The Carebear Conundrum

Forum rules
This forum is limited to topics relating to the game Diplomacy only. Other posts or topics will be relocated to the correct forum category or deleted. Please be respectful and follow our normal site rules at http://www.webdiplomacy.net/rules.php.

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:points: :-D :eyeroll: :neutral: :nmr: :razz: :raging: :-) ;) :( :sick: :o :? 8-) :x :shock: :lol: :cry: :evil: :?: :smirk: :!:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is OFF
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: The Carebear Conundrum

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by captainmeme » Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:42 am

Jamiet99uk wrote:
Sun Oct 01, 2023 4:12 pm
Wow. The bot edited a quoted post to put its spam link in there, rather than in its own post.
This is basically their new standard now. It's very irritating :D

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Jamiet99uk » Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:36 am

The second really weird thing is that the link the bot is promoting is a broken link.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Octavious » Mon Oct 02, 2023 5:58 am

My God... You mean they not only have the ability to make their own posts, but are also to analyse previous human posts to accurately identify the most well thought out and insightful comments, before editing them for their own ends?

I feel violated... I demand compensation for this outrage and will accept no less than 10,000 :points:

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Jamiet99uk » Sun Oct 01, 2023 4:12 pm

Wow. The bot edited a quoted post to put its spam link in there, rather than in its own post.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by qrzy » Sat Feb 26, 2022 7:08 am

I see two options:

1) The solo maniacs learn how to beat the carebears

2) the player(s) with the most centers win(s) the match.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Johnny Big Horse » Wed Feb 23, 2022 12:57 am

Squibit wrote:
Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:45 am

What if we introduced a new scoring system in which drawing a game was worth much less than winning? ... It could even be just your originally offered stake.

If there were an additional scoring mode along side SoS and DSS that was a more cut throat reward-the-solo style mode, then players could choose and be aware of what type of game they were joining from the start?
This is a good argument.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Squibit » Tue Feb 22, 2022 9:01 pm

I feel like the difference might be enough for some who are on the fence. There's a big difference conceptually between: "Shall we win together" and "Shall we concede together"? If you know going in that a Draw is essentially a loss and the assumption is that the stab has to come eventually, then I think it could sway a few, no?

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by PRINCE WILLIAM » Tue Feb 22, 2022 5:26 pm

Little would do to the carebears, as they don't play for the solo the same goes for playing for the points. Instead, they play just for the game, which is why they don't stab; if you play for a good time and amusement, it always leaves a sure taste to betray.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Doom427 » Tue Feb 22, 2022 4:32 pm

Squibit wrote:
Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:45 am

If there were an additional scoring mode along side SoS and DSS that was a more cut throat reward-the-solo style mode, then players could choose and be aware of what type of game they were joining from the start?
I had a similar idea with a scoring system (winner take all, draws return original bet to all players even defeated) that closer matched the original game. I'm sure it would have issues (especially with ghost rating), but the score system pushing solos would lead to much better endgames, instead of the toxic DSS endgame of "Let's beat on the little players".

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Squibit » Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:45 am

Hi Everyone,

I'm not much of a Diplomacy player, but I've enjoyed reading this discussion and have a suggestion to throw out there. Sorry if this has been considered already:

Someone quoted the rules as written regarding this earlier:

"OBJECT OF THE GAME: As soon as one Great Power controls 18 supply centers, it’s considered to have gained control of Europe. The player representing that Great Power is the winner. However, players can end the game by agreement before a winner is determined. In this case, all players who still have pieces on the game board share equally in a draw."

What this doesn't mention is how to "score" a win vs a draw. So any scoring associated with the conclusion is purely meta.

The rules as written don't make mention as to whether a Draw is equal to a win, worth a percentage of a win based on the number of remaining players, or perhaps is worth a great deal less than a win. Perhaps this is indeed the crux of the argument being had in this thread.

What if we introduced a new scoring system in which drawing a game was worth much less than winning? So lets say each player contributed a 10 point stake. A solo win is still worth 70 points in a classic game, but a two-way-draw is not worth 35 points each, perhaps it is worth 17 each instead? The exact total value of a shared draw vs a solo win is something that could be debated further. It could even be just your originally offered stake.

If there were an additional scoring mode along side SoS and DSS that was a more cut throat reward-the-solo style mode, then players could choose and be aware of what type of game they were joining from the start?

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Gabe The Fancy » Mon Feb 21, 2022 11:33 pm

Apologies for the previous post being full of errors. I'm on my phone - not the PC

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Gabe The Fancy » Mon Feb 21, 2022 11:32 pm

PRINCE WILLIAM wrote:
Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:26 pm
All of you that oppose carebearing (!) answer me this question: Why it is bad for the game to reward and ally who shared all the game and fought side by side, but it is okay and acceptable to throw the game to a player so to punish the one that stabbed you and made you lose?
Either is both to be frowned upon or are both to be accepted.
This is a good and legitimate question. I'm happy you asked it. My position on throwing a game being better is this. The objective of ever game should be to win (solo). Carebears objective is the draw. They are the ones who betrayed the spirit of fair hr game first. If I am going to have an unfavorable outcome to a game I may as well support the player who is staying true to the objective. I don't expect everyone to agree with my position but hopefully this offers some insight.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by PRINCE WILLIAM » Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:26 pm

All of you that oppose carebearing (!) answer me this question: Why it is bad for the game to reward and ally who shared all the game and fought side by side, but it is okay and acceptable to throw the game to a player so to punish the one that stabbed you and made you lose?
Either is both to be frowned upon or are both to be accepted.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Wusti » Mon Feb 21, 2022 5:09 am

Octavious wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 2:00 pm
Wusti wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 12:08 pm
You didn't take the solo on offer. The rest is sophistry. Also, nice job Cap.
Sophistry? It was tournament play designed to maximise my chances in the tournament. I'm somewhat surprised that you're having problems understanding the concept, Wusti. A Diplomacy player plays to win. In a one off game one's focus is on winning the game, in a tournament one's focus is on winning the tournament.
I know, I know - just giving you shit to see if you'd rise to it :)

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Trigfea63 » Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:00 pm

Nice stab btw :D

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Octavious » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:48 pm

Trigfea63 wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:13 pm
C'mon ... whatever else you might think about the topic of this thread, England cannot seriously be accused of playing that game like a Carebear. Look at how he allied with France in the early going, then brutally savaged him once the French units had all moved south and east.
True, that. I would have a hard time using this game as evidence to support my membership of the carebear club

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Trigfea63 » Sun Feb 20, 2022 5:13 pm

C'mon ... whatever else you might think about the topic of this thread, England cannot seriously be accused of playing that game like a Carebear. Look at how he allied with France in the early going, then brutally savaged him once the French units had all moved south and east.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by captainmeme » Sun Feb 20, 2022 2:26 pm

To be fair, you did win that tournament so I can't complain too much :lol:

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Octavious » Sun Feb 20, 2022 2:00 pm

Wusti wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 12:08 pm
You didn't take the solo on offer. The rest is sophistry. Also, nice job Cap.
Sophistry? It was tournament play designed to maximise my chances in the tournament. I'm somewhat surprised that you're having problems understanding the concept, Wusti. A Diplomacy player plays to win. In a one off game one's focus is on winning the game, in a tournament one's focus is on winning the tournament.

Re: The Carebear Conundrum

by Wusti » Sun Feb 20, 2022 12:08 pm

Octavious wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 11:22 am
But yeah, I don't think that qualifies as true carebeariness
You didn't take the solo on offer. The rest is sophistry. Also, nice job Cap.
Octavious wrote:
Fri Feb 18, 2022 12:16 pm
The draw should be earned, and you earn it by forcing it. You can, of course, only force a draw if you are playing against real Diplomacy players. If you are playing against Carebears you have no agency, no influence, no enjoyment, and no reason to come back and play the game in the future.
Bahahaha

Top