Please don't ever bring back PPSC.

This discussion started in the new points system thread.
To allow that thread to concentrate on discussing and explaining the new scoring systems, I have started this thread to discuss the value in keeping form of ppsc scoring

Call me an idiot, even a passionate idiot, and if you have an opinion on this issue, please have your say here

I agree it should be kept. I personally think ancient Med, World games, and gunboat are pretty stupid. But people enjoy them, so why take them away? If we go with the argument that this is a site for classic diplomacy only then you need to remove World, Ancient Med, and Gunboat along with PPSC. As long as it isn't the default option I don't see a good reason for removing it.

Am I .mistaken ?
I thought that in both new scoring systems the winner takes all
The differences in the new systems apply in how draws are scored

"As soon as one Great Power controls 18 supply centers, it is 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 board share equally in a draw."



Purists like me will argue that there is only one scoring system: WTA. However, I have heard several reasonable arguments to ignore the second paragraph. I have never heard a good argument to ignore the first paragraph.

I am only just returning after months away. I think these changes are exciting and hopefully they create better gaming experiences. I do think that removing PPSC is unnecessary as a permanent option; however to encourage people to use the new system it kind of makes sense to remove it at least temporarily. It is not like PPSC would hurt players who are aware of its drawbacks. you can simply avoid PPSC games. However removing it would hurt the experience for players who enjoy PPSC; it stands to reason that improving upon the gaming experience is a priority and in this case improving both sides of the isles experience is possible.

Hey, Byron is back.

Welcome back, Byron. Glad to see you've recovered from your incident with small pox.

I want to support a diversity of choices
I don't want to play gunboat, and don't always want to play anonymous games, or games with no messaging.
I am uninterested in Fall of the American doo dah

But I'd like this site to offer those choices to players who have different likes and preferences to mine

*cough* or am I.... lol

back on topic, I agree with Maj.Mitch its less about supporting the system itself and more about creating diversity. I personally hate PPSC. I think its terrible, of course that is an acquired opinion after my initial intro to webdip and finding I received better experiences in WTA. However, I had the luxury of coming to that conclusion on my own after playing enough games to see the difference. Others should be given that ability and should they go the other route of enjoying PPSC then they should not be punished. In the long-term providing variety in the nominal areas we choose will increase player satisfaction.

PPSC is a coring system that actively encourages people to throw the game.

If you want to reward a long standing ally then draw with them. New system solves for this.

@abge- as true as that is and as much as I agree its terrible there is honest legitimacy in keeping it so that those who don't agree with us still have their preferred option.

I don't think diversity is necessarily a good thing for the site. It's very frustrating to play a game when you don't have a relatively common definition of what 'winning' is. I think PPSC is a poor variant of the game and I'm sure,like all other variants, vdip will continue to support it.

Then tweak / improve ppsc
But not having any alternative to winner takes all apart from non ranked is a backward step, imho

Sum of Squares is a good version of PPSC.

They did tweak/improve PPSC.

what if the winner themselves gets to choose? maybe a variant where in the build phase the year the win is calculated the winner chooses: from the two draw methods for their win or winner takes all. It would give Maj.Mitch and others the option to share a win while not guaranteeing it thus forcing players to play for the win if they cant trust their neighbor.

We could call it MSS, Mercy Scoring System.... since the idea would be that the winner could show Mercy but is not inclined to.

@abge
Purist of fanatic?

You misrepresent my views, they are quite consistent with the first paragraph, IMHO, the art of being a Great Power is in part inspiring loyalty from at least one ally.
Perhaps the reason you've never heard a valid argument in favour of something you oppose, is that you're just NOT listening.

A good example from history is the prize money distribution scheme used by the Royal Navy.
The successful captain got the major share of the prize money
It it was considered important to give all who served on his ship a share of the prize money to encourage them to fight all the harder a d to inspire loyalty.

It was quite common for ordinary seamen and even warrant officers to do a runner, that is, desert and risk severe punishment to leave a captain considered harsh unjust and unlucky in regards to prize money to sail with captainswho enjoyed their trust and loyalty and who was regarded as a lucky captain with regard to capturing prizes

Well, now you're just plain being silly.

I agree that sum of squares is a good system, For draws.
It's still winner takes all if there is a winner isn't it

come on lets here it for Mercy Scoring System

I want to be able to WIN and reward a loyal supporter or loyal supporters with more than words

Sum of Squares allows a dominant power to reward his ally by agreeing to a draw, giving himself and his ally a substantial portion of the pot. It does this without the downside of PPSC, which is encouraging players to throw games.

"I want to be able to WIN and reward a loyal supporter or loyal supporters with more than words"

A player should not be rewarded for letting someone else win. Can you think of any other game in the world that promotes this type of behavior?

I also like to make alliances with new inexperienced players and mentor them and encourage them.
There's a real thrill in guiding a new player to their first win, but I like to also gain a few useful points out of the exercise.

I dislike the idea that I can only share in the points if the game ends in a draw.

Major: The removal of PPSC may be temporary, and it will (as I understand it) always be available on vDiplomacy. The others have articulated some of the reasons for us removing it, and why it may no longer be necessary. Time will tell.

There's a reason that wins are called "solos". No player from another site (and no FTF player) expects a solo win to be shared with another player. If we're to become the best site for playing classic Diplomacy online, then it's my feeling that we need to meet the expectations of diplomacy players globally.

Of course, webDip is a living code base. Nothing is necessarily permanent. If this change turns out not to have been a success, then we can revert it.

To those who say "why not keep it anyway?" - we're planning to keep game creation as simple as possible. We don't want the create game page to look like an airplane dashboard. And, we don't want to kill vDip - vDip exists as a copy of the webDiplomacy code with far more bells and whistles, so that they can have many variants and non-standard games. PPSC is certainly non-standard - it may be that it's a better fit over there.