Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 347 of 355
FirstPreviousNextLast
Ezio (841 D)
18 Jan 17 UTC
Highest stakes live game
What is the highest stakes live game ever on the site?
51 replies
Open
Ezio (841 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Ethics
If someone admits they only want to ally with you for meta reasons, are you ethically forced to attack them?
22 replies
Open
brainbomb (295 D)
17 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Selena Gomez vs. a Hot platter of Hush puppies and Fried Catfish
Is there an afterlife? Or is there reall just a giant reality tv orb that floats above Ariana Grande's feet.
30 replies
Open
Merirosvo (285 D)
13 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Scoring System Proposal
I don't know if this has been suggested but:
1. If there is a winner they get the whole pot
2. If there is a draw, it's always a seven* way draw regardless of elimination.
*Or however many
39 replies
Open
jmo1121109 (2537 D Mod)
16 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Congratulations Zultar
On winning the first 1 vs 1 game ever made (paused till now) on this site (gameID=187512).
29 replies
Open
leon1122 (183 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Rule Question
Can you support an enemy unit to attack your own unit?
11 replies
Open
WyattS14 (33 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Med Game
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=189125 This game is with 2 other friends of mine, and we couldn't get a full group together. We are in no way metagaming. The password is lollol
0 replies
Open
WyattS14 (33 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Posting password games in forum?
Was wondering if I could post a game's password I'm playing with two other friends in the forum? Two others couldn't join last minute
2 replies
Open
Matticus13 (633 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Best way to learn code
I want to learn how to code, but am having trouble deciding where to start. Their are many free resources, online classes, boot camps, etc. I would prefer to teach myself, but lack the knowledge to know what language I should be learning first and so on. Any tips from the experienced code writers here on WebDip?
47 replies
Open
taos (279 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
what happens when to fleets convoy the same army to the same point?
?
3 replies
Open
snowy801 (393 D)
15 Jan 17 UTC
Stalemate Gaming
Is there a rule against holding a stalemate indefinitely even though the situation is clear? I think he's hoping the rest of us give up and leave, which if it isn't against the rules yet then it should be.

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=189100
2 replies
Open
CAPT Brad (1186 D (B))
01 Jan 17 UTC
The Captain Will See You Now
I am starting my first long term gameID=187773 PM me for the password. It is one day turns and requires an eighty for reliability.
17 replies
Open
zultar (3900 D Mod (P))
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+5)
Removing Known World and Keeping World
See inside.
26 replies
Open
CommanderByron (423 D (S))
04 Jan 17 UTC
PPSC discussion thread:
I don't particularly care for PPSC. But saw that another thread was having this discussion as a sidebar and thought it fair to start a discussion thread. There is reasonable support for PPSC and regardless of the majority opinion the minority's should be heard.
Page 5 of 5
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
JECE (1072 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
My 'caprice' comment was basically referring to futile kamikaze attacks if that still isn't clear, Lethologica.
Lethologica (203 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
"My 'caprice' comment was basically referring to futile kamikaze attacks"

Do you play chess? There's an old saying that the threat is greater than the execution. Obviously someone who is reduced to actually making the kamikaze attack is doomed regardless, but that's a failure of diplomacy, because the person who can make the kamikaze attack should have used that fact to negotiate with the person who's pressuring him towards that extremity and get into the draw. Again, the idea that giving someone the kamikaze option reduces his options is absurd.

In PPSC, there's no incentive to stop attacking because the attacker is getting big (good if there's a solo) and narrowing the draw (good if there's no solo), and isn't worried about the small power's kingmaking abilities because there isn't much point in being the king.

"Do you have any evidence or arguments for why eliminations are more common in PPSC vs. WTA games?"

I make no claims on that scale. For all I know, WTA players get eliminated more because PPSC players don't know how to play the game, or vice versa.

"Right. Moreover, the given scenario with two Great Powers which dominate the board which is used to criticize PPSC scoring suggests that minor Great Powers face an inevitable solo from two directions."

Nope. The whole point of the criticism is when the solo is not tactically inevitable but the incentives make it inevitable. Really, there's no such thing as a solo that's inevitable from two directions.

"From a points-incentive perspective, those diplomatic options in a WTA scoring system don't hold the weight they do in a PPSC scoring system because simply holding territory is no guarantee of any points reward in WTA scoring whereas holding territory is a guarantee of points reward in PPSC scoring."

Are you for real? Holding territory is no guarantee of point rewards in WTA only if there's a solo threat. A solo threat outweighing mere point count is a *good thing* and does *not* make holding territory irrelevant, as territory confers the power to (a) become a solo threat and (b) survive draw-whittling.

"my most recent game"

I'll get back to this when I can see more than the final board state.
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
Nice verballing job Lethologica. ( we had corrupt police who would fabricate confessions from "suspects", a practise known as verballing )
You allege that MajorMitchell's PPSC modus operandi is " to ally, grow big together, then throw the solo to one member of the alliance "
The first two bits are reasonably accurate, my modus operandi is to try to form alliances and share the success and sc's...but "then throw the solo to one member of the alliance" is the misrepresentation that uses the emotive term "throw" with all that it implies. Nice smear job.
Think it out dopey...there will be tension, competition within the alliance, one player, perhaps because of luck in that he was favoured by silly play and disbands by his "victims" compared to the other player in the alliance who might have had to fight a tougher opponent, that one player for a variety of possible reasons ends up far better positioned to go for the solo...that I think would be more common than this idiotic view, imho, that all parties in an alliance will progress at uniformly equal rate, have equal strategic and tactical abilities & success.
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
So who gets the solo will be decided not by "throwing" but by a complex group of factors dopey
Lethologica (203 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
No, MM, all you've done is confirm that my view of your strategy is accurate. I don't know where you found the idiotic view that all parties in an alliance will always progress equally, but it sure wasn't from anything I said or any position I hold. On the other hand, agreeing beforehand to give the solo to whoever happens to be in better position for it is, in fact, throwing the solo.

You're the only one who doesn't recognize what you're doing. I don't expect you to change your mind about it. But not recognizing what you're doing doesn't change what you're doing.
Jeff Kuta (2150 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
PPSC = Participation Points Scoring System
Jeff Kuta (2150 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
Rather...

PPSC = Participation Points Scoring Calculation
Jeff Kuta (2150 D)
08 Jan 17 UTC
"In WTA, small Great Powers have zero points-incentive to play well unless they were lucky or smart enough to have placed their redoubt along a relevant stalemate line."

There is no luck in Diplomacy. A great power with 1 SC earns more points by drawing in a WTA game than surviving in a PPSC game.

A great power in a WTA game does not need to grow to still be relevant. They just need to convince others that their existence is relevant. That's called diplomacy.

"Do you have any evidence or arguments for why eliminations are more common in PPSC vs. WTA games?"

Yes. When one player is convinced to play for a 'strong second' then two can work together to eliminate all others. Winning is the most important thing in the game Diplomacy.

*Not letting someone else win* is the second most important thing in the game Diplomacy. PPSC encourages letting someone else win.

Tasnica (3366 D)
09 Jan 17 UTC
I don't think that PPSC is the best system for tournaments.

I do, however, think that it is quite a good system for casual play.
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
10 Jan 17 UTC
Ha, you said it yourself Lethologica, and if course all parties in alliances don't grow at uniformly equal rates, so that's one way how one will get the best opportunity to solo without there being any throwing of the game.
No agreement to throw the game is made, simply the agreement to work together against all other players first, not attack each other, and each player can go for the solo within that framework...
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
10 Jan 17 UTC
Then once it becomes clear which player has the best position to solo with PPSC the alliance can control the end game, eliminate all other players and split the points 9/17 to the winner and 8/17 to the loyal ally
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
10 Jan 17 UTC
People are diverse, so there's diversity in how we play this game, what we seek from it, so I'm suggesting there should be some diversity in scoring systems.. Carumba, if you don't like a non wta scoring system, Don't use it, all I'm suggesting is offering a non wta scoring system as an option for others who would like to use it.
The current status quo is an imposition of the hegemony of the "WTA" supporters. I say let's cater for diversity.
Lethologica (203 D)
10 Jan 17 UTC
"you said it yourself Lethologica"

Then fucking quote me. Except you can't, because nothing I've said anywhere had anything to do with alliances always growing equally. This is a concept you made up out of thin air.

As for the rest...I mean, you're describing the solo-throwing problem in a nutshell. It's just that because you never look beyond how nice it is for a member of the alliance to examine the game design implications--the resulting diplomatic stagnation of fixed alliance structures, and the stultifying effect on players who didn't make it into the initial winning alliance--you see it as a good thing.

Again, I don't expect you to do that looking or to change your mind (though you can if you like). If you want to think my objection to incentivized solo-throwing is that it's some kind of dishonorable match-fixing by the strong second, that's your prerogative. You're still making things abundantly clear for the rest of us.
MajorMitchell (1048 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
Well the only game that I think I can be regarded as having "thrown the solo" in was using a wta DSS scoring system, and there was a thread started in response to that, because it did cause a stir. I can assure y'all that the type of scoring system had nothing to do with my "controversial" decision and actions in that game.
Lethologica, it was where you said you didn't know where I'd formed the idiotic view that all alliance partners grow equally.

I don't have that view. A heap of factors will influence which player in the alliance I suggest as the example, gets the clear advantage to get the solo, it doesn't need the players to decide that the one with the sexjest player name will be the winner before they've played a move.
So you've described one of the factors that decides which player emerges to leadof the two in the alliance as the game is played..unequal growth.
Lethologica (203 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Quoting me saying that I don't have that view doesn't demonstrate that I have that view, MM. It demonstrates the opposite of that. I also never claimed *you* had that view. It's like your inability to read is a hydra--every time I correct your misreading, two more pop up.

And in your haste to disavow that view that no one ever claimed you had, you never addressed the actual problems with your view. Oh, well.
JECE (1072 D)
14 Jan 17 UTC
Bump so zultar, ghug, captainmeme others can see my long explanation on Page 4.


136 replies
Jamiet99uk (80 D (B))
13 Jan 17 UTC
(+2)
Abolish Sum-Of-Squares scoring
Ok, so I understand some people don't like PPSC and don't want it back. I disagree. BUT let's talk about SOS instead. It's a terrible scoring system and is directly contrary to the rulebook.
45 replies
Open
CptMike (1754 D)
14 Jan 17 UTC
New varant porposal -> µVariant
I was wondering if the following Variant was not "easy" to develop and it brings a crazy number of exciting possibilities...
13 replies
Open
Sandman99 (100 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Where my Libertarians at?
Just wondering if I have any fellow Libertarians on this god-forsaken website
28 replies
Open
VashtaNeurotic (1044 D)
13 Jan 17 UTC
(+3)
New Scoring System Proposal
I don’t know if this has been suggested but:
1. In draws have everyone alive share the pot equally (As they should because SoS is garbage)
2. In a solo, the soloist gains a portion of the pot equal to 18* divided by the number of centers controlled by the soloist or survivors (but not neutral centers or those of resigned powers) and the survivors split the remainder proportionally based on their center count.
*Or however many
7 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
13 Jan 17 UTC
Known World Realistic Speed
gameID=188977

7 days/phase to imitate how long it used to take messengers to move around. Let's do this thing. Rulebook press just to speed it up a little, and because why not
3 replies
Open
LeonWalras (670 D Mod)
09 Jan 17 UTC
ADVERTISE YOUR 1v1 GAMES HERE!
Is that the kind of thing that you think you might be into?
7 replies
Open
David E. Cohen (100 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
(+10)
From the Creator of Known World 901
I guess I need to look in on this site more often!
8 replies
Open
Rabid Acid Badger (50 D X)
13 Jan 17 UTC
Really want to test new map
Excites about this new map
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188972 password 901109
4 replies
Open
leon1122 (183 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Trump News Conference Discussion Thread
https://youtu.be/SUyAk0bYps0
51 replies
Open
Randomizer (214 D)
07 Jan 17 UTC
Trump wants US to pay to Build the Wall
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/politics/border-wall-house-republicans-donald-trump-taxpayers/?iid=ob_article_footer_expansion

Trump wants US to pay for his wall and then try to bill Mexico for it.
102 replies
Open
DammmmDaniel (103 D)
11 Jan 17 UTC
(+1)
Obama's Farewell Speech
I am a Diehard Republican believe it or not WepDip. But Obama's speech tonight has helped me realize many things tonight......

29 replies
Open
Chaqa (2774 D (B))
06 Jan 17 UTC
Going Away Game for the World Map
I wasn't a huge fan of it, but we should do a going away game for the World Map, similar to the Inaugural Known World 901 game we're running. Same deal, we get a mod to make the game the last one before they officially shut it off.
53 replies
Open
slypups (743 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Bug in attempted Known World move
This game: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=187862
Attempted Daju to Makuran with Al-Qatta'i support. Somehow, the support is showing as cut, even though no unit attacked Al-Qatta'i. Also, the orders page is showing an error. Please help.
5 replies
Open
The Diplomancer (100 D)
12 Jan 17 UTC
Is it just me, or is it dumb that you can retreat into other people's territory?
I know it's the rules of the game and all, but I feel like it would make more sense if you could only retreat into your own territory or neutral territory.
13 replies
Open
slypups (743 D)
04 Jan 17 UTC
So Long World Diplomacy IX
As some of you may have heard, the flawed World Dip IX map is going away. I made a game if you're interested in taking a final swing at this sucker: http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=188080
36 replies
Open
breaca (433 D (S))
12 Jan 17 UTC
Which is more balanced 1-1?
How are the two 1-1s shaping up in terms of balance? The consensus on AvF seems to be that Austria usually wins. What about IvG? Do we have any stats to suggest which is a more balanced match?
2 replies
Open
Page 347 of 355
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top