Apologies for recent downtime, we have been recovering from a DDoS attack on our provider which you can track here.
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.
This is one of the saddest and funniest (in a twisted sort of way) videos I have ever seen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4 This seemed very apropos of the debate in the NPR thread re: Fox's reliability compared with other stations. This seems to me to provide the definitive solution to that debate. Thoughts?
I recently had an encounter with an annoying little twerp in which he crossed (in my opinion at least) the metagaming line. The question is should I bother to mention it to our already overworked mods? Should we attempt to crush all damaging forms of metagaming with an iron first, or should we ignore the more minor forms of cheating?
As a newbie I am not sure if I am doing something wrong or not, but I am seeing two performance problems that are quite irritating. I time out readying orders, and also every time I change pages on the site there is a delay of 10 seconds or so before I can do anything. Is this normal?
What is your opinion on using proper English in diplomatic correspondence as opposed to shorthand (like u = you, wanna = want to etc.) I am usually less likely to trust a shorthand player and prefer full English communications.
If you have an SC left, but it's not one of your home centres, and your last unit is destroyed, and then the game ends, what goes on your record? And are you considered defeated immediately? Or not until someone walks over to your SC and sits there over the winter?
I like Johnny Depp. I think "Gilbert Grape," "Pirates otC I," "Ed Wood" and "Sleepy Hollow" are all very good. But I saw "Rango" today, misled by the generally good reviews, and found it dark, vulgar, violent, slow and fatally self-aware in an ironic, in-jokey way. If you loved it, peace to you. I did not.
A group that I play with are moving our correspondence game to web diplomacy. Normally, we switch country assignments between games so people don't have to play as the same country twice in a row. Is there a way to manually select who plays as what country or can it only be done randomly?
I'm in an anonymous gunboat (might be a tautology, still new-ish) at the moment with someone who saves his orders but never readies them, as there are 24 hour phases where most people are finished after around 10 or so this this could be getting quite annoying if it continues throughout the game. Just wondering if there's any way to communicate that it would be good for them to ready them?
Fights do result in penalties and sometimes suspensions. It isn't just a free-for-all. In fact, contact is very regulated in hockey. Lots of legitimate sports involve fighting; you should probably consider expanding your definition of sport.
@ Putin: Why is it allowed at the professional level?
@ Frank: I am aware of fighting sports such as boxing and MMA. Ice Hockey is different because, at the professional level (ie in the NHL) fighting is officially against the rules. However, in practice, the league authorities condone it and, in some cases, actively appear to encourage it. This double standard seems odd to me. If fighting is allowed, then the rules should say so.
The rules state that you go to the penalty box after for fighting...so it is against the rules. And in my opinion, it should stay that way. But fighting serves a purpose. It gives players their own way to serve justice when the refs miss something or when a goon gets out of hand.
There are two defenses for the anomaly of fighting at the professional level, neither of which I find persuasive.
1 - Allowing an outlet for fighting prevents more dangerous types of penalties during the game, because fighting is said to occur because a player engages in a rough hit or attacks a star player that the referee doesn't see. It's said to protect star players from getting hurt, because you can't go after one without getting your face punched in.
2 - The idea that it's tradition and has always been a part of the game.
The first argument is the only one worth dealing with. The fact is that has been no spike in dangerous hits or stick penalties at the amateur/collegiate level which does not allow fighting.
Anyone who has seen Claude Lemueix take Kris Drapers face and rake it along the boards knows what I mean by justice. that happens to be an outstanding example, but it's also the little things that go on in the game...
I don't know if you all follow baseball, but there was once an understanding whereby if your player got beaned by a pitch, the other team would retaliate and the umpires would allow the retaliation so long as it didn't escalate.
That code has largely been eroded, because the league has cracked down on retaliatory beanings due to bench-clearing brawls. Also the damned "DH" rule prevents retaliation as well since pitchers don't bat.
I don't know if it's a good or a bad thing, but a similar phenomenon in baseball has been killed.
2 is bunk, but 1 isn't completely correct. I think it's more about giving teams a way to police themselves in a way that doesn't take punishment to a child-like level...like kicking the player off the team for fighting or garnishing his pay.
Amateur and collegiate level players are kids and they are treated like kids...I don't think you should treat adults like kids.
well, you rarely see bench clearing brawls in hockey. 99% of the time it's a fight between two players...I can see where in baseball, if retaliation involves the entire team, it could get dangerous very fast.
@ Darwyn: "fighting serves a purpose. It gives players their own way to serve justice when the refs miss something or when a goon gets out of hand."
The professional game only has goons *because* fighting is tolerated.
"Amateur and collegiate level players are kids and they are treated like kids...I don't think you should treat adults like kids."
Erm, no. Many adults play ice hockey at levels below the professional game. They are not children.
"Anyone who has seen Claude Lemueix take Kris Drapers face and rake it along the boards knows what I mean by justice."
An incident like that should be dealt with by suspending or fining Lemueix after the game, if the referee did not spot it during the game. Fighting is not the way to deal with infractions the referee does not spot.
Jamie, clearly you have never played nor can appreciate the nuances of ice hockey.
Hockey, unlike any other sport is a free flowing, highly physical game, regularly lasting many minutes between stoppages of play. Using your body to knock another player out of the way is a requisite. And because it is free flowing and so physical, infractions/cheap shots happen all the time...but every tiny little infraction cannot be called without hindering the flow of the game.
Maybe someone gets tripped, or elbowed, or gets their face raked into the boards. If they are lucky, the refs see it and dole out a two minute minor penalty. Not a huge deal. But if you are a goon and have a reputation for taking these kind of penalties and possibly causing career ending injuries, the two minute penalty is fair trade.
As I said, fighting keeps goons honest. You take a cheap shot, you costs your team two minutes...but you'll also get a target on your back, as you should. Without fighting, the two minutes that you cost your team was well worth taking out an opposing teams player. With fighting, you'll think twice about what that may cost you.
"The professional game only has goons *because* fighting is tolerated."
Wrong. Goons are inherent to the game because of the highly physical, free flowing play. When you have someone rapping their stick against your shin pad constantly (perfectly legal by the way), tempers will flare. Its the nature of the game, my friend.
"Many adults play ice hockey at levels below the professional game. They are not children."
Indeed. I play and I am no professional by any means. Yet fights exist in MY beer league. You get suspended for a game and receive a $25 fine. It's against the rules, but it happens because of the reasons I just described.
"An incident like that should be dealt with by suspending or fining Lemueix after the game, if the referee did not spot it during the game. "
He was suspended AND fined. But suspension and being fined won't stop that sort of cheap shot. Being threatened with getting your ass kicked on the ice however, will.
"Fighting is not the way to deal with infractions the referee does not spot."
Again, you don't know hockey then. I'd urge you to lace up the skates, grab a stick and try it out. You'll find out fairly soon why fighting is allowed.
Just curious, what is boxing or MMA to you? And how is this form of fighting different than what goes on on the ice?
@ Darwyn: "Maybe someone gets tripped, or elbowed, or gets their face raked into the boards. If they are lucky, the refs see it and dole out a two minute minor penalty. Not a huge deal. But if you are a goon and have a reputation for taking these kind of penalties and possibly causing career ending injuries, the two minute penalty is fair trade."
Clearly, then, the actual problem is that violent players, whose violent play risks ending the careers of their opponents, are only recieving minor penalties. If you deliberately try to seriously injure an opponent, you shouldn't get a two minute penalty, you should face a large fine and a lengthy ban from the game, and your team should be fined and penalised heavily too, for failing to control their players' discipline.
That would put a stop to the fighting pretty quickly.
ME: ""An incident like that should be dealt with by suspending or fining Lemueix after the game, if the referee did not spot it during the game."
YOU: "He was suspended AND fined. But suspension and being fined won't stop that sort of cheap shot."
Then clearly the suspension was not long enough, and the fine was not large enough.
What you're basically saying is that ice hockey is a sport where a large proportion of the players are unscrupulous, violent cheats, whose cheating can only be stopped by punching them repeatedly. Not exactly a great advertisement for a sportsmanlike game, is it?
That's not what I'm saying at all...firstly, I'm saying is that you don't know hockey.
Secondly, hockey is a fast sport with 10 - 200+ lb. guys skating at high speeds colliding into each other...something will give eventually, sometimes it happens accidentally, sometimes on purpose. Due to the nature of the game, there are goons...and goons need to be policed more than the game itself can offer, else the game becomes too slow.
What's your beef with fighting anyway? Because you see a contradiction between the rules and the actuality? I don't get it.
Thirdly, go lace 'em up, hit the ice and play a competitive game to win. You'll figure it out...
The Sage of Omaha once said that investors should try to be "fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful." Which tendency, if either, tends to govern your Dip play, especially when you divert from a long-range plan (i.e. to stab earlier than you had hoped)?
This Time On Philosiophy Weekly: "What Do YOU Think Heaven And Hell Are Like, Then?"
That's a question I got on the bus this week, and it's been on my mind ever since, sort of simmering there...just when I think I'm happily ready to watch a movie, on comes Hamlet and instantly he's talking about this and that about death and there the question is again, so I put it to you as well, WebDip members--play Dante. If YOU could have your perfect, 100% version of what the two "afterlives" are, what would each be like? Is it anything to be excited about?