Even if I try to avoid them, I agree with you that draws aren't against the spirit of the game.

But one might say they are against the spirit of old phpDiplomacy v.0.7 (as they weren't implemented) :P

Are you by any chance diplomat? Haha, just kidding.

I'm not saying I agree with this view, but I've noticed you cited the pot as your reason for draws being okay in your book...

Do keep in mind that some of these people also believe that points are not in the spirit of play either, so your argument will hold no water for them.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with that view... just pointing it out. Don't shoot the messenger.

Fair nuff. I also think a three way victory is superior to elimination ;)

Oh Noirin, you dinosaur.

stratagos, but winning is better than a three way! Have you considered that it's a diplomatic ploy aimed to guilt you out of a draw? Apparently it backfired.

I don't know. I've had a few 3-ways in my time, and I must say that they were all quite superior to a solo... (wink, wink/nudge, nudge)

Chris, I'm green and noob compared to you, user #2^8 :P

Anyway, draws had to be added, as games ending with stalemate lines started to appear, but I believe no one had problems before they existed.

If I remember well the point system was the thing who generated the biggest debate at its introduction, as it changes the way some people play. But after all, the stats in our profiles do the same, the ghost rating lists again do the same, so... ;)

In the PPSC discussion someone commented that the beauty of WTA was that the most important thing was not letting anyone else win, with winning yourself being secondary, so by that definition a draw is the second best outcome of a game and more likely to happen as it satisfies more people. The person describing this did far better than I just did, but it made me very interested in playing WTA when I get a bit higher up in the point totals so I'm not playing against newbs (like me) that don't know this.

Well, I wouldn't say winning yourself is secondary, but before draws were implemented I generally had the two objectives:
1. Win
2. Don't let anyone else win, because then you can't win!

I've since altered it slightly to accommodate draws into the picture, and as well I've started to become a little more flexible in terms of objectives so as to not be so predictable. But WTA is definitely the way to go. =)

Noirin, stalemates were rare back in the days you could build in any SC!

When I started you could do interesting things like disband yourself (I still miss that, I hope some day we'll be able to add it as a variant), but build anywhere? Lol, I didn't see that. Alas, it's impossible to replay the old games to see it in action.

"but winning is better than a three way"
chrisp....

isnt having a three way a win too?

Dammit, Ukla already beat me to the three-way joke.

Noirin, oh yeah! You could dislodge yourself, an easy way to retreat into which ever territory was vacant, avoiding those pesky 50-50 guesses! But yes, at one point you could build at any open SC you controlled. Made for much shorter games.

Haha WhiteSammy.

Onar, I don't think you mean Ukla.

Hell yeah, he did. Look up.

Sent from: Ukla Online (0 ) Sent: 07:10 PM
I don't know. I've had a few 3-ways in my time, and I must say that they were all quite superior to a solo... (wink, wink/nudge, nudge)

He did. I tell you, my six-way was more than a bit odd, and didn't last very long.

lol @ ukla and Onar ... i had to read ukla's 2nd post to get it and now feel silly for not getting it the first time ;P

precious.


as for the idea that a draw is 'not in the spirit of the game' ... Malarky... what a load of crudderoo... totall horse manure...

a draw SHOULD happen in about 60-70% of the games IF all the players were competent and never CDd... but since i would venture we have a very low ratio of truly competent players and certainly minimal if not zero games without CDs, we wont have the 'right' draw rates on this site - ever.

why? b/c even more important than winning is NOT losing. it is... the game is simulating WWI... keep in mind, of course you want to take over the world... but more importantly you want to make sure you are still ruling SOMETHING... at least that's the historical premise...

Not to mention that in FtF, you have to watch everyone else for hours after you've been eliminated.

LoL.. you guys make me laugh, making you laugh..

I need to get out of the noob bracket. Too many games are tipped (some in my favor, some not) by a CD or two. I think that's a shame, but I understand; it's the noob bracket.
The worst one for me, so far, is in my gunboat game. I'm playing a cat and mouse game with everyone around me, and the friggin Austrians CD'd right off the bat, strengthening everyone on the other side of the world from me. This somehow reminds me of a depressive bald kid (who owns a beagle) and something about kicking a football..

The best thing about everyone assuming that a draw is "not good enough" is that they are less likely to stop you winning!

I think that was the point I was trying to make.

Regardless of your feelings on draws, assuming that someone *else* won't find a draw acceptable - and basing your moves on that assumption - is the height of folly.

I'm not saying *you* have to draw, but assuming that *I* won't is... suboptimal