Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 892 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Tom Bombadil (4023 D(G))
12 Apr 12 UTC
Because there are those who complain about a lack of Diplomacy Topics
One of the weakest parts of my game is that I don't go to other players with plans, but rather listen to plans, and adapt my strategy. Do you prefer to engage first, or listen to others? And how would you suggest I improve upon actively engaging with other players with ideas rather than waiting for them to come to me?
16 replies
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Muting is a curious feature
Apparently, you cannot mute a banned player. I discovered this when I tried muting bullshiot threads to make scouring the forums for an old thread easier. Curious indeed. By one's banning, they become like the mods: immutable.
8 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D(G))
12 Apr 12 UTC
Full Press games......
....... make me paranoid.
5 replies
Open
Lando Calrissian (100 D(S))
12 Apr 12 UTC
variants
Frank mentioned this some time ago, but how interesting do you all think the portage variant would be?
6 replies
Open
Leif_Syverson (271 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Addiction
After nearly 3 months of rigorous discipline in not responding to political bolshoi threads (from both sides) on the forum I've had a relapse.
Help me Randall!!!
http://xkcd.com/597/
http://xkcd.com/386/
2 replies
Open
Diplomat33 (243 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
New Game
Join, and have some low key fun!

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=85777
1 reply
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Highest rated (by GR) games ever
Who remembers high rated games? Pls feel free to share gameIDs and ratings actual when the game happend.
16 replies
Open
2ndWhiteLine (2736 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
Low Effort Thought Promotes Conservatism
http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/03/16/0146167212439213.abstract?rss=1
40 replies
Open
Putin33 (111 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
The Irish Property Tax
Anybody involved with the movement against this?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-03/is-irelands-property-tax-revolt-the-end-of-austerity-dont-bet-on-it
0 replies
Open
Yonni (136 D(S))
03 Apr 12 UTC
WebDip Triathlon
OK, I think I'd like to formally invite people to sign up for the WebDip Triathlon.
I'll explain more inside.
58 replies
Open
Andrew Wiggin (157 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
New Game, Battle for Middle Earth lll
Hey guys, looking for more players to join in on a game I just made. 24h turns, 20 D to join!

Thanks!
0 replies
Open
Sandgoose (0 DX)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Your Favorite Afternoon Snack With Sandgoose
Ladies and Gentlemen, tell me...what be your favorite snack? Could be pop-tarts...beans...crispy cream dodo's...ANYTHING! :)

respond within:
25 replies
Open
ODaly (236 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Scumbag?
Not looking for recompense or anything, but... (story inside)
Page 2 of 2
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
I have no problem disagreeing. But I do ask you just to answer this one question... Do you think a draw by an alliance (made whenever, not worried about meta-ing here) is the same as a win?
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@abge - The OP said he didn't know the mods would do anything or he would have contacted you guys.
I see a mention of points, but no statement clearly making it "because of" points. I feel my argument still stands on those grounds.

And how could you possibly misinterpret what I said so grossly? I am not saying a draw is absolutely a win. A "share" of the win doesn't mean a "shared" win literally. holy crap. Relative to the people who got killed you sure did "win" though, and the fewer people that are in the draw, the more people you beat. That's undeniable fact; they lost, you didn't. The comparison to metagaming pre-game alliance to a 3-way draw is just asinine.
Tom Bombadil (4023 D(G))
11 Apr 12 UTC
@Draug: Yes, I think it (rarely) can be.
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Thanks Tom. We'll leave it at that.

@PE - I wasn't saying any of it was meta-gaming. In fact just the opposite. The alliance could easily be a mid-game three way to the end. But for me, unless those allies helped to stop a 4th nation from soloing, they are just someone to eventually be stepped on to get to the win and I would hope that the two of them would stop me (or one of them would join me in stoipping the third) so that the games I am in would never end in a mutual back-patting but would end in a failed back-stabbing resulting in two folks keeping the third from pulling it out.
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Also, PE, a share of what win? My point (and I think Ald's too) is that the game has no win when a draw happens. You can't share in something that doesn't exist. Just like in sports. Neither team gets a check in the win column if they tie in baseball. Instead there are three stats: wins, losses, and ties.
It's a figurative statement. Jesus Christ. This isn't rocket science. You still haven't addressed the actual point I made - that the fewer people in the draw means you beat more people, and thus could certainly be argued as better, and that none of the above has anything to do with points or GR.
Your comparison was irrelevant and borderline krellin reading comprehension level. You're better than that.
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Ouch... I wasn't the only one read it that way.

And yes, arguably, a smaller draw could be viewed as better. But from the point of view of the ones who stopped the win, being magnaminous to your allies even if they are no longer crucial to the stalemate could be viewed as better too.

In the end, it is about what fun you get from playing the game.
ghug (5068 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
May I just point out that all of this anti-draw talk is coming from a player generally considered to be good despite having a 4% solo rate?
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
If you mean me, I'm not that good. There are a hell of a lot of players here better than me. And yes, my win rate is 4%. I tend to draw because I make myself vital to stopping the solo and get to partake of said draw as a result. But if I can win, I take it. And it isn't anti-draw so much as discussing what a draw really means.
Sandgoose (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
note to self...eliminate draug in games so he can't convince the board to stop my solo....CHECK! :D
Mr A (386 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Can someone point me to a reference about this "no SC changes in a couple of moves"-forced-draw-rule? I can't find this anywhere.

I understand and support such a rule in F2F games. Maybe even in live games. However, I don't really see the necessity of this rule in a 24h+ game. Unlike the pause button the draw button acutally IS a diplomatic tool which should not be enforcable by a majority on the board imo, at least not in press games.
butterhead (90 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@Mr A- It's not a "majority" thing. It's a, If there is a clear stalemate, where the only way that anyone could win is if A) someone misorders or B) someone CD's, and a player waits for 4+ game years trying to get that to happen, it's considered rude and the Mods may force a draw if contacted about it... it's about ending games that will obviously not have a Solo so that everyone can move on to the next game. because entering all support holds is no fun for anybody(and I may be in minority here against all the point/GR farmers, but the fun is why I play).
...but that's not what was happening here. Italy was waiting for Germany to kill Russia and France, and just took a 3-way when France CDed (presumably because he figured trying to get rid of Russia before France returned was pushing his luck too much). I think this is a perfectly valid approach from Italy.
Draugnar (0 DX)
11 Apr 12 UTC
But germany had no intention of eliminating them so it is exactly what was happening. And the rule about forcing a draw falls under the "keep the servers fun" and "use common sense". the mod use those two to cover situations not explicitly set out in the rules.
Mr A (386 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Whether or not I agree, it would help to reference this kind of site-rules, which are not covered by official diplo rules, somewhere so that players are aware that they are supposed to contact a mod in this case.
ODaly (236 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
@PE: I understand that diminishing the size of a draw is valid indeed, but waiting through almost 30 years of no change to do so? That seems less so. How long would you say is long enough before admitting that a completely helpless and inessential power is not going to be knocked out?

@Mr A: I agree. Perhaps a list of instances where asking for intervention is appropriate would be nice.

In hindsight, I probably should've supported one of Germany's armies into Paris and hoped he got the hint.
@DraugnarL But what's fun about having a 4-way draw forced upon you against your wishes? And how is it "common sense" to say that one side should be forced to concede to the other?

@ODaly: Theoretically, never. I don't see a distinction between Germany holding out indefinitely for the 4-way draw and Italy holding out indefinitely for the 2-way draw.
santosh (335 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
The distinction is when one side votes for a Draw and the other doesn't. If the party that is refusing to end the game at once (by not voting Draw at the moment) cannot make theoretical progress, there is really no basis to let the game continue.
Sure there is, because this game had *plenty* of theoretical progress. Half the draw participants could have been cut out! The game was *not* diplomatically stalemated by any means and could easily have been reduced to a 2-way draw, so there was ample theoretical progress and thus certain basis to continue the game.

If, say, Russia were holding Warsaw, Moscow and St. Petersburg, and ordering War+Mos S Ukr (presume France is dead, Germany got Marseilles and is holding it, Italy has Sevastopol for 17), that would be another matter; Germany could not safely eliminate Russia, and so the coalition is diplomatically and tactically stalemated. At that point continued holding out would, indeed, be ridiculous.

The way I see it, there are three options for such a scenario:

Pro-Leader: Force the coalition to kill every nonessential member and force the leader not to advance in order to minimize the draw. This unjustly removes the right of the coalition to keep valued-but-nonessential members of the draw alive, and so should be disregarded.
Pro-Coalition: Force the draw once it becomes clear that the coalition does not wish to kill any valued-but-nonessential members. This unjustly removes the right of the leader to fight diplomatically for a reduced draw, and so should also be disregarded.
Neutral: There should be no intervention and the game should continue until one side caves. This is the fair view, in my opinion, as it does not infringe on the rights of the coalition or the leader, and does not call upon moderator intervention. The ensuing battle of wills would reflect part of the spirit of the game: you are all diplomats, and if you believe your current foreign policy objectives are just, you should fight for them, not call upon the equivalent of God to resolve things in your favor.

Some might say this violates the "keep it fun" rule; I say that's not necessarily the case, as especially in press games the tense endgame negotiations that would result could certainly be very invigorating and enjoyable. Whether something is "fun" is entirely up to the players; I almost question why this is even a rule, because all it seems to do is justify moderator intervention to make the game fun for one side at the expense of the other side, but in any case, these scenarios are not always "not fun," and to argue they always are is nothing more than personal projection onto other players, which is a terrible way to craft policy on any issue.

I'm sure some would also argue that it violates the "Use common sense" rule. Frankly, I've never understood why we have a rule that appeals to the most egregious of bullshit pop culture truisms in existence, as "common sense" is nothing more than a useless buzz word employed as a laughably fallacious appeal to popular opinion as an authority, and again it strikes me as giving moderators undue freedom to influence games as they believe is right, without taking into account the will of all the players involved.
Yonni (136 D(S))
11 Apr 12 UTC
For the record, I just looked it up and the 'worst type of diplomacy player' is one who threatens to shut down the diplomacy site with his uber IT skills. But then again, that was just from yahoo answers so take or for what it's worth.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luly90KdgT1qk3jq8o1_500.gif
Gobbledydook (1389 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
That sounds familiar...


54 replies
SpeakerToAliens (147 D(S))
11 Apr 12 UTC
People actually complained about this TV advert made for the British Heart Foundation!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ILxjxfB4zNk

Thoughts?
4 replies
Open
AverageWhiteBoy (314 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Look, idealists and ideologues, I don't hate you guys, but
I'm a nihilist and you're all full of shit. ALL of you.
8 replies
Open
Gobbledydook (1389 D(B))
11 Apr 12 UTC
EOG: Over the Mountain
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=85764
1 reply
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Don't blame the free website for Tettleton's Chew
A free website is a website where a party may sign up for completely voluntary and free goods and/or services.
Any posting or trolling in the forums by a 3rd party is not a free website transaction. You muting a Tettleton's Chew after work is a free website transaction.
0 replies
Open
President Eden (2750 D)
11 Apr 12 UTC
Shock and Awe: Invisible Children spying for Ugandan government
WikiLeaks cable: http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09KAMPALA587.html

Violated their nonprofit status. Oh boy.
1 reply
Open
Leonidas (635 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
new recruit
Introducing a friend to the game, I have set up a low ( 10 D ) entry game for him to get started in, 19 hrs till it starts, three places to fill, looking for newbie tolerant veterans, who feel like participating in a training exercise, kinda like a dummy hand of cards, except end result sticks...

PM me for password if you're interested
2 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D(G))
10 Apr 12 UTC
Interesting .......???
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17446831
1 reply
Open
yebellz (729 D(G))
09 Apr 12 UTC
Just wondering why
What's the use of arguing about politics on a random internet forum?
93 replies
Open
largeham (149 D)
06 Apr 12 UTC
Look, Americans, I don't hate you guys
I mean, you had the IWW, Emma Goldman and Hemingway. But I'd rather you didn't station Marines in Darwin and UAVs on the Cocos Islands.
114 replies
Open
Draugnar (0 DX)
10 Apr 12 UTC
This came up in tha Admoin Smackdown game.
Important matter that needs the sites input.

See inside.
18 replies
Open
jwalters93 (288 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
One thing.
If you could pick one thing to be totally amazing at, what would you choose, and why? (Yes, it has to be a real thing.)
25 replies
Open
CrazyCanuck (100 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
Guinness record for longest convoy?
I'm in a World Diplo game, and we are almost done. A 4 way draw in this very, very long game! I'm wondering if anyone knows the World's Record for longest convoy. We are trying one that will use 25 fleets! If that's the record, please let me know, ASAP, as I can ask us to change it to use 26 fleets.

Thanks!
0 replies
Open
Leonidas (635 D)
07 Apr 12 UTC
Cancer Research Conspiracy
Had a discussion about whether a cure for Cancer is locked away in someone's deep pockets or not.
12 replies
Open
acmac10 (120 D(B))
04 Apr 12 UTC
Need Some Fantasy Baseball Participants
So as you may know, we're doing a fantasy baseball league for WebDip on Yahoo. If you're interested please PM me or krellin. Thanks
22 replies
Open
redhouse1938 (429 D)
08 Apr 12 UTC
EoG : "Skyfall" gameID=77069
Slot reserved! Post your EoGs here everybody!
13 replies
Open
jwalters93 (288 D)
09 Apr 12 UTC
Wow.
I made a game titled 'No Idiots Allowed.'

The game was cancelled because not enogh people joined.
2 replies
Open
YadHoGrojaUL (330 D)
10 Apr 12 UTC
EOG Live Gunboat 190
6 replies
Open
Page 892 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top