Old Forum - webDiplomacy

Forum

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

Page 58 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last

)
27 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

join victories?

a friend of mine told me it was possible to declare join victories though they have not been added yet...i was wondering if it would be possible to do such a thing in the 2 games im in.
im not sure what it takes to do so but any help would be useful
thanks

2 replies

)
26 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Request for a Draw

Admin can you please close this game and share the points to England and France? We decided this as a draw.

4 replies

)
26 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

The game "200+" is stuck

The game 200+ (gid=2172) -- is stuck in the "Due now" phase for two days already. Kestas, would you unblock it, please? Thank you!

1 reply

jasperleeabc (100

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

A problem here

Game affected: http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2463

Hi,
I am Turkey in this game. One thing I do not understand, why can Russia take my Greece in just 1 turn? Shouldn't Russia get it after the second Diplomacy turn, instead of immediately after attacking? Is that a known bug or am I wrong about the rules?

7 replies

Thucydides (864

(B)

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Due Now... how long is "Now?"

A game of mine: El pinko del bozo, has been in the "due now" stage for more than three hours. Is that normal?

9 replies

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Agreed to a two-way draw

We are at 17 centers apiece in the game political puppets ll and have formed a stalemate line. We have agreed to split the points and I get the win if we can't share it.

Thanks

2 replies

)
21 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

18 Units or 18 SCs

In order to win must you have 18 units, or just 18 SCs?

8 replies

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Merry Christmas everyone, and a happy new year.

Best wishes,

Wombat

11 replies

keeper0018 (100

)
26 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Open Game

Bored on Christmas? Then join the game "X-Mas Day Game;" Pot = 75, PLEASE JOIN!!!

http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2550

0 replies

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Holiday recess

Is it possible for us to extend the deadlines until January 2 for all of us who are going on vacation?

10 replies

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Huh?

Could someone explain what this means:

"Spring 1913, Diplomacy: Your army at Burgundy recieved stand support from the army at Munich, but couldn't accept it because your army at Munich tried to move"

Besides the misspelling of "received," I can't understand how my army at Munich could both give stand support to Burgundy and try to move.

3 replies

(S)

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

judication issue

I have noticed this ajudication issue, and it has not been discussed:

Assume the following orders:
Austria: Rumania support move Viena - Galicia
Viena - Galicia
Budapest support hold Rumania
Russia: Galicia - Rumania
Sevastopol support move Galicia - Rumania

In my opinion, Rumania holds, and Viena dislodges Galicia. Because "support against a province can only cut by the unit from the same province if the supporting unit is dislodged".

I am afraid the present phpdiplomacy adjudicator uses some other rule in this situation. As Austria, I got this message:
"Your army at Rumaniawas attacked by the army at Galicia, with support, and had to defend itself."
and Viena - Galicia did not succeed.

I would like to ask the community, and in particular Kestas, to clarify this.

Strategerist (89 )
22 Dec 07 UTC

The only reason your logic doesn't work out is that the attack from Galicia is supported by another unit. If there was not support from Sevastopol, then the attack would have been irrelevant and Vienna would have dislodged Galicia, but since Sev supported the invasion, Rumania could not support the attack into Galicia.

If you look at it from Russia's perspective it should become easier to understand. You couldn't support an attack with a unit that was under attack.

Signalseven (116 )
22 Dec 07 UTC

Your army in Rumania can only do one thing per turn. If it is attacked with or without support it has to defend itself. Therfor it can not support anyone. That is why you failed to move into Galica.

thewonderllama (100 )
22 Dec 07 UTC

No, bihary is right. According to Avalon Hill rules the support is not cut because the attack comes from the target of the support move. It should only be cut in this case if the supporting unit is dislodged. phpdip however uses the logic that if the attack has its own support, the original support is cut. I actually commented on this recently in another thread about supports.

bihary (2782 )
22 Dec 07 UTC

strategerist: I am talking about rules, not about justifications. I am fine with any rule, as long as I know them.

thewonderllama: So why does this rule stand as is? Is it part of a general misunderstanding or an exception coded for some reason?

bihary (2782 )
23 Dec 07 UTC

Kestas, can you answer this thread please?
Thank you.

alamothe (3367 )
23 Dec 07 UTC

bihary, are you sure that was what happened? if so, the adjudicator on this site is just a piece of crap

alamothe (3367 )
23 Dec 07 UTC

i also need to apologize to Mr. Spock: sorry for calling you a liar in that game World War something. it appears it was a bug :-) support is cut if the unit was attacked with support from the province support was given to. OMG

thewonderllama (100 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

alamothe: you sure seem to be rather critical of a free system coded out of a person's good graces...it comes off quite rude.

in many cases, that approach will be correct, it's only when the unit giving support that will be cut by phpdip (but shouldn't be) is itself receiving hold support that this will give the wrong result. if i'm not mistaken, to code it correctly would require substantially more processing (multiple passes of support checking).

if you have such a problem with the adjudicator, either stop using it or write a patch for it yourself.

alamothe (3367 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

sorry if i offended you. but i don't like your approach either. whenever someone points out a problem you can say "shut up or go away", but that won't make things better

thewonderllama (100 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

sorry for getting snarky. i should have expressed myself in a more constructive way. i'm all for pointing out deficeincies in code, that is how things improve. i don't mean to say I thinl phpdip is flawless, it's not even 1.0, of course it has issues, and even after that bugs are a matter of course. what i took issue with was calling it a "piece of crap". sure it needs improvement, and by all means point out the flaws in how things are handled, but just saying something like "it sucks" just ends up coming off bitchy.

but that said, sorry again for responding the way i did, i was out of line too.

bihary (2782 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thank you for the discussion, I was pointing out the flaw because I did not know it was already discussed. I also did not realize it was easier to code this way. The issue is not that important, I understand there are other priorities.

alamothe (3367 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

it's not easier to code it that way, it's a bug. but of couse it's easier to leave it this way than to fix it :-)

Thucydides (864 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

Indeed, I posted a thread ealier relating to this, but I was told (or at least I perceived I was told) that supporting a supporter is meaningless. I had always thought the Avalon Hill rules allowed for supporting hold at an area that is supporting, doing so to ensure the support stands, but I was told, like I said, that this wasn't the case. Now I am confused again. I don't have the board game, but maybe somone who does should post the rules on this site. That would be tremendously helpful.

Wooble (450 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

Supporting a supporter in general only prevents that supporter from being dislodged; it doesn't prevent the support from being cut.

The example given here is actually the *only* situation where supporting a supporter should cause the support to still succeed, and that's only because the attack that erroneously cuts support is coming from the territory that's being attacked.

I'll withhold my comment on exactly who is a piece of crap, but I think a policy of "it's free, and if you don't like it you can start your own damn site" would be a good one.

figlesquidge (2131 )
24 Dec 07 UTC

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/

Have a look there for views on the rules

alamothe (3367 )
25 Dec 07 UTC

@Wooble: yes, i bitch too much, but there are many good players who don't find playing on this site enjoyable anymore because of all the judge issues. it's crucial component of the game! and because they're too polite to complain here, and don't want to be flamed by the guys like you, i need to bitch for them. we need to let Kestas know what's happening. about it's free etc. as far as i know most diplomacy sites & software is free, but none of them has a broken judge. and it's the least i can say, since this site's judge is totally screwed

Razz (144 )
25 Dec 07 UTC

you know, i generally hate when people say this , but
If it bothers you that much, leave.
There's a difference between pointing out a bug and discussing how it needs to be fixed vs being a whiny little brat hurling personal insults at the guy who provides the site.
As far as I know, there are only 3 issues with the judge - that's hardly 'a piece of crap' or 'totally screwed'. In fact that's better than the '90% correct' that kestas modestly claims. It's actually not too much different than the official rules, which have had several major errors themselves over the years. The latest version of the rules STILL has a couple mistakes.
How about you try and use that bitching in a constructive manner and submit a new FAQ? or if you're a coder, write a patch.

alamothe (3367 )
25 Dec 07 UTC

the only one who is personally insulted in this thread is me :-)

yes, there are three issues which seriously affect gameplay, plus minor bugs which make the orders judged wronngly about 5% of the time (look at this thread and one about convoys down below)... in my opinion you can't say it's 90% correct. you'll see yourself how much the gameplay will change when / if these issues get fixed.

btw, can you point out mistakes in the official rules? it's just text... what kind of mistakes did you find? like a typo or something?

18 replies

warrenthegreat (147

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Christmas ceasefire

Merry Christmas everyone, lets have a ceasefire, no attacks on other players till boxing day.

3 replies

canstoptheaxzn (51

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

D points

If you have 0 D points, and currently not in any other games, how are you supposed to win more points?

2 replies

)
25 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Game open

Join at http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2537 for 100 points!

0 replies

yeunghauyip (1654

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Christmas

Merry X'mas & Happy New Year!

3 replies

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

merry mithraism!

i dont think it is fair to leave out the religion that started christianity and especially the celebration of december 25th.

happy mithraism!!!

0 replies

SlkySmoothOtter (969

)
23 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

An unfortunate error with the updated convoy rules...

So, I was going to very tricky and convoy around an attacker. The situation was that I have army Clyde, Fleet NAO and england has army Edi, fleet Lvp. I ordered Cly - NAO, NAO convoys Cly - Lvp. England ordered Lvp - Cly, Edi S Lvp - Cly (which was his obvious defense and so I correctly manuevered to outsmart and defeat it. The only problem was, the rules implementations failed me again. Now I though I had things figured out 8 or 9 months ago after I was surprised to see I could favorably (or unfavorably) dislodge my own units and cut my own supports, and I was very excited to find the convoy problem corrected since convoys were virtually useless before that. But, I was hoping that someone more powerful on the site could step in and redo the previous adjudication correctly (put my army in Lvp where it belongs) or if I could at least just have it back in Cly since the attack i would have made Cly - Lvp, NAO S Cly - Lvp would have succeed in bouncing with his assault.

The game is at: http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2434

8 replies

arthurmklo (879

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New Game

The Spectre is still needing 3 more players, http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2531
Pot is 120, please come and join

1 reply

SpectersGhost (75

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

No Option for movement

In the game Battlespire It is not giving me any options for movement?Please advise

2 replies

keeper0018 (100

)
24 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

longest game on this site...

hello everyone,

im kinda bored right now, so i was wondering if anyone could amuse me by telling me what the longest game on this site was and include the link to it. thanks.

7 replies

)
15 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

The Long Long story...

We all enjoyed the noble prize winning long long story proposed by thewonderllama a month or two ago... so I propose we start a new one. Same rules, 3 words per person. It's entertaining if you've got nothing to do at work...

so...

Genghis once said...

52 replies

(B)

)
23 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

tournament on another site...

www.diplomaticcorp.com/winterblitz

2 replies

)
23 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Help! I joined a game by mistake!

I accidentally hit the "Join Game" button for "game fornoobs" instead of "View Game."
http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2373&orders=on#orders

Can I get out of it somehow without losing the points?

0 replies

El_Perro_Artero (707

)
19 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Wiki People notified about Khan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genghis_Khan

13 replies

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Concerning Finalization

If I have orders "updated" but never finalize them.. when the turn ends do they get executed?

2 replies

yeunghauyip (1654

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Draw requested

in the game Political Puppets 2 http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gid=2092 , it's completely stuck, the most france can get is 17 while austria & i (italy) have 17 as well. so here i request for a draw & want the other players to vote for a draw too.

5 replies

just1primate (100

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New game....newbies check it out

new game NewbieGame2

0 replies

Jesse James (100

)
22 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

Joint Victories

How do you declare a joint victory or a draw in a game?

2 replies

Noodlebug (1812

)
21 Dec 07 UTC

Thread is too old to reply to

New message

...?

6 replies

Page 58 of 1419

First

Previous

Next

Last