Diplomacy Academy 10: Improve Negotiations

[dancing queen]

In the tenth edition of the Diplomacy Academy series, I examine a crucial element of the game: Negotiations. What does it mean to speak in a language they understand, and why is it so important?

In the first example, from the 2014 World Championships, three top level players try to persuade an unusual audience to work with them. In the second example, from a 2020 house game, an English player runs into trouble when their builds aren't in line with their moves.

https://youtu.be/d1pOJsC8-GY

I've tried a bunch of new stuff in this one, so feedback very much appreciated on what did/didn't work, too long, not focused enough, etc.

[cdngooner]

Content was excellent. Issues as a viewer included spotty sound quality, and too quick commentary, that left me (a novice player) left behind.

The sound switched regularly from left channel to stereo, with levels changing accordingly. When on left only, it was awfully quiet.

When you were analyzing the moves in the Backstabbr game, the commentary went too quickly for me to follow. Why did this move have this long term consequence? I think you got to explaining it, but a bit too quickly for me (again, a novice) to absorb. I'm assuming your audience is novices and intermediate players, so perhaps some clear visuals of what will happen if X does Y would help -- the quick mouse bounces around the Backstabbr map just went by too fast for me to follow.

But all in all, I do enjoy your videos. I've watched all 10 and find them very informative and entertaining. Thank you.

[dancing queen]

Thank you for the feedback! I'm working on the audio issues; I think they might be related to the new program I am using for editing.

Can you pin down some places when the audio got funky? I have a friend who does audio engineering and they said they'd give some feedback.

For the "too quickly section," was it the group commentary - with Brandon/Chris/Siobhan & I that was too fast? Or was it the "IF he built F Liverpool, then this is what might have happened" section?

I'm often worried about the videos going too long, so your comment that I can slow down in places is nice to hear!

[VillageIdiot]

This was great, a lot of awesome points and examples here.

I really like your suggestion of using your opening messages to send a clear message of who you are. There's an old sales adage that says "sell yourself, not your product" which rings just as true in Diplomacy. Pitching good plans are great and sometimes they're enough to strike a deal with somebody, but not always. Diplomacy is a game riddled with suspicion and mistrust and self-importance and desire for control and numerous other human nature traits that only get amplified in a game like this. In my experience a credible plan usually beats out a strong plan more times than not, and credibility is directly connected to the person proposing the deal.

I find online Diplomacy has nuances to the negotiating aspect that’s different from the FTF world as was used in these examples. I’ve played exactly one FTF game in my life (with DQ no less) and did pretty horribly, but I came to appreciate the speed of the game and the constraints that puts on one’s ability to invest in the negotiating aspect of the game. Online diplomacy you have a luxury of a lot more time for such things. In the online world you often have a day or two before the first moves are even made so I usually use this time to really focus on bonding with everybody around me and deeply vetting them. I'll talk tactics with players who i can tell this is important to, but my priority is just in getting them to feel good about me as a potential ally. "Sell yourself".

And i do this everywhere. I usually have a favourate ally in mind but I build every relationship up as if they may be my primary or future primary ally. In most rounds, by the time I’ve made it to the turnover I’ve typically deeply negotiated 2-3 very strong plans and can make a decision from there which one to take based on what looks most appealing. Just because Option A looks like the obvious best option, a lot can happen in the span of a round and you never know if in the midst of talking either Option B (or C or D) starts to look a lot more appealing or something unexpected develops to start to sour Option A. Keep your options as wide open as possible and then make your decision at the end of the round based on which looks the most appealing. Again, there's a delicacy here to handle this approach so you're entertaining multiple deals but not necessarily committing to a bunch of deals that require you to break promises. Defer commitments when you can and have diplomatic ways to get out of deals when needed without necessarily burning a bridge - you need to maintain your diplomatic credibility. On the flip side, do what you can to get definitive unambiguous commitments from the other party.

If you really want somebody to buy into a plan, its better when they’re the one to pitch it. Smart players almost always see the same opportunities on the board. As an example, if there’s an amazing opportunity for two players to stab their 3rd ally, it’s better to wait for them to be the one to suggest it...

“Let’s stab Italy, we all get some growth and he can’t retaliate!!”

Flawed: This is going to leave some doubt as to how aggressive and ambitious of a player you are and if it’s worth cutting out that buffer. The person may or may not go through with a proposal like this.

“Wish we had some way to get you some builds this year, France is growing really big and you’re going to be pretty vulnerable if this goes on much longer. And what’s going on with our pal Italy, he’s not really talking a lot to us these days and I’m not really sure how best to include him moving forward.”

Better: If you partner sees stabbing Italy as a real option here then you’ve already lent weight to the notion that you’re concerned about his involvement making it easier for him to propose the stab, which if he suggests you can feel confident will be followed through on. And you get the added goodwill and bonding of having supported ‘his plan’.

[dancing queen]

Love, love, love all of this.

Could you do me a favor and post this as a comment on the video over at youtube?

And so so smart to think of the opening phase of online negotiations to the kind of backslapping and joking and catching up that goes on before a F2F game. Dang, I never made that connection - always straight to business, me.

I'll be fixing that!

[VillageIdiot]

For you, of course!