"Do they not listen to you guys around here? "

*They* - is one guy. Kestas Kuliukas. He wrote the code for this site. The same code upon which playdiplomacy is based, and which a few other diplomacy sites. He can do whatever he likes. He doesn't have to listen to us. As it so happens he does listen to people and he has made a fantastic site. But he doesn't have to anything he doesn't want to.
As far as PPSC versus WTA goes. We have both kinds as well as other variants. Most players play WTA. The reason that WTA is not the default is that Kestas believes that PPSC is more appealing to newbs. He figures that experienced players will figure out pretty quickly how to either set up WTA games or join WTA games.

@ Niakan - Well you had a bad experience in a live game. Going back to play dip is a pretty good way to avoid repeating that experience. Because playdip doesn't have live games. Enjoy!

playdiplomacy has live games. It used to be available for premium members only but I think that was changed recently (according to an email playdiplomacy sent me - I am an inactive member).

That's funny. I got no such e-mail. I played a few games there, but really wanted live games, so I switched here. Now that I've established myself reasonably well here, there's no point in switching back.

@Frank: Who alleges that this is more friendly to beginners? I would argue that it is indeed the opposite. Who would want to return to a game when players are encouraged to flip the board once a winner starts emerging and it isn't them?

@Tom: All I hear is people repeating the same argument: "If we don't like it we can follow this exception to the bad rule." It seems that people here are accepting of this as if they have no other options. It would be easier for me to "fuck off", as you put it, but I tried instead to see if there was anyone here that cared about community. Apparently you'd rather band around a bad idea and get defensive instead. I get it. I'm "new" here, and I don't understand that I can simply play WTA. But even WTA is flawed. Spyman, you say that Kestas has no obligation to listen to you. You're right, but how about you take that one step further and realize that you have no obligation to use this website. There are, frankly, better ones out there, even if this one was the original. I suppose the numbers prove it as well. Come to think of it, most of those who know better probably left already, so I will concede to you all -- you are all absolutely right. My rant has been an utter waste of time.


Sorry to have disturbed you all.

This was a few years ago of course.

Playdip has had live games since.. 2009 I think. I joined back in 2008 and I think that they didn't have them right away. The only difference between regular and premium members is that premium members can play different variants on the game on the website. The regular game itself can still be played by free members. Our free members aren't punished in any way for contributing, but those who do contribute to our community are rewarded. Contributions can be monetary or by simply participating in our robust forum system. Newcomers are greeted, and not told to 'fuck off'. There are other differences between the two sites that I could continue to list, but again the point is moot. Ultimately, I just feel sad from my experience here.

Niakan, the sites are different. Webdiplomacy is open source, all features are free, and has a nicer interface (in my opinion). Playdiplomacy was copied and then made to look different from webdip with the goal of making a little money. If you want to be a pretentious asshole and say your site is better, please stop complaining and just leave.

One last word, and then I'll let those who are feeling defensive continue to trash playdip.com and me for your own site's shortcomings: I encourage you all to at least try to see what you're missing.

@Niakan: That is Kestas' view, I think. As it happens, I agree with you but it doesn't bother me because I can just choose to play WTA. Anyway, I think this is a great site where you can almost always get a live game going and there is also a very wide selection of high quality non-live games. It also a very friendly and lively forum community. I hope you stick around and keep playing here.

good riddance. I'm generally a polite guy, and don't get all defensive. In fact, I've got no problem with playdip. But when you come in here. Tell us that we are all bad players, have a bad forum, and a bad community, what kind of reception to you expect?

Every once in a while people from playdip come over here and use this forum to bitch about how bad this website is. Sorry if we don't take kindly to your complaint, but we kinda doubt your sincerity in actually wanting to discuss the matter at hand. Your mind was made up before you said anything at all.

Anyway, the point you seem to be not understanding, it's not as though PPSC is the rule, and if you really really really feel like it, you can change it to WTA, but it's a huge hassle and really only happens in exceptional cases. I'd estimate that at least half the games played on this site are WTA games. The same goes for the in house ranking system vs. Ghostratings. Most people agree the point based ranking system on the site is kinda ridiculous, and no one really pays any attention to it. Mostly the point of points is that you can make a game with a buy in of like 150 , and then you're relatively certain to only get experienced players.

Also, I am not a fan of PPSC either, but there are many folk who like it. I would prefer for it to be gone, but as many people enjoy it, why ruin their fun. Let them have it, and I can just play WTA games.

@Niakan- I think where the confusion has arisen is that you joined some random live game and, on seeing that The Czech was in it, thought that the game was supposed to be of higher quality than it was. It was just a random live game. The idea of PPSC is to try to make it so that people like Italy and France in your game won't quit (like they did). PPSC is designed specifically for people who have not yet learned the WTA ethic.

I encourage you to play in a "real game" before judging the quality of play on the site.

Niakan you come here, play one game, immediately start bagging the site and bagging a very well respected player, generally acting like a bad sport and whinger, boast about what a great player and the you are surprised that someone told you to fuck off. Sorry but you are acting like a total nob. Hello???

This is the game that Niakan began the post complaining about: http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=75308#gamePanel

Just thought I'd throw that up there after all Niakan's talk about how well he played and how expert his moves were. It's worth noting that Turkey NRMed the first move and that he benefited more than anyone when Italy CDed. By the time he "expertly" sent his troops to hold the stalemate line I was assured of taking Berlin and had four fleets in the Med to his three.

You can also see that Czech didn't "throw the game" (he didn't actually throw the game at all) until Niakan had positioned himself to take German centers in Sev and Warsaw; and when Czech moved into Austrian territory Niakan had already taken Warsaw. It's difficult to count on somebody helping you hold a stalemate line in a gunboat game when they're sending armies away from the leader in order to steal your supply centers.

This is just a case of somebody being bitter because they lost. It's awful convenient to blame the game's PPSC format when you don't want to acknowledge you're own mistakes.

Yeah. A few weeks back I played a live game with a player called Orion who just called everyone else stupid and said he was the only person who really understood the game, and the only reason he lost was because everyone else was too stupid to see that keeping him alive was their only chance for victory etc (he was playing Austria and he even said that to Turkey). Anyway, turns out he was a troll and a multi, but surprise surprise, everyone who played with him didn't like him much. This is sort of what you're doing here, except, presumably you're not trolling, and aren't a multi.

Hey, everyone remember when playDip went down for a week and members were told it might be permanent? I'm so glad that site is too ugly to play on.

That was @ Niakan obviously. And yeah, I had a look at that game too. I'm not great at this game, and even I can tell you didn't play "expertly". You played decently-ish, but you made a crucial misstep that cost you the game. Sorry.

@niakan: "Newcomers are greeted, and not told to 'fuck off'.

I bet you if I went to playdiplomacy and ranted and raved they way you have been doing here that I would be told to fuck off, and deservedly so. I can only assume you are a troll.

I'd also like to take a stab at the PPSC hating, perhaps because I was the one who set up that game. PPSC is only a perverse incentive if you want it to be. Most players understand the difference between a defeat and a draw, and even in PPSC you're probably going to get more points by arranging a draw than you would stealing one or two more centers before another player solos. There are exceptions, but they are few.

I've heard a lot of people say WTA is truer to the intent of the game, and they may be right. Diplomacy is ultimately about working together to achieve success. WTA theoretically takes all the incentive out of SC stealing in the face of a solo, because you won't get any Dip points out of any of those extra centers if someone else wins the game outright. Better to put your best effort into a draw. But even WTA doesn't always stop a player from doing some stupid SC stealing. Take this WTA game (http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=74726), where in Autumn 1912 Turkey forgoes a chance to force a draw so he can go grab a few more supply centers for himself. The result is a German solo.

There is also the case in WTA of nearly defeated players agreeing to help another person solo in exchange for a guaranteed survival. One might rather have a "survive" on their record and let someone else win than play for a draw they won't have any part in.

This is really what PPSC is for. A player can get some satisfaction (and Dip points) out of surviving a game even if another player wins. In the case of newer players (where your Dip points are scarce and surviving is sometimes the best you can do against tough competition), the PPSC set-up makes a lot of sense.

Ultimately a player's behavior is going to be determined by what they're in the game to do and what the circumstances have been presented, regardless of WTA or PPSC settings. Some players only want to win or die trying. Others will fight to ensure a draw. Still Others don't care what happens if they can pay back the guy who stabbed them. And still others just want to paint as much of the map yellow as possible so they can look at it later and think it's pretty.

I like Red maps. It reminds me of blood that my enemies lost while trying to defeat me.

Niakin you are kinda a tool.

You play one game here, did not understand the variant you were playing, and then bitch vehemently when people play that variant to maximize their outcome (assuming they did, I'm not gonna analyze it).

Is kestas or the community to be blamed that you did not understand the reward system of this variant? Seriously, rather than gripe, wash your hands of it, chalk it up to learning, and play only WTA from now on!

BTW a 9 SC survive in PPSC is considered a fairly acceptable outcome amongst those who play the PPSC variant. Do you consider it a loss and a loss only? Do you consider it bullshit that people would throw the game? Then you are handicapping yourself every time you play PPSC. Don't play that variant if you don't like it!

gameID=71988 this happened to me, and I didn't piss, moan, cry, or whine, I just got disgusted with myself and swore to not play PPSC anymore.

Deal with it.

I dont think that the PPSC v WTA argument will ever go away. I rather like and play both.
And i rather like and play both here and on playdip.
So, i'm going to have to come down firmly on side of 'i dont care' :)
and i like my maps with lots of pretty boats...austria just never has enough fleets to my thinking

Lol. Go away, playdip trash. The sordid history of playdip is too long and distasteful to get into. But you were wrong, your gunboat play was terrible, and Czech, like he usually does, played a fantastic game. The correct move was to trust Italy to not stab you and throw the game to England. *After* you've set up the stalemate with Germany, you can work *with* him to take out Italy. Any player in their right mind would have interpreted your moves as a stab, and... well... They were.

'I dont think that the PPSC v WTA argument will ever go away. I rather like and play both.'

That's the problem, it shouldn't ever even be an argument. Anybody who argues about it is being an idiot because they are trying to impose the victory conditions of the wrong variant in the wrong place.

Niakan - Kestas is the owner and primary developer for this site. In fact were it not for Kestas, yor beloved PlayDiplomacy wouldn't exist either.

@moskowitz -- appreciated and liked your explanation above ... I am one of the few 30+ year long time players who has now found a good home here who understands that WTA is just as much of a variant as PPSC, as the real game calls for neither

@Niakan -- if you actaully want to play some Diplomacy, have a good time and get some good competition, then follow the forum here, join some games and ride the waves, we have accepted and forgiven many others who have then later established themselves as good players and not sourpusses ... otherwise I don't think I am alone in saying good riddance

England had Tunis, he was across the stalemate line. Whatever Germany would have done, England was still winning.