Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 381 of 383
FirstPreviousNextLast
brainbomb (163 D)
Mon 17 Jul UTC
Do Republicans think that reason is good or bad?
There seems to be debate on the right about whether reason is to be trusted or not. (The left is uniformly suspicious of spurrious argument). I'm seeing Republican lawmakers being skeptical about using reason but rightwing media seems fine with it
5 replies
Open
trip (171 D (B))
07 Jul 17 UTC
Lusthog Gunboat
Anyone interested in a few games? 50ish points, 36hr, all the other standard gunboat options. Open to anyone who doesnt have a lot of CDs and resigns.

Lusthog is a gunboat varient where you can't vote to draw until the board stalemates.
50 replies
Open
Hellenic Riot (1479 D Mod (G))
Tue 11 Jul UTC
(+12)
July GR Published
https://sites.google.com/site/phpdiplomacytournaments/theghost-ratingslist
16 replies
Open
CommanderByron (723 D (S))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
Help.
How do you deal with unprovoked verbal violence in a game. I know it isn't against a site rules. But if I mute a player will it mute them in a game thread?
17 replies
Open
ubercacher16 (45 D)
Mon 17 Jul UTC
Join?
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=202092

Live, bet 5.
0 replies
Open
yavuzovic (110 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
(+1)
Homelands
If i lose my home SCs, and i take different SC's. Can i build?
20 replies
Open
trip (171 D (B))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
(+2)
Mods
Please check your email. Thanks.
2 replies
Open
lazynomad (130 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Wings: Air Force rules variant for Diplomacy
This diplomacy variant introduces rules for using air force units (wings).
lazynomad (130 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
While adding a unit that can reach anywhere on the map reduces the pressure to engage in negotiation, having a wing that could be helpful to any player, anywhere on the map, opens up strategic possibilities and breathes new life into the game we love.

Airbases: Wings are built during the build phase on any vacant home SC. That SC will be the airbase where it will start and end every mission each turn. A wing may move its airbase to any other vacant home SC where units didn't bounce in the same turn (eg. a wing in sevastopol moves to vacant st. petersburg: sev-stp). If an airbase is attacked, any air missions from that base are grounded that turn and the wing remains there. If attacked by a greater force, the wing is destroyed. A wing in its airbase may hold and be supported in holding by adjacent ground units and other wings. Unlike other units, a wing may not support a unit in an adjacent space. A wing requires being able to take off and occupy other airspaces to provide support (see air support). If a wing is supported to hold in its airbase by another unit but the wing does something other than hold that turn, that support is ineffective.

Air Assaults: A wing may attack any space on the map. When it attacks a target it occupies the airspace over that target during that turn before returning to base (eg. a wing from berlin attacks london: ber-lon). The attack may be supported by other armies and fleets in adjacent spaces to the target (eg. a fleet in the english channel supports the attack: eng s ber-lon). If the attack is successful, the wing doesn't occupy the space but returns to its airbase, leaving the the vanquished forces to retreat or be destroyed and the conquered space vacant. As many wings may attack the same space as you want - an exception to the diplomacy rule of only one unit occupying a space at once (eg. a wing in munich supports an air attack by a wing in berlin on moscow: ber-mos, mun s ber-mos). Equal forces bounce back to their airbases and a larger force of wings destroys a smaller force.

Air Support: A wing supports a unit to hold by occupying the airspace over that unit during that turn before returning to base (eg. a wing in berlin supporting piedmont to hold: ber s pie hold). More than one wing may provide air support in the same space (eg. wings from berlin and munich support piedmont to hold: ber s pie hold, mun s pie hold, pie hold. This would hold against an attack by a ground force of 3 units).
A wing supports a ground attack by occupying the airspace of the space being attacked before returning to base (eg. a wing in berlin supports an army attacking vienna from budapest: ber s bud-vie).
If the airspace being supported, whether supporting to hold or attack, is attacked by another wing, air support of all supporting wings in that space is cut. If the air-supporting wing(s) is attacked by a larger force of wings while providing air support, it is (they are) destroyed.

Airlifts: A wing can pick up an army from any space and drop it off in any vacant land space on the map where no units bounced this turn. This is similar to convoying. Airlifts can be disrupted by attacking the originating airbase or the dropoff space, leaving the army and airlifting wing remaining where they are. If a greater force of wings attacks the dropoff space, the airlifting wing and the unit airlifted are destroyed. Airlifts may be supported by other wings (eg. a wing in munich supports an airlift by a wing in berlin of an army from portugal to moscow: using 'a' for airlift, ber a por-mos, mun s por-mos, por-mos).

Optional: Delay introduction of wings, allowing them to be built only after a year or two if players feel these units are too powerful to be introduced immediately.

These rules are designed to be relatively simple and balance the power of these new air units by reducing available space for a player to build, successful wing attacks not occupying the spaces attacked, air support being cut easily by other wings, wing missions being disruptible with air defences by attacking airbases and target spaces, and greater forces of wings destroying weaker forces.

I hope you like these rules. Let me know how they work out for you.

lazynomad
lazynomad (130 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
It ends stalemate lines.
Oztra (55 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
ees thees leget
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Diplomacy is not a tactical wargame. It is a game of strategic negotiation.
Deeply_Dippy (395 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Yes, Jamiet99uk, but as the threat of air attack exists as a factor in strategic negotiations there is no reason why these shouldn't be replicated in a Diplonacy variant.

My only thought was that in practical terms there is essentially no difference between 'air assault' and 'air support'. I'd have wings providing support only but that cannot be cut.
yavuzovic (110 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
I think we need two SC for every wings. And dislodged wings cannot reteat. Destroyed air forges can't fly. But this may harm spirit of Diplomacy.
Bladerunners (934 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
agree with jamiet - too many people think this is a wargame.... but "if" airpower was to be introduced .. it would have to be at relevant timeline .. i.e. for classic game - wright brothers first flight was 1903 and at time of world war 1 were just starting to be used for combat (but mainly reconnaissance)
lazynomad (130 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
Deeply_Dippy, an air assault by one wing would cut all the air support at the target space, even if there were 10 wings there providing air support to the ground unit below.
Wings are more useful for supporting ground attacks because they can't capture and occupy a target themselves.
Bladerunners (934 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
no such thing as an 'airwing' in 1901 ... ;-)
lazynomad (130 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
(+1)
yavuzovic,
Each wing occupies only one home SC. That limits a player's ability to build and, since it is always occupied by the wing at the end of the turn, no other units can move through there. I agree that wings should be destroyed when their airbase is destroyed.
Bladerunners (934 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
(+2)
each wing is shot down by rifle fire of average soldier in 1903
The Ambassador (149 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
I assume you guys are aware of how wings are used in the Dissolution variant over at PlayDip: http://www.playdiplomacy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=804&t=54793

Worth reviewing.
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
The ability to reach anywhere on the map, from any other point, is unrealistic for a game starting in 1901. In 1901 no viable military aircraft would have been able to fly from, say, London to Moscow.
MajorMitchell (984 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
Imho, it's just not practical, and only complicates the game unnecessarily. For example, if you have "air units" then shouldn't they be allowed to move further in one move than an army or fleet ?
MajorMitchell (984 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
If you want army, Navy and Air forces, then design a completely new and different game
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
If you want that kind of game, try playing Axis Axis and Allies with 5 separate players, with negotiation phases.
A_Tin_Can (1660 D)
Sun 16 Jul UTC
For me, the big question is why? What would this variant bring over classic diplomacy? If the answer is "it would be cool to have air units", then I don't think I'm personally interested.
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
I agree with ATC. And I don't say that often!


18 replies
SantaClausowitz (300 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Strategy games on regular laptops
I'm laptop shopping and I'm hearing that the new- mid range laptops can't play games, even strategy games, is this true?
11 replies
Open
Valis2501 (3705 D (G))
Sun 16 Jul UTC
(+2)
DNC RIGGED LOSERS FINALS
SHOULDA BEEN HBOX
1 reply
Open
faded box (100 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Rocket League
Anyone else addicted to this game?
0 replies
Open
faded box (100 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Live
Live anyone?
1 reply
Open
TiconderogaHB (129 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
Replacement Persia needed
Public Press Only Ancient Mediteranean
gameID=201578
1 reply
Open
brainbomb (163 D)
Tue 11 Jul UTC
(+1)
Webdip Conservatives have convinced me my world view is flawed.
I have decided to become a Republican and a Libertarian because the arguments made on this forum have convinced me the Democrat party is no better than the pro-slavery radicals of the 1860's. I have learned that tax cuts for the wealthy, deportations, and putting business and moneymaking ahead of health of US citizenry is paramount
235 replies
Open
umbletheheep (169 D)
Sat 15 Jul UTC
New Classic Game Starting in 20min.
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=201859
0 replies
Open
Valis2501 (3705 D (G))
Tue 11 Jul UTC
Donald Trump Jr's emails released.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/11/us/politics/document-Donaldtrumpjr.html?_r=0
38 replies
Open
brainbomb (163 D)
Thu 13 Jul UTC
Texas law allows open carry of Swords
Starting in September, finally - true American potential is acheived. We can now carry swords into work/battle/recess/village inn ect. https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/11/texas-law-will-allow-open-carry-knives-swords.amp.html
6 replies
Open
swordsman3003 (6954 D (G))
Mon 10 Jul UTC
Top gunboaters game
Could we get enough interest to get a game going? I want only to invite players ranked in the top 50 (ghostratings or points).
13 replies
Open
Smokey Gem (97 D)
Mon 10 Jul UTC
Users: Logged on:75 - Playing:1712 - Registered:87165
Are there really 87165 registere players ..and 77000 odd games completed. That leave 1712 playing currently in so Im no accountant but those numbers seem a bit out of whack..

18 replies
Open
Hauta (1592 D (S))
Wed 12 Jul UTC
(+1)
It is always darkest before the dawn
Given the Don Jr. revelations, this might seem like a bleak time for the Republicans, but if they can wait out the media coverage without breaking rank they will be have saved Trump. There is no larger shoe yet to drop and it will be morning in America again.
55 replies
Open
Hellenic Riot (1479 D Mod (G))
Thu 13 Jul UTC
Replacement Russia Needed
1 reply
Open
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Thu 13 Jul UTC
China has a TELEPORTER
This is fascinating news:

http://time.com/4854718/quantum-entanglement-teleport-space/
3 replies
Open
brainbomb (163 D)
05 Jul 17 UTC
Why shouldnt North Dakota have a nuclear weapons programme?
The US has nuclear weapons. We got silos and shit all over Montana/ND and SD. Who are we to say that North Dakota is not entitled to secede and have their own nuclear arsenal?
20 replies
Open
JamesYanik (309 D)
Wed 12 Jul UTC
Digital forums and free speech
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40577858

i think we all understand the implications of this: twitter is a digital forum open to the public, but it's also privately operated and it has set rules. the decision on this case is going to have sweeping effects on the internet and internal law alike
4 replies
Open
LeonWalras (660 D)
Wed 12 Jul UTC
(+2)
Webdip Conservatives have convinced me my world is flawed.
I had always suspected it might be.
1 reply
Open
michael_b (656 D)
Wed 12 Jul UTC
Board Pieces World Diplomacy 2017
See Reply
7 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
Sun 09 Jul UTC
IndyCar and Nascar vs F1 and Touring Car
Why are American motor racing events based on going around and around and around an oval circuit with no difficult turns or chicanes or anything? So boring.
5 replies
Open
Marneus_Calgar (180 D)
01 Jul 17 UTC
(+3)
Diplomacy Survival Game!
Each person may non-consecutively take one point from one nation to another.
110 replies
Open
Carebear (95 D)
01 Jul 17 UTC
WDC 2017 in Oxford
Just curious, which webDiplomacy regulars will be going to WDC?
105 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (75 D (B))
04 Jul 17 UTC
(+1)
Why shouldn't North Korea have a nuclear weapons programme?
The US has nuclear weapons. The UK does. France does. China does. Russia does. Israel probably does. India and Pakistan might also.

Who are we to say that North Korea is not similarly entitled?
55 replies
Open
Page 381 of 383
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top