Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 963 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
loftus99 (100 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Craziest Game i have ever been apart of
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=100535&nocache=97

and shout out to germany for only taking two centers that werent his by right or from a cd france
22 replies
Open
EmperorJC (436 D)
28 Sep 12 UTC
Need another Carthage again.
gameID=100298

Not in the best position, but there's still hope.
1 reply
Open
Optimouse (107 D)
28 Sep 12 UTC
Need someone to step in as France! Spring 01, 24h turns.
Our France was banned for cheating, details unknown. We need a new one. The game hasn't started yet. The game is called Turn-A-Day conflict.
11 replies
Open
HITLER69 (0 DX)
28 Sep 12 UTC
when will games unpause?
for all the games I'm playing that got automatically paused there is 1 person holding out on the unpause for each of these games. Neither of the people who have left their votes out have much of a stake left in the game either. Will the games automatically unpause after a certain time or do I need to contact the mods directly?
0 replies
Open
DrTenpenny (100 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Treaties
There was a game I played on VDip called 'Treaties' where you had to announce alliances, lay claim to SCs and declare war a year before invasion, all on public chat. Private chat is enabled though so you can plan effectively with your allies. I loved it and I was wondering if anyone here was interested. Bit of RPing makes it that much better too. If anyone is clearer on the rules, it'd be awesome if you could clear it up.
13 replies
Open
Fortress Door (1837 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Just Want To Hear Other People's Opinion..
It is the time of a game where you are just on whittling down the draw. And a 1-3 center power requests a draw for about a week. Do you give it?
41 replies
Open
dougal (177 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Unpausing
Hi all, Sorry if this has been asked before.
Does every player have to vote to unpause before a game can proceed or will games unpause themselves eventually?
Ta Doug
18 replies
Open
Hyperactive Jam (299 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Need a takeover of Italy in excellent position.
5 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
24 Sep 12 UTC
The 46 Books of the WebDiplomacy Bible Or...
...How I Learned to Quit Quarreling and Love Some Books! ;)
I've always wanted to do this, loving literature and the written word so much:
Everyone picks 2 books/poems/plays/works (No Collected Works/Anthologies, Multi-Part Series can count as 2 books a la 1/2 Samuel.) 1 book chosen = literature/fiction, 1 book = philosophy/science/any non-fiction. So let's see what we compile together, what our Forum's "canon" looks like! :)
40 replies
Open
Alex987 (174 D)
26 Sep 12 UTC
Hi Guys...
I need your help...
13 replies
Open
Tom Bombadil (4023 D(G))
27 Sep 12 UTC
Differential Equations.
Need some help. Not cheating on hw or anything like that. Just a practice problem that would be great if someone could walk me through. Reply if you gots some math knowledge!
19 replies
Open
EmperorJC (436 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
Need a Carthage....
We need someone to take over Carthage, it's early in the game but there is still hope!

gameID=100298
2 replies
Open
kestasjk (95 DMod(P))
26 Sep 12 UTC
Processing time reset
Hi guys,
I've reset the processing time, and added 24 hours to all games. Apologies for the inconvenience. I'll add this issue to my automated warning system so that I'll be able to respond more quickly next time.
Regards,
Kestas
30 replies
Open
tj218 (713 D)
22 Sep 12 UTC
Any RP or highly talkative games starting?
Sick of playing games that turn into a gunboat. I do prefer WTA and anon games. Thanks
24 replies
Open
EOG- Mother of God
3 replies
Open
LakersFan (899 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
EoG Roma Victor
2 replies
Open
Bob Genghiskhan (1233 D)
27 Sep 12 UTC
EOGs for Wave upon wave of demented avengers...
11 replies
Open
Yonni (136 D(S))
27 Sep 12 UTC
Subs needed for Triathlon
Acmac hasn't been around since the 17th so I'm guessing that he won't make it in time to join the next round. I need subs for a gunboat and a full press game. Could be one person for both, or two different people.
7 replies
Open
erik8asandwich (298 D)
26 Sep 12 UTC
Replacement Needed
We need a replacement France for a player who was banned. France is in a pretty good position. PM me if interested for game details.
1 reply
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
26 Sep 12 UTC
EoG: Happy Fun Palace-2
When England and France leave, it's Germany who should win... isn't it?
18 replies
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
26 Sep 12 UTC
EoG: Mass destruction
Memorable moment: Denmark stays neutral until autumn 1904.
5 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
25 Sep 12 UTC
All Slaves
Huffington post recently claimed income inequality in the US today is worse than both slavery era US and the roman empire. Thoughts?
6 replies
Open
SantaClausowitz (360 D)
23 Sep 12 UTC
SEC is on such a higher plane
Which is why Rutgers went into a FULL STRENGTH Arkansas and came out with a win. Can't wait till Arkansas take some SEC teams down and the discussion is "How did Arkansas turn their season around so quickly." Newsflash, outside of LSU and Alabama the SEC is nothing special.
65 replies
Open
Fortress Door (1837 D)
26 Sep 12 UTC
What?
http://webdiplomacy.net/profile.php?userID=47277

he plays one game and get banned... this makes me wish that mods revealed case details for bans :P
5 replies
Open
ckroberts (3548 D)
25 Sep 12 UTC
Everyone knows this server isn't processed
Why is there even a webdiplomacy server if no one is every going to process games?

It just seems like the whole website is un-serviced and everyone knows it.
34 replies
Open
Lando Calrissian (100 D(S))
26 Sep 12 UTC
Why are these games paused ???????
9 replies
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
Can't register to forum.webdiplomacy.net
Hi guys, I tried to register to forum.webdiplomacy.net, but the CAPTCHA says I'm wrong. I tried it like 100 times, still no result.

Tried it with space, without space, case-sensitive, insensitive, changing word orthers, still no succees. Is it just me, or is it wrong for others as well?
8 replies
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
An(other) idea to handle multis/metas
See below
Page 5 of 7
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
Summary:

HELP-TO-AVOID LIST (aka banlist)

The purpose of this game is to be able to avoid those players whom you think cheat (but are not [yet] banned), those who regularly CD or resign, or whom you don't want to play for any other reason. It would work like the "Mute" function, you can "Avoid" anyone by placing them on your list.

Once someone is on your list and joins a game, which you already joined, you'll get a notification that one of your "avoidees" joined, and you can decide whether to stay in the game or leave it, before it starts.



RESTRICTIONS AND SPECS:

a) No avoidee can join any games created by his/her avoider.
--
Meaning if you create a game, you can take it guaranteed no one will join it you don't want.


b) No avoidee can join any game having an avoider inside after there's less then 1 phase length time left till start.
--
This means, if an avoidee [of any already joined player] joins the game the avoider can leave before the game was meant to start, and he has enough time to do that. [May result a filled up regular phase game doesn't start immidiately after it's filled but will start in time.] Also the avoider can stay as well, if he/she wants. Having less than 1 phase length time left until start, means the avoider may not be able to step out from the game, so he wouldn't avoid whom he wanted. The same stands at live games.


c) The avoidee has the right to know who's banned him
--
If you get banned by someone you have the ability to ask him why and argue.


d) The avoid-list is not public
--
Meaning you can't see who tries to avoid who, just who tries to avoid YOU.


e) 48 hours time limit to change status
--
If you ban/unban someone there's a 48-hours delay when you can change his/her status again and unban/ban him/her. This meant to not to help you figure out who is in an anonymous game, unban him/her, and join.


f) Those games, which already have an avoidee of yours inside are non-joinable by you.
--
Though this is a help to avoid list, and you might want to join anyway, this restriction is meant to make you handle your list seriously. Once you ban someone, you have to face the fact you might restrict yourself from some games and banning has consequences, it's not a tool to change daily.
Draugnar (0 DX)
19 Sep 12 UTC
One additional caveat: In anon games, the n otification should not say who the avoidee is as that would be problematic in keeping the game anon.
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
I never thought to tell who the avoidee is, at any circumstances, just state the fact there's one.
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
I will let this thread live it's own for a couple of days, then I will move to developers forum.
uclabb (589 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
One thought: It seems undesirable to have the possibility of a banner basically blocking the seventh spot in a game for a while, and then choosing to leave 10 minutes before the game is scheduled to start. There is a reason games are locked once 7 players join. It seems there are two ways to address this: 1. Build in "reaction time" as part of the time limits involving the ban list or 2. Allow for a queue in games so that there can be someone in line to join a game in case someone else leaves.
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
I think queues would be hard to handle.

About leaving 10 minutes before, what I thought is, for example there's 4 days left from a 36 hours phase game to start. the avoidee joins, the banner still has only 36hours to leave, if he doesn't it will start 2,5 days before scheduled, if he leaves there's still 4 days left.

So basically this causes a problem only if the avoidee joins closely 1 phase length time before scheduled start. But if we expand it to 2 phases, why the banner still has 1 phase to leave, that solves the problem, and in case he leaves there's still at least 1 phase length time left to fill up the 7th place.
rokakoma (19138 D)
19 Sep 12 UTC
"while the banner"
Draugnar (0 DX)
19 Sep 12 UTC
When the seventh joins, just make the time remaining exactly one phase length. If the time remiaing would have been less, it gets bumped out, if it would have been more, it gets shortened up.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
any new thought by anyone? Since I couldn't register to developers forum, we still have time to discuss ...

@draug: I can't really get your idea about modifying the remaining time. Though I think letting the avoider only 1 phase time to leave, while giving the avoidee 1.5-2 phases latest to join solves the problem. So I would just modify point "b)" to 1.5 phase. So worst case scenario they still will have 0.5 phase to fill up the 7th place.
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
20 Sep 12 UTC
I realize I haven't been involved in this conversation, but I was asked to contribute, so I shall.

I would suggest starting off simply. Allow game creators to have their black list be activated, but do not have black lists apply to games that a player joins but didn't create. This will eliminate several complicated scenarios. In this situation, I wouldn't bother letting people see if they are on any black lists, as that will only cause controversy.
djakarta97 (358 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
I personally think that while the idea is prospective, it can be easily abused by people who want to keep good players (like you) out of their games. The silencing mechanism that you've devised should only be accessible to members. Most multis are political puppets, so they would not be able to prevent regular, fair players from joining.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
djakarta97; you missed the point, you can't exclude any players from any games, only from those ones you created. But anyone who is banned can join any game, except those which were created by the banner person.

This issue has been discussed in this thread already and we found it's not aproblem, look it up.
djakarta97 (358 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
All I'm saying is that the function shouldn't be available to political puppets.
Fortress Door (1837 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
why not???

Fortress Door (1837 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
Lando was actually a political puppet a few months ago (bet a whole ton of points, I think so the mods couldn't dock his points)
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
20 Sep 12 UTC
Also, I don't like B and F, as they seem to skirt around the point of anon games.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
@abge: I couldn't really get you. The reason behind your ban list doesn't effect those games which are not created by you is, that any of your actions (banning someone) should not have any effect on others. This is basically just a warning system, notifying you, that you may play with someone whom you don't want to.

If they don't see on whose list they are, they don't have the opportunity to defend themselves, and to argue with the banner. But that's an issue between the two players only.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
@abge: erasing F is okay for me.
point B was added on purpose not to extend scheduled game start. So if an avoidee joins 10 minutes before gamestart, or even worse, he joins a regular game as 7th, then the game starts, t the banner is forced to play with his bannee. That's not good.
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
20 Sep 12 UTC
First, please do not call it a ban list. Mods ban people, players don't. Your terminology is very confusing. Call it a blacklist if that's what you're trying to do.

I think game creators should have the ability to prohibit certain people from playing. After all, that's what a PW already does.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
but point A is on purpose to allow game creatiors to prohibit certain people? So where's the problem?
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
20 Sep 12 UTC
Yes, I'm saying I agree with point A. I think the rest is not important or detrimental or unnecessarily complicated.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
Well, if we clear all the rest that would certainly make things easier. Also point C,D might still be needed, B,E,F is useless if we limit it only for created games.

I like it because it encourages people to create more games, on the other hand I might still run into people I don't want :(

But I think if we (the wider community) can agree on this one it would be a great start, and we can implement/develop rules to it later as well.
Yonni (136 D(S))
20 Sep 12 UTC
Didn't read through the 5 pages but making 'semi-anon' an option for game creation would help people avoid playing games with people they don't want to.
It would also make it easier to set up pw games and see who hasn't joined yet.

It'd be a nice feature. Just saying.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
Yonni: both your ideas have been discussed in this thread. Semi-anon is hardly anon, you can easily figure out who is who. PW has the same problem, you know who are in. The point is, to be able to play purely anon games with avoiding people you don't want.
Yonni (136 D(S))
20 Sep 12 UTC
Meh, you play GB anyways. Not diplomacy. We don't have these problems in diplomacy.
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
touche ;), (I'm currently playing two FP games btw ;) and joining the 3rd tomorrow :) )
uclabb (589 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
I actually do think having a true semi-anon option would be cool
rokakoma (19138 D)
20 Sep 12 UTC
This wouldn't be a true semi anon, just from the creators point of view, but not for the other 6.
Draugnar (0 DX)
20 Sep 12 UTC
@DJakarta - I'm a political puppet, dude. That title don't mean shit. If you wanted to restrict access based on membership time or games played, OK. But that title is based on available points, not even total.points.
rokakoma (19138 D)
21 Sep 12 UTC
@Draug, @uclabb

Do you guys like the idea to limit this "blacklist" only for games which you created. I think abge's idea makes it much more simple both to implement and to create less contorversy, also by limiting it only to games which were created by the "avoider" we don't limit the "service" to be upgraded later according to our discussion here.

I think limiting to games only which the "avoider" makes this a really good pilot project without risking having too much tension among players on the site, or to substantially limit anyone's ability to play any game he wants.

It's easy to implement: copying muting feature, and only evaluating an if condition whether the player is on the creator's blacklist. That's all, simple and great ;)

Of course, if the creator leaves his own game then anyone can join. The players should still know who has banned them.

Page 5 of 7
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

185 replies
Fortress Door (1837 D)
25 Sep 12 UTC
Another Game...
I am sad because I was the only one defeated in abge's game. Signup's for the Third FD Game

1. Fortress Door
2. Legatus (signed up a wihle ago, via pm)
55 replies
Open
Fortress Door (1837 D)
25 Sep 12 UTC
bo_sox48
Please stop being an asshole. Thank You
11 replies
Open
Page 963 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top