How would that work? I guess someone would type /draw the /draw would be turned into white and the GM would say the amount of players to vote for a draw.

Well in the next update the draw votes are being turned into buttons. There would be no notification whatsoever (as that would give it away). However, once everyone has the draw button turned on then the game will draw itself.

ah that sounds good

I think that was MY original suggestion wayyyy back

Oh, an update! Nifty.

wow, great idea.

would you know how many people have voted for a draw or not? (even if no actual names).

That would be a nice idea, but I'm not sure. The whole idea of diplomacy in my mind is that all orders are clear. If you were to hide who had voted for a draw, I would think that's like hiding peoples failed orders.
As another possibility, how would it be if to draw you had to vote to draw *as an order* that phase. Then, at the end of the phase, people who had voted to draw would show up in the failed orders listings. If the game was drawn, it would show up as such

If you did hide who voted but give a message, it wouldn't be too hard, just say "Gamemaster: 3/5 players have voted for a draw" - assuming two had already been eliminated

You could do it along order lines. Thats an interesting theory and its how them do it on Play By Email. Meaning you would have to keep submitting draws every turn and no one could "sneak a draw".

To answer Bravehearts question: only if you use Figles system. Under my original proposal you wouldn't because it would make it clear who voted due to login times etc.

I don't think hiding draws is like hiding orders, its a different part of the game. You should usually be able to use diplomacy to figure it out anyway. But I can envision a three way draw being held up but both the other players claim to have voted for it. An interesting scenairio indeed.

How about just a report at each phase processing showing how many players had voted for a draw by that moment. Timing would no longer give away who did what, when but we would still know if a draw is being sought by other players. I have to suspect that if there is no report of draws requested, players will not vote for a draw thinking there is no support and now a player will have to raise his head by requesting votes for one in global. Kind of kills the whole anonymous thing.

I'd also suggest draws only become effective when the turn processes normally, not when all votes are in. That avoids the sneak draw by one player who was holding things up, finds he had a bad turn, then throws in a vote before the others can react. Draws should then only happen on Spring/Fall turns, not retreats & builds to make sure everyone has a chance to change their mind.

Why - If we allow everyone to finalize their orders, and then run the turn early, why not allow them to finalize their votes?
Just to say, I only came up with the 'treat it as an order' idea here, but I can see a lot of positives with that. Does anyone see a significant disadvantage? The worst I can think of is that it might confuse new players who would ask
"This unit of mine won't go anywhere and isn't on the map. It's only asking to move to a draw. This is a bug"

In most face to face (FtF) tournaments and even in many social games, the draw vote is secret and players often try to cheat in the vote to show people how they are voting.

It is a common diplomatic tactic in the game, to propose or verbally support a draw and then vote against it and blame someone else.

I prefer open ballots as it provides more entertainment value for me to see how to gather and manipulate peer group pressure than the secret ballot method, but that is more of a personal choice than anything else.

Well Edi supports open ballots because the peer group pressure is definately more conducive to draws.

Unlike Edi, I believe draws are best avoided, which is why I prefer closed ballot.

If I may, I'd have to agree that closed ballots are better.

And I'd like to add the idea of a surreder button. Sometimes, people know they're going to lose, or they don't want to be in a game they joined, so tey could surrender, instantly going into CD, rather than having to leave their nation open to attack for two turns.

You would also need to RANDOMLY put the message from the Gamemaster. If you see that I logged off at 7:53pm, and the Gamemaster put a message at 7:52pm that 1/5 people had voted for a draw, it kind of narrows it down.

There would either be no gamemaster message or there would be one at the end of each turn.

Please note Centurian: I do not like open ballots because it is more conduce of draws, I like open ballots because it is more entertaining (fun) for me to see the manipulation of peer group pressure to get a desired result...whatever that may be for the game and that may be a draw and may be a concession (my personal favorite).