Old Forum - webDiplomacy

Page 660 of 1419

Draugnar (0

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

So the negotiations are done and...

I got what I was willing to take salary wise (would have liked another $5K a year, but this will work) and I accepted the position. I start as a corporate member and cease being a consultant next Friday. Woot!

18 replies

Open

acmac10 (120

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

New Feature on HOF

Is that a new feature on the Hall of Fame where it tells you your rank? Eg, I am on the bottom with 121

at 3000 something. I've only noticed it now

1 reply

Open

Bob Genghiskhan (1258

)
26 Sep 10 UTC

Need a Russia...

Baskineli asked me to request a substitute Russia, for some reason...

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=37035

2 replies

Open

Baskineli (100

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

New game

200

, Anonymous, WTA, 2 days/phase

gameID=38919

0 replies

Open

diplonerd (173

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

Live Med Game

We just got to 4 last time, we got 5?

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38903

3 replies

Open

butterhead (90

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

can someone explain to me...

what is all of this i am seing about diplomacy leagues and diplomacy world cup and stuff? ive seen so many posts about them and i dont know what they are.

6 replies

Open

Chrispminis (916

)
21 Sep 10 UTC

Please permit me to gloat! ; )

Feel free to gloat about your recent accomplishments as well.

92 replies

Open

Xeterog (100

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

NMR/CD

Is there a game on this site that no one ever CD's or NMR's in a game...in EVERY game I've played so far, someone (usually more) NMR's at some point..usually one of the leading powers. Even in a 'league' game, I've seen it happen now.

5 replies

Open

Maniac (189

)
21 Sep 10 UTC

Not a cheating accusation

Just seeking your thoughts on an incident. The incident has already been ruled on and I have accepted the ruling. (see inside)

Maniac (189 )
21 Sep 10 UTC

Some time ago I was playing in two games, I was doing ok in the first game and the second game had only just got under way. There was a guy in both games with me who happened to be a neighbouring power. I offered him an alliance in the second game a received this response…

Depends on how (game name) bodes...if we can come to a good alliance there and work together well, then yeah, I'd love to do it twice...but if you snarl at peace efforts there and attack, how can I trust you here? We can be a dynamic duo …. or Capulets and Montagues- I'll leave it to you, though the former idea is far more attractive to me...

I advised him that I had difficulty keeping track of one game at a time and we should play the board without outside influences. He droned on about how it was natural for players to take into account how they acted in other games and players records etc….

I considered his approach to be a stone wall approach to meta game so posted my thoughts about metagaming / cheating in the global tab. My problem was that if he was doing this kind of things to others and they accepted his logic, I could end up being the victim of meta gamers.

I also reported it to a mod.

The mod ruled that the other player wasn’t metagaming and wouldn’t take any action against him either in relation to the game or site wide.

I accepted the mod’s ruling – finished the game, and won’t be playing with the player again. I am playing far less at the moment anyway – trying to end all my outstanding games.

My question to you guys is…was this player metagaming and should he have been sanctioned?

I never posted my accusations here at the time, and have refrained from naming names here. Anyone involved in the games should also avoid pointing the finger. I would like to move this on to how approaches like this should be dealt with in the future, rather than me arguing about this particular incident.

DJEcc24 (246 )
21 Sep 10 UTC

thats a tricky situation. its not like he came out saying that he would attack you or supprot you based off of a previous game. plus he had a point that players do often play the same and you can't always trust them.

TheGhostmaker (1545 )
21 Sep 10 UTC

I believe this was also in the leagues?

The Lord Duke (3898 )
21 Sep 10 UTC

I also struggle with this gaming attitude.
I play everygame as a seperate game.
I never research or remember other players or what they did or didnot do in other games except for players whom I consider to be closed minded & intransigent in their diplomacy. Then I try never to enter a game in which they are registered.
It is my belief that you should review your position & the position of all neigbouring players at the start of each season & then order in accordance to what is in your best interest & those of your current ally, which could change very frequently.
I have no problem working with someone who has just stabbed me or attacked me as long as it is to my or our benefit if we do so.
I have major difficulties with players that stick with alliances even when it does them harm or refuse to work with you because they are wounded by your previous actions.
I think some players play to form friendships & to become partners in a draw.
They forget that it is a game that you play to win & they often become personally offended by your orders if they are contrary to what you have agreed with them.
I am always true to my word unless it benifits me to be otherwise.
It is for them to evaluate the risk & reward factors involved & that is the skill of the game.
It was designed to be a fluid & ever changing game in order that you can, if everyone was brilliant at diploming, keep a game evenly balanced for ever, yet still be both entertaining, absorbing & enjoyable for all.
You should only get a winner if some players were incapable of remebering it is just a game, rather than cutting their noses off to spite their own faces.

Draugnar (0 )
21 Sep 10 UTC

If it was in a league, then you have to consider the other games and he was within his rights to do so. I have an ally in C2 that became a league long ally do to position in Games 3 and 4.

And it is not unacceptable (nor against the spirit of the game) to consider the play style and reliability of the other players when considering their offers. The boardgame was played amongst friends, usually the same group, and those friends would definitely remember how each of them played.

So if you don't want to risk this problem, only play anon games. Otherwise you should realize the best will do their due diligence and study their opponents.

Maniac (189 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

Thanks for your input guys

@Ghost - it was a league situation yes.

@ Draugnar - I understand that people may want to look at how people play, thir perpensity to stab etc. I don't necessarily condone it , but I do understand it. If we agree that it is ok to look at people's histories that is one thing, but to say "if you do this is game A - the consequences in game B are..." Is looking at history, it's trying to effect it.

hopsyturvy (521 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

Yup, but league games are an exception - not just because you're playing 4 games in quick succession with the same players, but because this sort of behaviour is *explicitly allowed* in the league rules. Doing this in non-league games would be another thing entirely.

TheGhostmaker (1545 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

The issue is whether it was cross-gaming, or meta-gaming in the sense of taking into account the nature of the players. It was very borderline, certainly, and I erred on the side of cautioning without taking definite action. Thus, I did ask the player to refrain from doing this in the future, but did not penalise him in any way. I think if this cross-gaming but-not-quite became common practise, it would dramatically change the leagues, likely for the worse, but at the same time I wanted to allow the league to continue with as little fall-out as possible.

Maniac was understandably in disagreement with my decision, and decided to leave, which was a shame, but I think that the fact that the problem didn't have wider repercussions suggests that my call wasn't too far off the mark.

hopsyturvy (521 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

Oh, I thought it was totally allowed in the leagues. My bad. Not that I go in for that sort of thing myself, it's a bit boring really :)

pastoralan (100 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

This is a relevant discussion for the league I'm in (D2). There's all sorts of stuff going on that would be clearly against the rules in a non-league game, but it isn't getting reported. I posted on global chat that I would ally with anyone against the league leader, and there's at least one alliance that's working across several games. None of this seems wrong to me. Even the multi-game alliance isn't as much of an issue as it might seem: in game 3, one of the alliance members (also a league leader) was immediately taken out.

Alderian (2425 )
22 Sep 10 UTC

Considering the league standings is allowed. So allying with or against someone because of league standings is one thing. But it sounds like this person went a bit beyond that. In a non-league game it would seem to definitely be against the rules.

pastoralan (100 )
23 Sep 10 UTC

I don't think that the two players sat down before the league and decided to have a multi-game alliance so they could split the top two spots. It looks more like they found they could work together well and kept on doing it.

Baskineli (100 )
23 Sep 10 UTC

@Maniac

Metagaming is not cheating. Metagaming is the use of information available outside of the game - while playing one. Diplomacy is a game of negotiation, and knowing the character of who you are negotiating with is very important if you want to succeed in negotiation. Some consider each game different from another, but this is incorrect - you pass information from one game to another, learn from it about yourself, positions and of course other players.

In addition, look at the latest "how reliable am I" discussion. There is a lot of information there regarding how various players play - or rather how they state they play. Isn't it a pity not to use such information when you play against them?

Now, about the specific issue. I think it is illegal to connect closely two games. Sayings like "if you will betray me here, I will attack you there" should raise an alarm - however people are not being punished for sayings, but for doings.

To make the long story short, I am with TGM. Maybe that player did something distasteful, but he didn't act upon it, and even if he did - you can never know he wouldn't. Would it be ok if he attacked you in the other game if you betrayed him in this game, but without saying it to you? Would it make it more... right?

Jamiet99uk (1307 )
23 Sep 10 UTC

@ Baskineli:

Please STOP saying "Metagaming is not cheating".

You should know full well that some forms of Metagaming ARE cheating because they are against the rules.

To quote from the site rules:

"2. No Meta-gaming

You can't make alliances for reasons outside a game, such as because you are friends, relatives or in return for a favour in another game. This is known as metagaming and is against the rules because it gives an unfair advantage to those involved. If you are worried that you can't stab someone because you want to stay friends, then that's fair enough but you can't join a game with them."

Draugnar (0 )
23 Sep 10 UTC

Rule 2 does *not* apply to League games though when the cross game alliance is to take the leader out and better your own position in the league. Look to the present C2 games. LeoDaVinci and I worked together throughout games 3 and 4 because we knew that Plastic had 8

already while 4 more of us had 4

. We joined with one of the other two 4 pointers to have a four way draw (with someone without points) and see to Plastic's elimination. Plastic still had 8

but we three now had 7. In the last game, we stuck together and brought along the other 4 point player from earlier so he'd reach 8, but we'd reach 11. But the only reason we allied in game 4 was because our board positions dictated it as well. Had that not been the case, something different might have happened. And no, game 4 isn't technically over, but we have agreements between the three remaining players to draw after the build phase.

Baskineli (100 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

@Jamiet

Metagaming is not cheating. The question is where do you draw the line regarding where it is "in game" and "out of the game". Some people think that metagaming is using in game A the information you've learned about a player in game B - which is incorrect.

Obviously, some forms of metagaming ARE cheating (allying someone just because you are friends or relatives), and some other forms of metagaming ARE NOT cheating (such as using the information you've gathered in previous games about player's way of playing and character, or looking at his history and seeing how many wins VS draws he has and deducing how trustworthy he is in promising that 17-17 draw).

So, if some forms of metagaming ARE cheating, and some others AREN'T, then plain logic dictates that metagaming is not cheating.

If it was up to me, I would change the "No Meta-gaming" in rules to "No cheating" or clarify what exactly is not allowed, since obviously some types of metagaming are allowed on this site, despite what the rules (mistakenly) say.

Alderian (2425 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

"if some forms of metagaming ARE cheating, and some others AREN'T, then plain logic dictates that metagaming is not cheating."

Really? Is that how it works? So since it is legal to kill a person in certain cases (executions, war, etc...) but it is illegal in other cases, plane logic dictates that killing is not illegal?

In any case, you are arguing technical definitions and not the subject itself so it really doesn't matter much I guess.

Baskineli (100 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

You are right, this is exactly how it works. The doctor who executes the prisoner who was sentenced by the judge to a death sentence is doing a legal killing. So - yes, not all kills are illegal. Same goes for soldiers who kill an enemy in a combat - they are not going to be prosecuted by the state.

It is important to argue technical definitions, because some people here think that deducing what a person will do according to his previous game is metagaming and thus illegal, while clearly this is not the situation.

While some forms of metagaming are illegal, some others are not only legal, but constitute a large part of Diplomacy game, thus the ruling that "metagaming is illegal" is simply wrong.

Draugnar (0 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

Bask is correct. It's simple set logic. Set A is metagaming. Set B is cheating. There is an area where the two sets intersect, but the statement "metagaming is cheating" is patently false because metagaming is only cheating in very specific circumstances. Same thing applies with killing. There is accidental, justified (i.e. Self defense or defense of another), manslaughter (usually accidental but a result of negligence or some other illegal activity) and murder. The last two are illegal but not the first two, therefore the statement "killing another human being is illegal" is patently false as well.

Alderian (2425 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

I wasn't arguing that metagaming is cheating or killing is illegal. I was arguing against saying metagaming is not cheating and killing is legal without the words "some forms of" at the start.

Draugnar (0 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

Gotcha. And I agree that killing and metagaming are neither leagl nor illegal. In both cases it falls into the "can be" category.

Maniac (189 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

Thx for your comments guys...whilst I think that the wording of the rules is correct "You can't make alliances for reasons outside a game" I think that if the community accept that some people will look at other players' histories and style of play etc, then I would go with the majority and allow such actions. However, I think there is a clear line between looking at what people did in a previous game and trying to link what is happening in two concurrent games.

I also think we should take follow the example of snooker and cricket in the UK. In their rules they consider that you are bringing the game into disrepute if you do not report an approach to "cheat". This would stop people making approaches to metagame as they know that there is a chance they will be reported. It does require the mods to clearly set out is and isn't acceptable and what the consequences are for breaching these rules.

Just for the sake of completeness, whilst my incident happened in the league, it was not related to trying to stop a league leader or anything like that.

AlexNesta (239 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

Frankly, I don't understand the discussion here - the rules page of webdiplomacy.net clearly specifies that ALL kinds of metagaming are against the rules: "You can't make alliances for reasons outside a game". There are no exceptions! I really think the moderators should either enforce this or change the rules.

Baskineli (100 )
24 Sep 10 UTC

@AlexNesta

Ah, now we are hitting the real issue - what is the game? Is a single game of Diplomacy consists the whole game? Or are we playing a long game of Diplomacy while we are on this site?

This reminds me of an issue I posted a few weeks earlier, with quotes of some of the world's best Diplomacy players, saying that the personalities are part of the game. How can you deduce about a personality of a player, without knowing his past?

I waited a lot of time for a thread like this. My position and understanding of the game is quite simple - we play a continuous game of Diplomacy, each starting with 100

's, and the game ends only when we quit playing here. Everything that happens on this site is legal, with the only exception of "one must not enter a game with a pre-arranged alliance".

What is illegal is the use of tools and information outside the site. Multi? Illegal. Allies-just-because-friends-or-neighbors? Illegal. "You help me in this game and I will help you in the next game" - Illegal.

AlexNesta (239 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

Baskinelli,

I think both the game rules and the site make it is very clear what a "game" is. The fact that you press the "New Game" button for each "game instance" clearly contradicts your view that "we play a continuous game of Diplomacy, each starting with 100 @'s, and the game ends only when we quit playing here".

Also, there is another contradiction in your logic - you say "Everything that happens on this site is legal, with the only exception of one must not enter a game with a pre-arranged alliance", but then immediately follow up with "You help me in this game and I will help you in the next game - Illegal." Why is it illegal, then?

AlexNesta (239 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

PS: Consider that the "next game" may already have started.

kestasjk (99 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

Remember sometimes it's just impossible to know someones motives, whether it is really metagaming or not.. It's a very difficult position to have to make a judgment call on something where you can never know for sure (the people involved might even be influenced by other games without being consciously aware of it).

Maniac and most others seem to understand this, but any debate over what the rules should be (which I think is a debate worth having) should always take into account how difficult they are to enforce

AlexNesta (239 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

Kestas, I totally understand, but I think clearly (re)stating that all metagaming is illegal together with Maniac's proposal for the ability of reporting such things as metagaming approaches would really improve things.
Anyway, there's always the option to play anonymous games...

svenson (106 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

I know this thread ended last night... wish we could bring it back to the front of the forum.

Alex makes a good point. If everyone truly believed that every form of metagaming was undesireable (including looking up a prospective allies past play), then the simple solution would be to make ALL games anonymous. But we all know, that part of the fun of FTF games, is the community it creates. Community implies knowledge, which implies a limited form of "metagaming", as currently defined. What we need is a new term for limited activities that are within the scope of the type of game exercised in FTF, such as "communigaming" (hopefully better than that).

Baskineli (100 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

Svenson +1

@AlexNesta
"Also, there is another contradiction in your logic - you say "Everything that happens on this site is legal, with the only exception of one must not enter a game with a pre-arranged alliance", but then immediately follow up with "You help me in this game and I will help you in the next game - Illegal." Why is it illegal, then? "

Because it is a pre-arranged alliance that has nothing to do with the current game, but some other game.

I think that cheating in Diplomacy, besides multi-ing, is the creation of alliances based on out of game considerations.

Player character, position, way of speaking, previous experience - all are in-game considerations and are legal.

"He helped me win last game so I will help him win the current game" - distasteful, but legal.

"He helps me in one game we are playing, so I will help him in another game we are playing" - should be illegal. (but then again - how can you prove it...?)

Baskineli (100 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

@AlexNesta
Regarding your point on what is game - I think you are wrong. If you were right, you would've no Ghost Ratings, no Points, no leagues, no nothing. The beauty of the game of Diplomacy is that it is a continuous game, played a lot of times.

Consider the Prisoner's Dilemma. When it is played for one round, it is boring. When it is played for multiple rounds, it is an opening to the whole world of the Game Theory.

You carry information from one game to another. You learn from one game to another, about strategy, about how to know when people are lying to you, about who lie more and who don't lie, whom you can trust and who should be your next target.

Diplomacy is not a game of tactics, but a game of negotiation, and all decent negotiators know that you must understand the person who you are negotiating with in order to progress.

If you think that Diplomacy is not a game of negotiation, and should be played each game at a time, there is a variant that suits exactly that - anonymous gunboats.

butterhead (90 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

sorry guys, gonna jump on your forum now...
@Bask
"Because it is a pre-arranged alliance that has nothing to do with the current game, but some other game."
i thought you said we were all playing one continuous game of diplomacy? your contradicting your own arguments.

Baskineli (100 )
25 Sep 10 UTC

See? This is why it is important to define the terminology prior to any serious discussion:

Lets define it.

Small game - an instance of the game, the one that has 7 players in it.
Big game - the whole game that occurs on this site, the continuous game of Diplomacy, in which participate all the users on the website, in which you get ranked by your Ghost Rank and Diplomacy Points (GR and DP for the sake of future arguments).

So, having defined it, I will rephrase what you've quoted:

"Because it is a pre-arranged alliance that has nothing to do with the current small game, but some other small game."

Is it clearer now?

33 replies

Ebay (966

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

Did you miss the last one?

Or you just want another?
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38873
The 1st game is going so well that I thought I'd make another one. WTA, 105

, Anon. Join!

3 replies

Open

digitsu (1254

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

Team Japan for world cup

Anybody want to start a team Japan for dip world cup?
Are there enough people from japan on this board? If no, I'll settle for team Asia.

0 replies

Open

Crazyter (1335

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

Join 10 Hour Phase Game with Lots of Diploming

Fast-paced lots of negotiations 50 point WTA. Great weekend entertainment!

6 replies

Open

rdrivera2005 (3533

)
23 Sep 10 UTC

New Classic WTA game - who else want to play a brand new game?

Well, all my games are ending one way or another, so I start to get bored and want a new game with some good players.
.

26 replies

Open

Эvalanche (100

)
25 Sep 10 UTC

Today is my last day of live games!

This game is the last straw
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38820#gamePanel
I all the games I've played ( including my wins) were raveged by cd's!!!
I quit

3 replies

Open

diplonerd (173

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

Live game now?

Can we get 7?

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38852

3 replies

Open

Sicarius (673

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

one player needed

world diplomacy
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38261

0 replies

Open

Praetorian308 (100

)
18 Sep 10 UTC

College students

Just wondering which others of the community out there are fellow college students. I go to Austin College.

58 replies

Open

philcore (317

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

Constant refresh problem, anyone?

Does anyone else have a problem wit the constant refreshing of the page? I'll be typing in the Message box, and then I'll hear the refresh clicky sound, and my focus is lost, so that depending on what I'm typing, it'll end up being keyboard shortcuts to the IE menu, or tryin to navigate away from the page or something.

6 replies

Open

DIVONICH (100

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

Ancient Gunboat,two days/phase game wants of participant!

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38761

1 reply

Open

President Eden (2750

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

Alright, I have an SQL file for this site...

I think it's concerning opening moves, or win records, or what have you. Anyway, it's certainly some form of data storage file, but I don't know what to use to open a .sql file. Anyone know what to use?

2 replies

Open

Ebay (966

)
22 Sep 10 UTC

I've heard about these leagues

I've heard that this is a great place to find some really good games and play several games with the same players and thereby build friendships and get yourself know to the community. Is there one starting soon and how can I join?

15 replies

Open

JakeAteMyIllegalElephant (0

)
21 Sep 10 UTC

A Winner?

What is a real winner? Does he do anything to win or does he not win at all but instead he plays his best? Post you thoughts!

8 replies

Open

vexlord (231

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

leisurely gunboat

classic map
101 point gunboat
gameID=38808
1.5 day turns (hence the thread)

2 replies

Open

MuadDib (1432

)
23 Sep 10 UTC

Diplomacy Software

Is there any software to check play diplomacy offline and to check the validity and results of moves? For example, I want to check what happens if me and adversaries choose certain moves (supports and bounce results).

In a way, to play offline against myself the diplomacy game.

9 replies

Open

gordonpup (1127

)
24 Sep 10 UTC

super fantastic

how do i get the password to get into the game super fantastic?

1 reply

Open

FreedomFighter101 (1465

)
22 Sep 10 UTC

Egypt Tactics

Can someone tell me a good strategy playing Egypt in the Ancient Mediterranean variant? I always seem to have difficulty playing it.

6 replies

Open

Crazyter (1335

)
23 Sep 10 UTC

Internal Server Error 500

I love the new info page that comes up, explaining what is going on, and what to do about it!

1 reply

Open

obiwanobiwan (248

)
22 Sep 10 UTC

Dr. Hackenbush or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Look On The Bright Side of Life

I love philosophy/literature, sports, Trek, and comedy, and as I've already done threads on two (three) two of my three favorite things (four favorite things) four favorite things, it's time to do the third thing (fourth thing) foruth thing and pay homage to The Top Comedies Of All-Time! (So, nominate away (3 per person and has to be an original film, ie, no Shakespeare or Greek comedies) and when we get enough, say, 20 (or 42?) we'll vote for the Best Comedy Film Ever!

66 replies

Open

Nadji (898

)
23 Sep 10 UTC

classic, 100 pt bid

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38749

it's called "To Put it Diplomatically"
Come play with us.

0 replies

Open

Doe.TwainColts (100

)
23 Sep 10 UTC

Captcha problem

I'm trying to install the sourceforge tgz 1.00, and have a problem registering the 1st user: captcha does not appear.
config.php: public static $secret='3759'; // not 3759, other.
Any help? Thanks. PS: I don't see any "SEARCH" in the forum.

5 replies

Open

Page 660 of 1419