Just reading the previous thread about 'sportsmanship'... it seems clear to me that this application and the ridiculous ppsc concept is detrimental to the game.

The game is supposed to be about strategy, tactics, and diplomacy - but this idiotic ppsc system encourages crap like what we see discussed in the other thread...

'friends' and 'alliances' now mean 17/17 draws? this is not "Diplomacy" the game - and it should not be titled as such... this is some mutation of an age-old respected game.... and I for one am fed up with what it engenders.

its a free world and you all are welcome to continue to enjoy it - but you should know that you are not getting the full experience of a phenomenal game... instead you are playing a far inferior version of it.

as for myself - I'm trying to make decision if I should just go CD in all my games or if that would be unfair.... i'm certainly going to finish my wta games...

i wish there was a way to 'quit' or put your games up for 'takeover' in some fashion...

Are you referring exclusively to PPSC games? I will allow that these are affected by the points sharing system, but WTA games are much closer to the 'real thing'.

@ superchunk...

because the site does not allowe anyone under 100pts to create a wta game... 95% of all games are ppsc and new players get introduced to the game as a ppsc version.

php is a detriment to the hobby because it hooks new players with this ill-conceived notion of what the game should be...

the shame of it is - i have a feeling that because of the proliferation of the internet game - this version will start to dominate the hobby - and the 'purists' will be relegated to obscure corners of the web instead...

@ flashman - the wta games are fine... its just that they are such a small minority of games played on php or its FB cousin.

You will find that quite a few players now prefer WTA and the trick is to get invited to join a private game when you have very few points. I have played / am playing quite a few where the points to join has been in the 5-10 range. I am not sure if you can see all the private games going on but there have been a lot.

Perhaps I can tempt you to stay and when you have five points to your name, I will start another game called, 'If you leave me now...'

(Yes, it is a Chicago song)

lol @ flashman...

I have not heard a word about private wta games... nor seen posts about them... I tried to create a few and got zero takers... I think i managed to be in a 10 pt wta game finally...

but I LOVE the game - and i want to play 5-6 games at a time... its just that on THIS site - I cant find the games I'm looking for.

as for points - I'm in 7 right now - mostly recent starts - so now I have to deal with a moral dilemma of quitting vs finishing a bunch of games I dont really have my heart in :(

I would say play them out honestly and as soon as you have the points, ask in here and I or one of the other regulars will start a WTA game. You would be a most welcome opponent. If you click on my profile, you will find that I am not bothered about points one way or another - I play a lot of private games, a lot of variants (always refreshing), and pick up CDs from time to time where the position looks like a challenge (a bit like doing chess puzzles in the newspapers).

I do keep an eye on my stats though and regret stepping into some traps with the first few games I tried (multis and metas).

I should add that when I first joined, and for a long time, WTA was not an option on here, so I have a lot of PPSC games from the past.

If you want WTA, can I make a short plug for joining the leagues next season?

wait until EdiBirsan gets here and tells you some stuff about diplomacy and draws

lol yeah... he usually sort of ends these discussions

I'm playing about half and half ppsc and wta.

They're all gunboats but still

I'm willing to do a 100 point wta Gunboat if I could get any takers.

babak, i will play a small pot wta with you, want me to start one?

Wow. Harsh words... I think your criticism would be better received if you tried a little tact... I'm surprised at the lack thereof from a fellow Diplomacy player. Don't try the chainsaw diplomacy with developers because it won't work.

If you want to play WTA, you could probably just ask on the forum for someone to start one up. The reason the limit is there is to prevent players from simply gambling 100 point WTA constantly and just ditching them until they get a good start and the 700 points.

Perhaps a more moderate limit, such as points < 100, you can only create a WTA game of half your point worth?

Reiterating what I posted in the other thread:

You don't have to go on a one man crusade. I, and many others, would support your cause, because we feel WTA is superior to PPSC. However, any fire you might take is clearly your fault for adopting such a radical stance and denouncing phpDip as a curse to the hobby. Don't hurt a young community that may mature to take the hobby above and beyond and to an unprecedented level of interest in the game. Not over a relatively trivial matter of how the game should be scored which is easily rectifiable.

Use your diplomacy skills. Suggest a solid course of action that you believe will improve the site and the hobby. Don't just go off to some Diplomacy publication and write a foaming tirade... it's not like we've contradicted your overall statement or crucified you. Yet you have behaved as if you've been complaining about this for a while and we've been ignoring your posts and now you have to step it up to be taken seriously...

Now... if you've settled down... you have my sword. If we can agree on a solution to what you apparently deem to be a problem of catastrophic magnitude I'm sure we can achieve some productive change for the better.

Is it really any different? I mean, I always play a PPSC game to win it outright, and if I'm losing I try for a survival in my record, not the points from a center.

Having all WTA games would cut down on point inflation, but I don't see the fire here. It's all about people's frame of mind.

The only real way to solve the "problem" would be to do away with points entirely and just have people be ranked by their records. A cap on how many games a player can be in at any given time can solve the dilemma of some idiot starting fifty games and flooding the site, which I think the points are really there for.

At any rate, I don't see how the current system is all that bad.

@ Babak: what, then, is the way it should be played? Inspire us!

il remeber that invictus :p

WTA games are definitely better - more difficult to win, less draws (other than tactical draws in the leagues).

As others have said - if you can't set one up yourself, post on the forum asking for someone to set up a private WTA game with you in it.

Sometimes we set up several variants. These are usually done PPSC as we have no idea how they will turn out, and it's fairer for people to set it up in this format as there's less chance of losing points if the variant doesn't work.

Yes, points are a bastardisation of Dip, but try not to get too caught up on it. Play to your style - if you don't want draws to happen, fight to win!

@ Chris - thank you for your measured response - and yes - I am being more radical than maybe this community or this site deserve... the impetus was a particular game where a palyer, who confessed to playing for 30 years, with over 50 games under his belt made a totally 'illogical' stab and explained it as wanting a game-long ally...

he then went to the trouble of linking to 3 instances in my short game history where I 'stabbed' an ally as evidence that I'm a horrible ally. furthermore - he pointed out that half his games were either 2-way draws or 18/16 'survive' concoctions and somehow this was the ideal form of the game...

in another game - a player with over 40 games in his record confessed to me that he has seen 20+ draws in his dip-life but only 1-2 genuine stale-mate lines.... there are a whole batch of people who do not even know what an 'end-game' could/can look like...

now I'm not crying boo hoo - i've been stabed dozens and dozens of times - eliminated and otherwise chewed up in plenty of games... by good and bad players... good and bad stabs alike... I have no problem with someone stabbing me - even for a ridiculous reason...

but what I DO have a problem with - is when in THIS community we build up (including me by my participation) this mutated understanding of a game I cherish so much.

how do I mean? well - new players who pick up this game on here or on FB get used to the ppsc philosophy and rubric of the game... of course I can go out of MY way to find wta games - ask for them advertise them etc - but that does not mean that a whole generation of dippers are learning using THESE rules...

so what would be my solution... one that IS radical Chris...

scrap the entire ppsc concept... I have a ton of reasons for why wta is better than ppsc and i've seen this debate many times on these fora (both here and FB) and yet you and Kestas have made clear ppsc is here to stay.

how to get around the 'issue' of point farming one game at a time...

put a limit.... ie...

if finished games in phpdip <= 4
then 'you can not join a game with pts >25'

so - new to the site?? then feel free to play 4+ 25pt wta games... (you can play lower point games still).

once you have shown you can play through 4 games - then bet however much you want...

if you are a veteran of the game and just joining php (like I was in Dec) then go through the motions with a few low-point games - and teach a thing or two to new players on your way up.



as for ideas - i've posted at least half-a-dozen threads on various ideas for the platform... not any has gotten a serious response from the developers. i've seen even more other ideas being posted... and again - with very minimal response and almost zero discussion or engagement by the developers...

I know this is a labor of love for you guys - and I know you are not making money and dont 'owe' me anything - but as a fan of the hobby - and as someone who does not want to perpetuate what I see as a whole slew of next-gen dip players getting a totally flawed reality about this game - it just bugs me too much.


also chris - see my post about how to help fix the rampant CD issue... and not letting new players sign up for CD positions (hell most of them have no clue they are coming in the middle of the game - many think its a new game) - I did not see a single response from a developer on there either... (and there was no flamboyance AT ALL in that thread)

@ sean, curly, flash and others - I do appreciate the wta game offers - and to the extent that I stay and play on this site or the FB one - I will do my utmost to play wta games only -

but there is a wider issue at play that I'm trying to address here - which is a game psychology being developed in the community that not only allows meta-gaming, game-long-alliance building, and point farming... its my role in perpetuating that psychology by participating in that community. and want to or not - we all get infected by that psychology ... even in wta game-play when its all around you as it is here.

@ ursa - sorry to seem contemptuous and necessitating such a satirical response from you.. and it is not my job to tell you what you should or should not play... but this game has a special place in the pantheon of games... it is one of the few PURE strategy games on the planet. it is meant to be played with 7 mutually exclusive rational actors... but what happens in a ppsc community like this is that the game becomes unbalanced.

i may and probably do sound way too emphatic about this and many if not most will simply dismiss my diatribe and tell me to move on... but the wider point i'm trying to make is that this ppsc model is hurting the game of Diplomacy. I don't like that - and I think I should do something about it.

Chris - you said:

"Use your diplomacy skills. Suggest a solid course of action that you believe will improve the site and the hobby.
.... you have behaved as if you've been complaining about this for a while and we've been ignoring your posts and now you have to step it up to be taken seriously..."

I bumped up a previos post I made with an explicit title "A suggestion for Kestas and other developers" which was measured - backed up with examples and with specific suggestions. just as you ask in the quote above. quite diplomatic if I may.

what response did you or kestas offer in that thread vs this thread?

I dont mean to be mean to you - i'm not trying to be - but I am frustrated...

you said:

"Now... if you've settled down... you have my sword. If we can agree on a solution to what you apparently deem to be a problem of catastrophic magnitude I'm sure we can achieve some productive change for the better."

let me be constructive... let me ask first -

1) what is the purpose of the ppsc system?
2) what benefits does it offer over a wta-only system?
3) can we achieve those same benefits with a purly wta-system? 4a) if so - how difficult is it to program?
4b) and how difficult will it be for the community as a whole to transition?
4c) if not - what other proposals can be made to cover those benefits without losing the wta nature of teh game?

I and others have offered up suggestions (invictus for example suggested scrapping points alltogether and just limiting # of games - a specific suggestion)... but I think before that... you and Kestas - whose brainchild this application and platform is have to provide a few guidelines...

what are the answers to question 1 and 2 above?

I'll try and answer your questions.

1.) When the site was set up (well before I joined, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong), there was no limit on the number of games you could play. It was 'pure' - no points etc.

This changed to introduce points. One of the significant reasons for this was that some players were playing 40+ games, and this lead to a huge number of drop outs and civil disorders. Basically, people joined games, and if they didn't do well, dropped out and started another.

Introducing points meant that as a new player (who were more likely to drop out) you could only join a maximum of 20 games, at 5 points each. In fact, from what I have seen, and I may be wrong, most new players enter significantly higher points - 25+, so they can get more points and move up the list more quickly.

The other advantage of points is that they help to rank, and add more 'spice' to games - you are more likely to invest more time and effort in a game if you have a stake of D's in it.

2.) PPSC is like a 'break the ice' system for entering into Diplomacy. You must remember that a large percentage of players come to this site 'blind'. They have never played before, so giving people a chance to get stakes back is a bit kinder. Also, I think there is a problem with initiating WTA only, which brings me to:

3.) WTA only - probably purer, but I believe there would be a problem instituting this only instead of PPSC. Someone might be able to let you know more about this - am afraid I don't know.

3.) No ideas - you'll have to speak to a programmer. Please bear in mind that Kestas doesn't check in so often these days as he used to, so programming is going at a slower rate than in the early days.

4 a,b,c) I think there is a choice here. Dip was a great invention as a game, but who is to say that you cannot regard PPSC as a variant, in the same way that Gunboat, Touch Diplomacy, UN Variants etc are? If people want to play PPSC, let them. If you want to play WTA, you can, as we've explained before, start one yourself, or if you don't have enough points, ask someone to do it for you. We'd be happy to oblige.

I personally don't see the need for change. The points system works as it intended, and there are now 2 systems for ranking players - Points, and the ELO. I feel that the ELO is sidelining points among some of the more frequent players, as they seek to move up that list by skill, rather than by points.

Hope that helps - I know it's not comprehensive, but at least it will give you some idea of the thoughts of some of us!

@ Babak: I was not being satirical, sorry if it sounded that way.

The problem I want to discuss is: you may have complaints on the online game culture - and for a great part I can follow your argument. For some time now I myself am trying to lessen my amount of games and increase the amount of press - I have already played too much games with little or no communication, call it 'Diplomacy with a calculator'. While the diplomacy is supposed to be the fun part.

Trailing off here.

What I mean is there's an online game culture, and most of the players here are participants of this culture. In other words, they are used to PPSC. Now, you can complain about this culture existing, but that's not going to change something. Better is to inspire people how the game should be played as a Diplomacy veteran, one that didn't learn the game online.

Babak, I'll be a bit harsh on you here - because you've written a ton of whining nonsense above + managed to insult the people who have created and maintain the site and everyone who plays here.

In here, just as in life, you have two general options:
A) Get stronger and make a difference to the environment around you
B). Whine
You seem to have taken option B?

Maybe play a bit more games, win some more points, and you'll be able to join/make whatever games you want? Noone is stopping you, are they?

You've been here two months, played a couple of games and suddenly you're an expert on the game as a whole and know everything about this community? :) There're some very good players here - and some really great games along the way.

It is a key part of Diplomacy to be able to adjust your play according to the other people you're in a game with. The rules are the same for everyone and if you're not able to fit in then most likely the problem is not in the others.

PPSC has the beneficial effect of allowing people to create alliances because the PPSC principle makes the ally predictable - he stands to gain by agreement. I find it encourages players who build a momentum to start to think in a semi- gunboat way about the possible ways to win.
But I agree with Babak that the communication and intensity of the alliances is weak and superficial. It's like the problem with online poker; you can't read the other person. Sometimes potential alliances go missing simply because the player in question is not posting often enough or replying to your posts.
The only way around this is to play 1 hour games on the weekend which will intensify the level of message posting and therefore negotiations??

What is PPSC and WTA? :x

PPSC = Point Per Supply Center (e.g. point are split proportionally to the centers each player holds at game end)
WTA = Winner Takes All

Babak, if I remember correctly you joined this site already a vetern. Instituting a WTA only system might work for you. But I ahve three reasons why PPSC is necessary.
1) Rookies could easily be driven off. The first game I played on this site I maneuvered myself intoa strong second place after alot of hard work and diplomacy. If I had gotten nothing back from that effort it would have been frustrating. In fact, if it had looked like I wasn't going to be able to win any of my games I probably would have just quit. This would not only CD my games but it would mean you would have lost me as a player.
2) Civil Disorder problems. Your policy will increase CDs. But even if it didn't you must know that many of the the low pot games are rife with CDs and NMRs. This schews the game so its harder to control. I've played some awesome WTA games where the balance of power is constantly shifting and you try to effect what happens all over the board. But if France isn't moving, Germany and England are going to grow alot faster. If I lose my ally to CD through no fault of my own, in WTA I lose everything. In PPSC I'm not punished for others problems as much. All in all: PPSC is less frustrating. Creating frustration is bad.
3) It doesn't solve your problem. Your original example is about planning 17-17 draws and complaining about how many players draw games without having stalemate lines. People can draw in WTA. In fact, since people are risk averse, I find many players are more likely to draw WTA games without "just cause" simply because they don't want to risk getting nothing out of there efforts.

In conclusion. I think limiting what people can do out of free will is almost always bad. No one is twisting anyones arm to paly either style. I think it should stay that way.