWhiteLine (2611 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
On the opposite end of the incentive spectrum, we could institute harsh punishments for being caught as a multi. For example, attach a credit card to your webdip account. If you are caught playing as a multi, you have to pay $10,000.
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Lol ^
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
I think we should be able to create games with certain rating requirements. I also think we should have another couple of variants and discounted takeovers of CDs. Wonder where I can find all of those..

On the topic of CDs, I still say we should make the CD pay the remainder of the price for the entrance of another player in their spot after the discount. If that means negative points, hey, we know why...
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
@ Gen. Lee
I propose no points at all - simiralily to the board version of Diplomacy. Game maybe won, lost or drawn. I do not care about points and rankings. I play the game it is fun. Then the game is finished and I can start another diplomacy experience to enjoy. Although in my second idea ranking can be kept.
Anyway I think even when all the virtual tokens system would be cancelled, and the ranking would be only based on number of win/draw/survived games it would be way better.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
There needs to be a way to decrease your resign rate if that was implemented imo. I had 3 resigns thf first night I ever played this game, b/c I didn't know how to play & I didn't realize what a big deal a CD is or that there was a win/loss/resign/draw record being kept. My resign rate is 6% and besides 1 night I've been a model member of this site imho. If you lock out all noobs from the beginning, new player growth will be effected.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
@ bo_sox48 I like the idea of the system based on virtual token fines for quitting. Lets say if you quit - you will lose twice as your original bet. If you have no tokens - you get banned for given period of time. Together with my idea of game parameters based on players reputation the CDers problem would be limited to minimum
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
No, no need to ban anyone. CDs do happen and webDip and vDip alike have always valued letting people play no matter what the circumstance so long as they haven't broken rules. CDing happens and it's not that extreme. I had my first resign the other day because of circumstance, not because I didn't want to play.

We can't tell new people to fuck off and stay out because of CDs. We can have game requirements, but no, we should never ban people for CDs. Don't even go there.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Oh i see. I like the point system and I also think that will hurt the participation on this site. Sorry, I'm shitting on all your ideas today, and I don't have any better to add.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
@ Gen. Lee - good point - the rate of resigns may be measured on i.e last 6-12 month period
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
Losing the points is easy enough to do especially if we implemented Oli's reliability rating. That combined with passworded games would eliminate the need to have points.

I don't like #2 at all though. It's how the judges generally worked and doesn't allow you to organize games with your internet peeps. I don't think it is perfect as you claim seeing as it is as imperfect as it gets from a fun-level perspective and we all, in the end, play this game to have fun.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
Re points based system - I mean any point ranking somehow works as a metagame to any single game competitions -- and in that way it is against the rules.
Tantris (2456 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
So, we should remove usernames and the forum, so that there is no meta. Pure diplomacy only!
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
So, Chess's ELO system is against Chess rules? No, it isn't against the rules. It just expands upon the rules by providing players a means of comparing themselves with others. In our case, we have a better system anyhow in the GR system based upon Chess's ELO ratings.
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
And face it, #2 sucks. Diplomacy started as a baordgamne. You don't throw your name in the hat and wait for your turn to come up to play a boardgame with random strangers. You play boardgames with people you know. Friends, enemies, frenemies, you name it. #2 destroys the concept of playign a game with your friends. In short, #2 is #2 because it takes the #1 out of the fun.
BreathOfVega (597 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
I am sure that RR would work great about CDers, and has already been implemented on other sites.

I think that live games, starting one at a time, would be unaffected by your 2nd proposal. And you cannot delay a live game just to wait for a lot to start together.

Third, Wyludniacz: I'd concentrate on another factor. Does this site (i.e. people who work on it and implement improvements) really want to find a solution? I mean, there are a lot of features implemented on the sister site. I am not sure if the tendency is to use this site as a lab for improvements.

I am not trolling :P
rokakoma (19138 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
I like points :)

All that said, taking away points would take away my motivation. Players joining 7000 D games play totally different, the dynamics of the game, the seriousness they take it is basically different and taking these away would take away much of the "high-class" games as well. Personally GR doesn't motivates me and I never care my rating, but I do care about my high pot games.

I don't like the #2 idea either. Meta/multi is generally the problem of low pot games from which you move away anyway.

I admit it's a problem, but it occurs mostly at new players with few games only, because you can't maintain being a multi on the long run. Sooner or later you'll get caught.

There were many suggestions in the past already, but the basic problem is new players will be always new players without any record how or whom with they play. And without these information you can never decide whether he's a multi or not.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
@Draugnar I'm not against a ranking itself - Comparing to others is useful as you can measure your diplomacy skills that way. I only say it implements some extra motivation for unfair behaviours. How we deal with it - we currently discussing.
As I play in diplomacy for fun and mastering my diplomacy skills - I would like to keep the ranking if only I would have an assurance that it is a fair ranking and fair playing
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
I don't think we should take away points but I think a reliability system is something that the big dawgz should work on. I (how weird!) still like my idea about discounted joins over CDs and penalizing the CD for it. I haven't seen anyone legitimately give a reason not to do something like that. It doesn't kill anyone's account; it doesn't ban anyone. It gets the message across with a little prod in the back saying "don't do that" and it reminds you when you forget. Keep forgetting and that's where the reliability thing comes in.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Rokakoma has won the thread. I agree on all accounts.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
@ Gen. Lee - I understand your needs -- it only proves that there are different groups off people playing in this place for a different reason. I only do not understand your nervous and unkind reations. Im not implementing anything Im not threating to anyone. Just giving and idea for a discussion. Running non-ranking games and players reputation system running along with existing one does not alter your ranking and high stakes games. So you may feel safe.
Gen. Lee (7588 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
nervous and unkind reaction? I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm only discussing the OPs two proposed ideas, don't take it personal they just aren't good.
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
You know what else they should implement? A system to remove +1's.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Points help prevent NMRs/CDs by giving players something to measure themselves against.

Multis are less interested in being seen to have beaten people in a fair game than they are interested in 'getting the better of the system' - they don't care if they have to cheat to get their own personal satisfaction, they are already playing their own little game.

secondly, losing the personal touch of playing people who i've gotten to know, a community would destroy my experience here.

I don't want to play diplomacy against random anon people, if i did i could easily play on facebook dip. A community is also the better solution to preventing multis.
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
bo_sox +1 for wanting the ability to -1 posts.
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
And ora +1 for his last two sentegraphs (one sentence paragraphs :-) ). That's one of the reason I prefer non-anon and only play anon with people I have played before or know from the forums so it becomes a guessing game and leads to some great mindfucks tryuign to figure out who is who.
jmo1121109 (3812 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
Like other people have mentioned, I enjoy setting up password protected games to play top 50 or top 100 GR games. I don't really play random games anymore because I have no desire to play against people with terrible resign rates.

Agreed with bo_sox, a -1 button is needed. Just like points some people now are motivated by the +1 system to troll the forum for +1's.

The second problem I could see with #2 is that it might actually encourage devoted cheaters to make more and more accounts and just CD'ing in the games they don't end up with one of their other accounts. If you were a cheater and made say 20 accounts all with the same parameters there's a pretty good chance you would end up with multiple accounts in the same game.
Sandgoose (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
I like this discussion, but I believe in both occasions you miss out on the quality of play.

Most players on this site are just idiots (myself included....just kidding) and would rather do whatever it takes to incur hurt. If you merge RANDOM players you loose the quality games. Quality games that take a long period of time to create. You would laugh if you say MadMarx playing with member 40,000 off a randomized system.

Quality of games is always best...that's why I agree with mah mayn Tantris

The easy solutions for multis are generally:
a) password protect games but put them in the forum. Multis generally don't look in the forum for some reason.
b) start games worth more than 100 .
c) join the league or a tournament.

It's simple, and it's effective. I get you guys don't want to risk points, but it's not about the points, it's about a quality game....if you don't care to move up the ranks more live games might be what you want. otherwise...set up a quality live game here in the forums...PW protected so you can review the account before you agree to accepting them...simple solution!
Draugnar (0 DX)
14 Sep 12 UTC
The one place I disagree with Sandgoose and others to a certain degree is the need for 100+ points. Password protected should be sufficient, especially if the password is given out via PM to those who express interest and meet the creator's approval.

However, I can also see that, just like in poker, more risk affects the way people play and as points have a perceived (although not real) value, high pot games will make some act like madmen hoping to win the gold bracelte and others will play more conservatively, hoping to just hold their own and be in the draw. Me, well, I prefer the purer form of the game with minimal points where people are instead playing their best game to win. Period. Not worrying about "oh shit! everything I have is in this game!" mentalitiesmakes the game more enjoyable and pure to me.
Wyludniacz (809 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
I agree Draugnar. And I would also agree with statement that tight organized community is the best preventive tool to exclude multis - if there would be efficient way of excluding them. Some people agree that admins cannot cope with all the multi/meta cases. The accounts that obviously are multi they are still in the game - and that is sad. Even you ban someone he/she will create another bunch of accounts or other 'clever' guys will replace them - problem exists and noone can deny it.
Im happy thet my ideas ignited this discussion - even thou some of you do not like it.
As I said these solutions could exist as an extra option - so if you like current system - you do not need to resign from anything. Im sure some group of people would use them - they would meet my expectations and I'm not the only one here with similar point of view.
bo_sox48 (5202 DMod(G))
14 Sep 12 UTC
Everyone agrees that multis are annoying, but systems that take away from the game aren't going to work. We can't take the community away in order to give back to the game.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
15 Sep 12 UTC
@bo_sox, this is a open source project, we could indeed have a fork which only allows random games, randomly joined and completely anon.

Wyludniacz, feel free to create such a project, you can find the source code on sourceforge, or linked on the help page.
Draugnar (0 DX)
15 Sep 12 UTC
@W - Admins don't code at all. They use the tools written for them. At least one is a programmer, but you confuse the mod/admin roles with the developer role.
Draugnar (0 DX)
15 Sep 12 UTC
Also, @W, they benefits (i.e. how many people would actually use these options) versus the effort has to be weighed. After all, all development effort on this site is donated time. The only ones making any money off it is the hosting company.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
15 Sep 12 UTC
Hosting Company running on the donations of money from the users.

@Wyludniacz, if you would like to raise money for this project and hire a programmer, i'm sure kickstarter is a good place. You seem to think there are others who share you views. If you wish to rally them together i am certain a new site could be up and running in less than 3 months.
Draugnar (0 DX)
15 Sep 12 UTC
That was what I meant, Ora. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
15 Sep 12 UTC
Honestly, cheating isn't that big of a problem. Either that, or people aren't reporting it as much as they've used to. In any case, I think people have outline pretty well why your suggestions would be a net detriment to the site. But, as always, we welcome suggestions.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
15 Sep 12 UTC
@Draug, i'm agreeing with you, and maybe elaborating... Ideas are great, and donations of either time or money to make them become any more than an idea would be the best advice i can offer.
Draugnar (0 DX)
15 Sep 12 UTC
@Ora - I know. I jist reread my post and realized I wasn't clear on how and where the hosting company got its money.


48 replies
Masf (661 D)
07 Sep 12 UTC
MODS: Are you there?
Hey mods, can you check your e-mail please?
I'm writing to you for six days and waiting for an answer about a few obviously meta gamers (and possible multy accounts) and the game is screwed for all this time.
86 replies
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
14 Sep 12 UTC
press ready for f**k's sake
just press it, really, it's not a big thing at all ...
41 replies
Open
Submariner (111 D)
15 Sep 12 UTC
Moderator Request - suspected meta gaming
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=99278#gamePanel

Can a moderator check out this game please. There are a few reasons to suspect there are fewer than 7 people playing in this game!
12 replies
Open
krellin (80 DX)
13 Sep 12 UTC
I've Got Blisters on My Fingers!
And other great lyrics.

Go!
45 replies
Open
Page 958 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top