Old Forum - webDiplomacy

Forum

A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.

Page 28 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last

)
07 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New Game

I'm startin a new game titled Royalty.

2 replies

)
11 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

What Happened to GameMaster?

In this game, it's currently Autumn 1902, and yet on my gamemaster tab I only have one line which reads " Autumn 1902, Retreats: Nothing happened involving your units in this phase."

My previous moves from 1901 are all gone. What's up with this?

5 replies

)
11 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

um, this is way weird, and gay

I'm in a game called bloody chess, everybody has finalized their moves but the game wont go to the next round (or season or whatever) it seems like I'll have to wait another 13 hours, even tho everyone is done!

6 replies

)
10 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Strange Player Name

In the game Fat and Juicy Italy is in civil disorder and the name of the Italy player is "Civil Disorder Italy". Did the player specifically make an account to play as Italy and be in civil disorder all the time?

This is just weird and I'm bringing it up because it might be cheating.

8 replies

)
05 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

MasterMinds III & IV

i'm starting another MasterMinds only game. email me if you want to join. i'll start the game as soon as i get 6 emails. or, since there are so many of us now, we could have two games. (no one would be in both, so someone else would have to start the second)

44 replies

)
10 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

World Is Yours

say hello to my little friend and be aware that new game was just open...

0 replies

)
10 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Rules Question

I am just wondering what the rule is and what the outcome will be on this site if this situation were to happen:

Lets have Four Armies armies Army A, B, C and D. A and B are on the same team, C and D are on the same team.

Say A is in Trieste, B is in Budapest, C is in Vienna, and D is in Galacia.

So the situation is as follows:

Army A move Trieste - Vienna
Army B support move Triest - Vienna

So there is an attack of strength two on Vienna.

Army C move Vienna - Bohemia
Army D support Hold in Vienna.

Say Army C were to have a stalemate in Bohemia, and so comes back to Vienna. Now is there a stalemate in Vienna, since they are both strength two, OR does the support hold order become void, and Army C is forced to retreat?

Any help is appreciated.

2 replies

DrTerminus (107

)
09 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Lost Passwords

One of my players lost his password. Can you email it to him? His user name is "Friendly Bill".

1 reply

The Mahatma (1195

)
05 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Unreliable players - name names?

Do the experienced players on this site have an appetite for a thread that names names of players who
-have abandoned when the going got tough
-haven't fought right to the bitter end
-don't finalize their moves in a timely fashion

I think the bugs on the site aren't a big deal, as long as you know what they are. But the potentially fatal flaws in this site are the absence of a abandon game option, the number of moves before an abandoned country goes into cd, and the length of time to wait for retreats when there's no place to go.

Noodlebug (1812 )
05 Jun 07 UTC

Everyone has their own definition of unreliable, and certain player characteristics they prefer to avoid. I think a naming names thread would inevitably just become a flame thread full of arguments!

Some players give up because they can't be bothered, some give up out of spite, some think giving up so as to advantage one player over another is a reasonable response to unreasonable conduct... we should not be looking to take the free will or the unpredictability out of games.

If we can't use persuasion and honest dealing to influence people to act in a mutual best interest, we're not really qualified to play a game called "Diplomacy!"

Locke (1846 )
05 Jun 07 UTC

i agree with Noodlebug, a name and shame session is all very well but it won't really achieve anything other than dispute.
One persons unreliable is anothers ticket to free SCs!!

The Mahatma (1195 )
05 Jun 07 UTC

You should not be winning by getting free SCs - that's not how game is meant to be played. I thought about asking who the reliable players are, but I think that is even more subject to context; on a couple of occasions I have observed players give up on a game play another game through to the conclusion because they were winning.

The list I propose would be useful for me when considering joining a game.

jimshlif (441 )
05 Jun 07 UTC

Mahatma, I've bumped my own thread, which offers a different solution to the problems you describe. BTW, is it really fair to criticize people who take a long time to finalize their moves or their retreats? Not everyone can check the site constantly, and there's nothing wrong with talking your move over with allies before you finalize it - or, for that matter, with deliberately delaying the next turn because you want to be sure your allies get your messages before their moves deploy. I agree with you very strongly, though, that players who miss turns, or give up while they have more than 1 sc, or go into civil disorder, make the game less fun for everyone else and should be penalized.

Noodlebug (1812 )
05 Jun 07 UTC

All you have to do is monitor the current games and watch the names of people who go into civil disorder regularly - ESPECIALLY where they go CD in some games but not in others.

The Mahatma (1195 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

Jim, I agree with you that it is ok to take 24 hrs if necessary. As was argued in the earlier thread, that is the time line, so it will have to do. On the other hand, it is very annoying when players always don't finalize even when there's no diplomatic reason for doing so. I think it is absolutely absurd to have to wait 24 hours for retreats or builds. There is some diplomacy required, but not the same amount as for movements.

Noodlebug (1812 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

Apparantly, some people can only get online once-per-day, if they finalise as soon as they are online then that means the next day they have to get on slightly earlier, which might not always be possible.

jimshlif (441 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

Yeah, I see what you mean, Mahatma. Is it currently the case that if I enter orders, but fail to finalize them, they get enacted anyway when the 24 hours end? If that's true, what if those moves simply didn't get enacted, giving people a motivation to finalize their move early lest they lose their move altogether?

The quickest and easiest solution might simply be to let a game's creator set separate time limits on each type of round. People who could only play once per day could join games where the limits were 24 hours for moves, 24 for builds, 24 for retreats. People interested in logging in every hour could host games where the limits were 12 hours for moves, 1 daylight hour for builds, 1 daylight hour for retreats.

jimshlif (441 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

The more I think about it, the more important I find that "abandon game" button you suggest.

Chrispminis (916 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

An "abandon game" button is not the answer.

Not many players look to take over a country in civil disorder, and it would interrupt the game anyways. kestas has a new scoring system planned, and once implemented, should penalize unreliable players so that playing through to the end of a game is imperative, and falling into civil disorder is a serious offense.

There are always people who have legitimate reasons for having to abandon games, but if they do not abandon games too often, a small penalty is no big deal. The disruption incurred by other players is more significant.

jimshlif (441 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

The scoring system you suggest could actually be used to encourage takeovers of civil disorders: ie, if you take over a game that someone else has abandoned, you get good karma (in the form of points or whatever) that cancels out some of your bad karma for missing turns or leaving games elsewhere.

The fact of the matter is, if someone wants to leave a game in the lurch, he's going to do it whether or not there's a button to abandon the game. The "abandon game" button would at least make it easier for another player to take over the game quickly, minimizing the damage to the game. And the button's use could be enforced by slightly penalizing people who click on the button, but severely penalizing people who just stop playing.

Chrispminis (916 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

The scoring system, would indeed encompass the problem of civil disorders.

I now see the logic behind "abandon game" buttons. Good points. I had initially thought that it was merely to deter unreliable playing, for whatever strange reason.

I can see how such a button might be quite useful.

The Mahatma (1195 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

It would also help to keep a game moving along rather than having to wait in vain for several 24 hour phases for someone who will never return.

isbian (106 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

The "abandon game" option has appeared in the forum before. The argument against it is that "players will be encouraged to give up on their games". Also, I think instead of fighting against civil disorder time, why don't we turn our attention on the new players who join in and quit shortly afterwards? Most of the civil disorders are caused by people like that anyway.

The Mahatma (1195 )
06 Jun 07 UTC

Hey, it's a good idea isbian, so why not keep our attention on both things.

But we can end this thread now. It seems there is no appetite for naming names.

Noodlebug (1812 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

If we're naming names for people who make stupid, suicidal plays (whether out of spite or stupidity, I really can't tell) that effectively surrender a game to another player, I've got a couple! Check out game 551!

The Mahatma (1195 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

Noodle, your first post was right and now I'm regretting starting this thread as you have sorely misused it.

In game 551, it looks like all the other countries gained at your expense. The intent of this thread was not to call out players who disadvantage you by what you perceive as stupid play. If I remember correctly, you went on a renegade mission in The Faster Game and effectively took the win from Mendoek and swung it in my favour.

The intention of this thread was not to identify situations like 551, where, whether you like what they've done or not, players are still fighting for what they obviously perceive as their advantage. Rather, the intention was to identify players who order all positions to hold or stop playing altogether when they're losing.

hanker (769 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

Spite, stupidity and suicide all sound like factors that have played out in the wars of history. Why should Diplomacy be any more rational?

Locke (1846 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

well said hanker! i could name a list of names and they could all deny everything and name me... diplomacy is irrational!

aoe3rules (949 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

i agree. morons will be morons, but in the long run they'll leave and we'll be okay. anyway we will (i think) have reliability/NMR ratings in the future so we'll know who to play with.

Worldbeing (1063 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

"Rather, the intention was to identify players who order all positions to hold or stop playing altogether when they're losing."

To stop playing altogether is bad, yes. It slows the game down and makes it less interesting.
Finalising holds is simliar, but in some situations it is the right and honourable thing to do- say you are outnumbered because you took over a country in civ dis, and the player surrounding you is taking vengeance on a traitor who opposed him.
Then you stand no hope of growing- when your every boundary is patrolled by this bigger player- and it would be simply dishonourable to support an enemy into your own territory unless it was to your advantage.
The only solution is to finalise holds and let fate take its course.

Noodlebug (1812 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

There's no advantage in effectively sealing the victory of another country and condemning yourself to defeat... playing the renegade is fine when you have zero chance of winning anyway (as when you and Mendoek were both attacking me!), but both players in game 551 could have conceivably played themselves back into the game, rather than just settle for bringing down the second most powerful nation.

However, I accept my post was not really appropriate to this thread, people do make stupid, short-termist moves without realising they're hurting themselves, or sometimes just can't be bothered to play from a difficult position (or have trust issues!). It's part of the game, you have to deal with them and sometimes lose games because of them. I was annoyed, and I wanted to name and shame. I'm sorry!

Locke (1846 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

Hey, don't put down stupid and short term moves!

I got 12 wins of people making stupid and short term moves!

PLEASE everyone..... keep making stupid moves... for my sake if nothing else!

Locke (1846 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

*off*

Noodlebug (1812 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

That's true, looking at all my games together I've profited more than I've suffered..!

Chrispminis (916 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

Noodlebug, please keep any of our disputes between us. =)

I don't want to have to publicize our discussions. And I've just sent a detailed explanation. Thanks.

QCadd (100 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

The reprecussions from stupid moves build character!

Noodlebug (1812 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

Well I like to think they teach people a lesson that they will remember in future games. Hopefully next time these people are in the same position they will remember what happened and try the smart, long-term tactic (unless I'm the guy who's about to win as a result!)

isbian (106 )
07 Jun 07 UTC

I seriously disagree with QCadd. If you notice, the stupid moves are all made by new players (no offense meant). Stupid moves may build character, but for these new players, they just leave, slowing down the game.

dangermouse (5551 )
10 Jun 07 UTC

maybe we should just ban new players?
:)

30 replies

)
08 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Racist

this is a racist game close or i will fuck your systems

13 replies

)
09 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Lets Do Everything as a PHP Community to Make this Site Perfect

Kestas, I suggest that you provide an option for donations to improve servers and make a PHP Diplomacy 1.0 with upgrades. If money will fix the flaws then I think as a community we can come together and help. What do you guys say.

1 reply

)
01 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

need help regarding support

I have an army at keil and an army at Holland I ordered my army at keil to move to rhur and sipport Holland and I told my army at Holland to move to belgium(which was occupied by enemy force).
for some reason after the end of the phase i keep on getting ths message:your army at keil's move support wasn't accepted by the unit which support was being given to.

its not the first time it happened can someone please tell me what happened. and can someone please also tell me how can I support my units.

thanks

12 replies

)
09 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

new game

war is hell

join it

0 replies

DrTerminus (107

)
08 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Due Now status

After the 24 hour time limit the game is in the "due now" status. Why does the game not make the moves? If there are players that have not finalized orders whey does it not just default them to hold and move on?

3 replies

)
06 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New game

"Unto the breach" for fans of Shakespeare, and other literate homies. "Summon up the blood"!

0 replies

)
22 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Feature request: record NMR's

Certainly not a high priority, but it would be nice if phpdiplomacy logged each time a player committed an NMR ("no moves received"), and displayed in his profile the percentage of his turns that were NMR's.

Maybe game creators could even set a threshold: "anyone can join this game except people with NMR% higher than 10%" etc.

19 replies

Otto Von Bismark (653

)
31 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

3 of My 7 Games are in the "Due Now" Phase

Kestas, if there is something you can do, it would be appriciated.

10 replies

)
03 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Fleet support cut by army????

Autumn 1906, Diplomacy: Your fleet at Aegean Sea was attacked by a army at Greece, and had to defend itself, so couldnt support a move elsewhere.

Autumn 1906, Diplomacy: Your army at Constantinople engaged the army at Bulgaria head on; both units were equally matched so there was a stand off.

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=1051&msgmembershipid=0

7 replies

)
03 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Oddity corner

what is the most unusual game you have seen so far?

0 replies

Salmaneser (6160

)
03 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Spelling error

Kestas, just found a spelling order. In the dropbox, one of the possibilities to move to is North Altantic Ocean. Never heared of that though ;-)

13 replies

The Donkey (479

)
02 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Request for Kestas

http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=1162

Could you extend the turn deadline by one day? Some of our players have disappeared and it is unlikely that they'll make a move by 8AM PST. I wouldn't want any player to skip a turn as that unbalances the game.

2 replies

)
01 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Mad Game

I was just looking over the games i got knocked out in when i found this:

http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=969

This is the strangest looking board i think i've seen on this site..... almost makes me wish i was still in!

8 replies

)
02 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Bug?

my army at triest moved into venice with support from a fleet in the adriatic. how did the italian army happen to move venice-triest at the same time?

3 replies

)
01 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

a question

what determines what country you are in a game? is it completly random? obviously randomness is a big part, but does anything else factor in?

4 replies

)
01 Jun 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Bloddy Chess

new game, join it

2 replies

)
31 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New game started

Hell on Earth for everyone interested in a non-peaceful solvation of multilateral interests. Warheads welcome.

0 replies

Salmaneser (6160

)
27 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Even more demographics! - Profession

What's your job, or what do you study?

I'm a student History at university of Ghent.

34 replies

)
31 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New Game

New game - Senso-Yaro - for all hepcats. Everybody welcome. Except assholes.

2 replies

)
26 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Rules that haven't yet been implemented

I just got this Gamemaster message: "Autumn 1906, Diplomacy: Your army at Serbia prevented the army at Rumania from giving a support move against your army at Serbia." Is that to be taken as accurate? I thought if Xxx s Yyy->Zzz, then Zzz->Xxx couldn't cut that support. Either this is an erroneous message, or the rule I just cited isn't yet implemented in phpdiplomacy.

I haven't been able to find any kind of list of known discrepancies between phpdiplomacy adjudication and the official rules, but it would be useful to have such a list. Can we list such discrepancies here for future reference?

In phpdiplomacy, unlike in regular Diplomacy...
1) You can't yet support the movement of a unit that's being convoyed.
2) A unit that's under attack can cut support being given to its own attacker.
3) A convoy is disrupted if it is attacked, even if the attack is unsuccessful.
4) A unit to be convoyed specifies what route to use, not its destination.
5) Other players don't get to see your orders, only the results of the orders.
6) ...

What else?

12 replies

Mod

(P)

)
31 May 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

sid cookie set to 0 error

A problem that has been turning up in the logs a lot recently was a logon bug that has been fixed. You may have been logged out momentarily when I applied the fix, but that should be over now.

If anyone can't log in let me know at [email protected]

0 replies

Page 28 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last