did you consider*
my 6am English is not very scholarly.

I haven't done it because the phaselengths are too short. With anon games, all press has to go through the site, which takes longer than using, for instance, and IM.

If we extend phaselengths, it becomes a possibility.

Hmm, is using outside methods of communication common for league players? I didn't see it in the last league, but perhaps at the higher levels it is almost required.

I'm not into anonymous games. Can't do any research on your opponents and any metagaming done could be very obvious since many players are watching the coming leagues.

When I thought of it, I was mainly considering the huge amount of:

"We can't let this guy win another because he'll have the number one slot locked." attitude.

I suppose much of that is eliminated by playing the games simultaneously, but surely game one's winner is decided by game four and most likely by game three.

The popularity of forcing alliances by that stigma means it's almost detrimental to your overall chances of winning the league by taking the first game, particularly by a huge stab.

Different strategies may be required per the game number, yikes, I never thought of that!

Hopefully, the new players will have better game spirit than that...

Even those that don't see the leagues extending past their four games will have a preconceived notion to behave that way, I certainly did in my first league.

You're only playing four games, and it's the best of those four games between six other players. The first winner is the ultimate rendition of Tall Poppy Syndrome.

If anything, it might be best to make sure your first game lasts as long as humanely possible, at least until the fourth game is past it's first year.

That's the whole point. Why are people so worried about 'metagaming'? It's a very loose definition that gets thrown around a lot. The word is becoming a little tired. For the record, my view is:

Metagaming:
- I will do something that harms me and benefits an opponent in Game X. This will be repaid by the same player in game Y, who will do something otherwise illogical or self-harming within the context of that game, when taken alone.

Not metagaming:
- You want to win the league, so you look at the table and do not help the player who currently has the most points in the table.
- You want to avoid relegation from the league, so you develop a strategy based on ensuring three players score fewer points than you, and so work in multiple games to defeat those players on a consistent basis.
- Your ally in Game Two is the same as your ally in Game One! Boo hoo! Not metagaming though.

Anonymity would completely defeat the object of the league for me - it is about developing a long-term strategy with the final table in mind. I don't see how that's possible with anonymity, unless the players/allies reveal their identites in private, anyway, which would again make it pointless. Indeed, with the same 7 players each game, you could work out quickly by process of elimination who was whom.

It's merely an observation that the apparent predilection for this type of meta-gaming, illegal, unwanted, or welcomed, may influence the very nature of a singular diplomacy game and it's underlying strategy.

But this isn't a "Oh my, i see meta-gaming, stomp it!" post.

Remove the term from this discussion if you like, I've never liked it either, and personally am not offended by the employment of it in a game, regardless of what "type" of meta-gaming you use. And if you take that as your opinion, you can understand where there are many different forms of meta-gaming, with a loose definition of:

"Anything outside of the game being used to influence the inside of the game."

This would include acknowledging past experience or friendships with another player, doing extensive research on your opponents complete with charts and graphs, and yes, influencing your play based on the uniform understanding that this game is part of a series.

These types of meta-gaming are going to happen, and I accept and intend to utilise them myself. The only thing I wanted to know, and the only reason I created the thread, was to find out if they are encouraged by the maker(s) of the league.

I am pleased with the way it is, I think it adds an extra dimension to the game(s) that you cannot find outside of the league. And in that respect, you and I are in agreement. Which is why my first words in the thread were: "I am not asking for it, but I am curious..."

From CGWhite, via email:

"I'm playing this game: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=13801 as France, and want to order Spain SC to Mars, however the drop down boxes don't allow me do to it. Now, since Mars and Spain share a coastline, surely I should be able to move there? Can you check and let me know?"

Wrong Thread, sorry

When I was sitting for Gryncat in League A last season, I discussed several moves with TGM over Gtalk.

But I disgress, I think the point of the matter is that tall poppy syndrome is another aspect of the game, and in the Leagues it gets a whole new dimension that I think adds a lot to the game, rather than substract from it.

So far the consensus is that the leagues add or embellish an aspect of the game that would be destroyed with anonymous play. I'm curious to hear what more players have to say, especially after the league is over, and especially from league first-timers.

Is this your first season in the leagues Geofram? Because I think you will find the answers very quickly once you get started, and you will see what comes naturally. You will be surprised at the tactics you find yourself using to ensure you finish on top of the league at the end of the final game. Xapi has it exactly right; a whole new dimension is added. Some people are uncomfortable with this and for those people there are alternative formats and goals available.

In my case, I only play league games now. Amassing D points is something I could do quite easily if I chose to, but wouldn't really give me any satisfaction.

Again Xapi makes a very good observation. Tall poppies get chopped. I won both leagues I have been in after being eliminated from the first game (that was not on purpose!)

No, I played last season, and I am well aware of the tactics used inside league games that are not found in casual play, I used them myself.

I must have mistakenly left the impression that I am worried or concerned about the use of meta-gaming within leagues. Believe me, I am not, I'm expecting the use and plan for it. I was only curious as to the popular opinions of those that enjoy or agree with the league tactics, and those that do not recognise them or dislike them.

Disregarding the obvious contrasts, it is interesting to note that the acceptance of cross-game influences in live tournament play differs from the opinions I've received so far on webDip. Whilst it is a large reality in both, generally, using cross-game information in live play to influence your negotiations and play is frowned upon, where here it is looked forward to.

Limited meta in the leagues has been acceptable. Don't throw a game, but some you scrtach mine and I'll scratch yours will occur as will Tall Poppy Syndrome. This is how it should be. Even sports teams know which games are must wins and which they should keep their starters out of to protect them from injury, but no one cries meta there...

I don't think anyone has "cried" meta, as most players seem to enjoy the added struggle in the game.

Another interesting observation: Whenever you post about diplomacy, you must be complaining!

Sorry, that was not my intent. It came across wrong. I should have just said no one calls it metagaming when sports team do it. I used cry intending it to be as in "Cry havoc, and let loose the dogs of war!" not as in "Cry baby."

Also note that the league rules specifically allow for meta-gaming in the form of considering the league standings when deciding what to do in a specific league game.

Also, we actually had this conversation back when the anonymous game feature was added a month or two back. No harm discussing it again since the people reading and posting now are potentially a different subset from those back then. Just letting you know that is has been considered and discussed before.

I am, truly, amazed by TGMs remarks on out-of-site messaging.

I never, never, never use any form of communication apart from the site for playing these games. I send some e-mails about general issues or if I am asking a Mod a question, but do not discuss actual play.

if it's only the last game that maters (because you have orchestrated to be on the same points as your opponents up until then) surely the advantage of playing multiple games and taking the best players overall is lost, ni?

oh, i may be looking at the extreme case of avoiding winning your first three games, and the actual effect may be less pronounced, but the point is the same.

Well, its not the case that everyone is on the same level going into Game 4.

4 players won their league having lost game 1. 3 players won their league having lost game 4. I'd think that suggests there's not that big a difference, particularly given the "Oh, well, he's won already" effect that means that there are more big draws in the last game

How many players won their league having won game 1?

I got flamed for setting up a Tall Poppy situation in Game One after my own position was compromised. Instead of just the Tall Poppy being targetted, I was done for 'letting it happen'. No justice in this world!

Note that except for the B leagues, second place will still get you promoted to the next level. So if you solo in the first game you are in a good position to at least get second place and a draw in one of the other games would just about clinch it.

I pulled out a win in game four to put me as one of the best of the second places in D leagues back in the spring and guaranteed my move up. gjdip drew game 1 and won game 2 to win the league and virtually guaranteeing a move up, even if one of his fellow drawees (DingleberryJones) did manage to pull out a win in 3 or 4. But then out league had some NMR/CD issues that lead to the draw or things might have been different.

"How many players won their league having won game 1?"

3/4

You could have looked that up yourself, really.

if interested in an anon tourny wait until the world cup in february it might be anon

I'm sorry Ghost, I should of thought that.

DJEcc24 once the new year comes around we should get to planning that

yes i think anon is the best since there might be multiple teams for one country

i'm just so excited i can;t wait to plan =)