AFAIK no. It rather spoils the game in my opinion as it discourages minor powers when against strong two-power alliances. I don't know if other systems have been suggested such as half WTA and half PPSC. Or sharing the points in the ratio of the square of the number of supply centres. I think that there should be a bit more incentive to win, even in PPSC.

'half WTA' has got to be an oxymoron...

WTH then

"A win is a win and you should always aim for it!"
jadayne, that is one person's opinion. Some of us don't share it.

New variant idea: Try to be eliminated first!

WTH = PPSC :-)

Dipper Don is right. The old board game may be about the win, but I play for "team victory" even if it is just a "draw" on my stats. I believe being able to make a game long alliance without stabbing or being stabbed requires some reasonably decent diplomacy skills, and I like to try for that. I've had to fight hard on some games to keep my allies with me, but managed to do it.

You should try it. Start a game. See who wants to be your ally and who is geographically and politically convenient to ally with, then try to make that alliance last the whole game.

When I did it my last game, I was called a cheater and metagamer by major Mulfanction. Making strong allies for one.game is prohibited.

cool... by solving the oxymoron we changed the meaning of half WTA so that now WTH=PPSC.

WT3/4 would be closer to the original suggesion :-P

Remember that the phpDiplomacy community has a unique concept on the relationship between a Win and coming in second to a win. That concept is not shared by any other non-php scoring or ranking system.

You can bitch and moan about it but it is something that you are all stuck with (or can support and applaud in its uniqueness) until someone wants to step up, do some coding, access the Data Base and present a totally different concept in scoring here.

And yes, in PPSC there are many cases when there are multiple players around that you would be better off on a point system to let someone else win rather than draw the game with 4 or 5 or 6 players, (not that it has ever stopped me from drawing a game that I felt like drawing).

wait, what is the unique concept -that drawing is ok or that it isn't? I have heard both.

the unique concept is ppsc.

And Edi can pretty draw any game he wants to - look at his stats. No defeats, no survives. He either wins, or somehow convinces everyone to draw. Pretty amazing actually.

But here's my opinion, since that's what you're really waiting for ;-)

I think that a draw is for team variants and stalemates. Or a really good game long team alliance, I suppose, but I have no problem stabbing for the win, and it is actually considered an honored part of the game and it's history from what I understand.

sidenote - I know the points don't mean everything, but something struck me very funny about the following exchange:

Sent from: figlesquidge (2140 ) Sent: Sun 05 AM
A win is a win and you should always aim for it!

Sent from: DipperDon (0 ) Sent: Sun 09 AM
"A win is a win and you should always aim for it!"
jadayne, that is one person's opinion. Some of us don't share it.

hahahaha - seriously though, the zero points don't mean anything in DD's case as he is in several high pot games at the moment. It was still funny though ... to me.

"And Edi can pretty draw "

haha makes it sound like I think he's an artist or something

should have been "And Edi can pretty MUCH draw ..."