A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Start a new discussion in the public forum
Post a new thread
If your post relates to a particular game please include the URL or ID#
of the game.
If you are posting a feature request please check that it isn't mentioned in the todo list.
If you are posting a question please check the FAQ before posting.
If your message is long you may need to write a summary message, and add the full message as a reply.
I'm just getting back in to Diplomacy as I haven't played for a while, and I thought I would start off with a global match. Then I thought it might be even more interesting if it was a World Diplomacy global match.
I just started on this and I need a little help... I joined a match that was scheduled to start in an hour so I closed the screen and left the site, I get on now when it should be starting and I can't find out how to join it, if I look in my games the only ones in there are those that have yet to start... please help
In autumn 1905 of gameID=42802, I believe disbands were improperly adjudicated. Russia was in civil disorder, and had a unit in St. Pete and in Black Sea, yet Black Sea was not disbanded - Sevastopol was.
I didn't expect to win in my first WTA game (I was England), gameID=42868 but I'm suspicious that Turkey gave up on the possibility of winning in Autumn '09 with the simple move F Irish Sea to Lvp. Does this play look odd to anyone else?
Got a note that a user was banned and to see the game for details, but it being a gunboat, there's no chatbox. Still there's a message saying unread messages, but no apparent way to check them. Is this a feature?
I have an army in Gascony, other in Spain, other in Piedmont. The orders i give are: G: move Mars; P: move Mars; S: support hold Gascony. If i'm attacked in Gascony with support move, will the support hold make the fight even and thus i keep gascony, or will it be invalidated since the army has moved (or at least, attemped to)?
@ joey, that's silly. Without unions, workers are worse off than slaves and it's not a coincidence that we're experiencing this slash and burn economy with record unemployment and record corporate profits at this point in history when unions are at a nadir. Of course unions are political, their purpose is to find power in numbers to offset the otherwise abusive position (influence and affluence) of corporate management and win improvements in their conditions. Unfortunately, they are susceptible to corruption just like any human institution and the members of unions must be vigilant of their leaders and make efforts to prevent abuses. @CA no one said corporate management shouldn't be allowed to vote. "Excercising their right..."? That's precisely the problem, campaign contributions shouldn't be a right any more than special favours and kickbacks from lobbys.
"Unfortunately, they are susceptible to corruption just like any human institution and the members of unions must be vigilant of their leaders and make efforts to prevent abuses."
Do you really think that labor unions don't use their not insubstantial purses to make campaign contributions? The problem with your defense is that, in the way that you use it, it applies equally to the corporations. The shareholders have voting rights within the corporations. However just like any human institution it is susceptible to corruption. It's up to the shareholders to make sure that they their investment is with a company that has integrity. Surely you're not arguing that every corporation is evil and bent on running the world, are you?
No. I'm saying neither corporations nor unions should be allowed to make campaign donations. I thought that was clear, sorry. Also, integrity is only of interest to (the majority of) investors / shareholders when there's a possibility of hurting their benefits. Layoffs, salary freezes, exportation or outsourcing of production and waste disposal are all decisions that are taken with the bottom line as the primary if not only concern. Maybe evil is not the word, and yes there are certainly some more and some less ethical models, but there is no question "corporate interest" tends to be a rather one-dimensional concern.
I thought I understood this part of the rules, but after looking things up, I've become even more confused. The question is, can a fleet from say Marseilles support a fleet from Gascony to the north coast of Spain?