Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

New players can go here for helpful advice and to sign up for our mentor program, or if you're a veteran help answer questions.
Forum rules
This is an area for new members or members looking for help with the site or Diplomacy. Off topic threads and replies will be moved to the appropriate category.
Post Reply
Message
Author
TheBatch
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2018 5:03 am
Karma: 2

Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#1 Post by TheBatch » Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:11 pm

The idea of negotiating with countries in a game of Diplomacy based on how many points the players would receive once the game is done seems like metagaming to me and it kills the spirit of the game.

Here is an excerpt of a message I received:
we feel our position is stronger than yours by way of our strong alliance, but we will still draw. our terms are ~40 points each for us, ~20 for you
Is this a normal thing? Is this okay to do? It feels wrong to me.

Squigs44
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:50 pm
Location: America
Karma: 555

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#2 Post by Squigs44 » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:24 pm

The players can't divvy out points at the end of the game. It's either an even split or a sum of squares. Not sure what those players are thinking they are going to do to split the points.
1

Nodnyl
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:56 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#3 Post by Nodnyl » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:16 pm

The point is the other two players under sos rules are on 40 points each they are offering a three way draw because the third player has play well. He will under dos rules receive 20 points because he has las centres. I think he is thinking of the other draw rules.

Mercy
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:03 pm
Karma: 106

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#4 Post by Mercy » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:20 pm

It is perfectly okay.

bo_sox48
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1348
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:01 am
Karma: 692
Contact:

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#5 Post by bo_sox48 » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:24 pm

Cheating accusations are not allowed on the forum, so if you have a specific concern, please email the moderators at webdipmod@gmail.com instead of divulging specifics regarding your game on here. As you have technically not crossed that threshold yet and are only asking a rule-based question with a relevant example, I will leave this thread unlocked, but any further complaints of a rule violation should be directed to the moderators.

If I understand correctly, you are concerned over players discussing the point payout of the game if they were to draw a certain way. That on its own is not metagaming nor is it against the rules. The point totals, though, as others have mentioned, are determined based on the scoring system that the game creator chose initially, not based on the "terms" of any given player.

TheBatch
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2018 5:03 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#6 Post by TheBatch » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:58 pm

bo_sox48 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:24 pm
Cheating accusations are not allowed on the forum, so if you have a specific concern, please email the moderators at webdipmod@gmail.com instead of divulging specifics regarding your game on here. As you have technically not crossed that threshold yet and are only asking a rule-based question with a relevant example, I will leave this thread unlocked, but any further complaints of a rule violation should be directed to the moderators.
Understood. I'm not making accusations yet, just asking if this is okay to do, because I don't know.
bo_sox48 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:24 pm
If I understand correctly, you are concerned over players discussing the point payout of the game if they were to draw a certain way.
My concern is that they are doing this as part of in-game negotiations, not simple discussions. That, to me, seems like metagaming. Allowing outside factors to influence game decisions.
bo_sox48 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:24 pm
The point totals, though, as others have mentioned, are determined based on the scoring system that the game creator chose initially, not based on the "terms" of any given player.
I do understand how the scoring systems work and that they were referring to the Sum of Squares scoring. I wasn't clear about that in my initial post.
1

Nodnyl
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:56 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#7 Post by Nodnyl » Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:12 pm

This has got a little out of hand. The 40/40/20 split is not a matter of negotiation but a statement of the position of each player at the end of the Autumn turn. The offer of a three way draw was to be executed after that Autumn turn. Any misunderstanding about this matter and the fact it was a sum of squares game could have been cleared up with a quick message to the other players.
1

jmo1121109
Developer
Developer
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:20 pm
Karma: 1342
Contact:

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#8 Post by jmo1121109 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:51 am

Nodnyl wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:12 pm
This has got a little out of hand. The 40/40/20 split is not a matter of negotiation but a statement of the position of each player at the end of the Autumn turn. The offer of a three way draw was to be executed after that Autumn turn. Any misunderstanding about this matter and the fact it was a sum of squares game could have been cleared up with a quick message to the other players.
Hey Nodnyl,

I understand where you are coming from, but I believe the question being asked was more to discern whether or not negotiations based on point payouts at the end of the game is allowed. And since this isn't a topic explicitly covered in our rules I don't think it's unreasonable for someone to ask about it. The mod team is always happy to answer questions.
2

TheBatch
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2018 5:03 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#9 Post by TheBatch » Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:52 am

Thank you. That's exactly the question I'm asking.
1

jmo1121109
Developer
Developer
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:20 pm
Karma: 1342
Contact:

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#10 Post by jmo1121109 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:32 am

TheBatch wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:52 am
Thank you. That's exactly the question I'm asking.
The rules do answer it, but it isn't especially clear, it's hidden in another rule. Metagaming is making decisions based on factors outside of the game in an unfair way. So if someone in your game looked at your profile and decided they hated your profile quote and then told you they were attacking you for it, that's something that is "outside" the game an unfair to base game choices on, so the mods wouldn't allow it.

Points and the bets to enter games are really a part of the game, the current worth of your position is even displayed on the bottom of the board. So they aren't outside of it. Since points are used as the site's incentive program, it is okay to base in game decisions based on them.

And it's also important to note that 1 of the 2 people could be lying and just using that reasoning to try and lure the other person into a position where they can be stabbed. Which is also fine. But that's the main factor to consider for what is/isn't allowed.

Let me know if any part of that isn't clear.
1

TheBatch
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2018 5:03 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#11 Post by TheBatch » Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:56 am

That is clear. I didn't know the points were considered part of the game.

That answers my question and settles this issue for me. Thank you.

Nodnyl
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:56 am
Karma: 2

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#12 Post by Nodnyl » Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:16 pm

Sum of Squares scoring
This kind of scoring is often used by face-to-face tournaments, because it allows for more distinction between players, encourages going for solos rather than cutting out surviving players, and doesn't drag games on just to get that last elimination.
There is no skill or fun in eliminating a player when he is outnumbered two to one. Rather than eliminating you , Persia was offered a draw based on the end of Autumn position and holdings. This was not a negotiation over points they were already determined by the rules of the game.
1

Octavious
Posts: 916
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: The Five Valleys, Gloucestershire
Karma: 644
Contact:

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#13 Post by Octavious » Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:06 pm

Nodnyl wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:16 pm
Sum of Squares scoring
This kind of scoring is often used by face-to-face tournaments, because it allows for more distinction between players, encourages going for solos rather than cutting out surviving players, and doesn't drag games on just to get that last elimination.
There is no skill or fun in eliminating a player when he is outnumbered two to one. Rather than eliminating you , Persia was offered a draw based on the end of Autumn position and holdings. This was not a negotiation over points they were already determined by the rules of the game.
I have to disagree with that. A smaller power heavily outnumbered by an alliance of two can show a great deal of skill and have enjoyment from managing their retreat to destabilise the attacking alliance. The larger powers in turn can show skill in pretending to play for a two-way, only to stab for a solo in the death. SoS scoring removes a lot of the motivation for such play for the sake of finishing early, which is important enough in a face to face game but far less so online.
4

Caloxal
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:13 pm
Karma: 3

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#14 Post by Caloxal » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:14 pm

Sorry, but I think that its normal situation

Dejan0707
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:15 pm
Karma: 48

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#15 Post by Dejan0707 » Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:40 pm

jmo1121109 wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:32 am
TheBatch wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:52 am
Thank you. That's exactly the question I'm asking.
The rules do answer it, but it isn't especially clear, it's hidden in another rule. Metagaming is making decisions based on factors outside of the game in an unfair way. So if someone in your game looked at your profile and decided they hated your profile quote and then told you they were attacking you for it, that's something that is "outside" the game an unfair to base game choices on, so the mods wouldn't allow it.

Points and the bets to enter games are really a part of the game, the current worth of your position is even displayed on the bottom of the board. So they aren't outside of it. Since points are used as the site's incentive program, it is okay to base in game decisions based on them.

And it's also important to note that 1 of the 2 people could be lying and just using that reasoning to try and lure the other person into a position where they can be stabbed. Which is also fine. But that's the main factor to consider for what is/isn't allowed.

Let me know if any part of that isn't clear.
If someone doesn't like your win pecentage and decide to attack you because of that...is that a metagaming? That information is part of the profile so it has the same origin like profile quote.

Obviously it is not fair to gang upon someone you percieve as strong player but also in human nature is to do exactly that.

I remember one game on playdip where one player was playing good game until someone spread the word that this player has 9 solo wins out of 9 games played. Game was not anon so soon everybody knew. From that momment on that player had been eyed upon by most players and soon after was eliminated.

jmo1121109
Developer
Developer
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:20 pm
Karma: 1342
Contact:

Re: Negotiating in-game based on our-of-game player scoring

#16 Post by jmo1121109 » Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:13 pm

Dejan0707 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:40 pm
jmo1121109 wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:32 am
TheBatch wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:52 am
Thank you. That's exactly the question I'm asking.
The rules do answer it, but it isn't especially clear, it's hidden in another rule. Metagaming is making decisions based on factors outside of the game in an unfair way. So if someone in your game looked at your profile and decided they hated your profile quote and then told you they were attacking you for it, that's something that is "outside" the game an unfair to base game choices on, so the mods wouldn't allow it.

Points and the bets to enter games are really a part of the game, the current worth of your position is even displayed on the bottom of the board. So they aren't outside of it. Since points are used as the site's incentive program, it is okay to base in game decisions based on them.

And it's also important to note that 1 of the 2 people could be lying and just using that reasoning to try and lure the other person into a position where they can be stabbed. Which is also fine. But that's the main factor to consider for what is/isn't allowed.

Let me know if any part of that isn't clear.
If someone doesn't like your win pecentage and decide to attack you because of that...is that a metagaming? That information is part of the profile so it has the same origin like profile quote.

Obviously it is not fair to gang upon someone you percieve as strong player but also in human nature is to do exactly that.

I remember one game on playdip where one player was playing good game until someone spread the word that this player has 9 solo wins out of 9 games played. Game was not anon so soon everybody knew. From that momment on that player had been eyed upon by most players and soon after was eliminated.
Yes, that is metagaming and would be investigated and probably punished.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest